Slashdot Mirror


China Says Serious Polluters Will Get the Death Penalty

formaggio writes "According to the Xinhua News Agency, the Chinese government is now allowing courts to punish those who commit environment crimes with the death penalty. The new judicial interpretation comes in the wake of several serious environmental problems that have hit the country over the last few months, including dangerous levels of air pollution, a river full of dead pigs, and other development projects that have imperiled public health."

21 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. This will only be enforced when convenient. by mark-t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    [nt]

  2. Ironic by slashmydots · · Score: 5, Funny

    Boy, I sure hope they catch and kill the worst pollution offender in the entire country: the Chinese government.

  3. Communist China by Pagey123 · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Communist China, pollution kills you (literally)!

  4. Re:Thou hast angered thy King by X0563511 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This isn't saying you are executed for littering. This looks to be establishing the maximal punishment.

    Think more along the lines of "knowingly poisoning hundreds of thousands of people."

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  5. They Can't Even Hand Out Fines Effectively by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Chinese can't even effectively fine polluters and now there's talk of capital punishment for polluting? What next? Decimate school children when their class average isn't up to par because the instructor's scolding has no effect?

    There are several key problems here that are the real underlying problems: 1) the Chinese government is not unified in their vision of the environment and I'm talking differences spanning across provincial & federal levels as well as between federal ministries. 2) they collectively refuse to accept that their abuse of natural resources is part of their winning equation against other capitalist nation states and, as a consequence, no one can talk about how this will hurt their bottom line even though several parts of the government realize it (we pay them to import our pollution). 3) there is widespread corruption at all levels which is why fining is ineffective -- it's so bad that I'm sure if capital punishment is meted out, it will be given to the fork lift operator who dumped those pig carcasses in the river after his supervisor told him to "make them disappear or you'll disappear." No one up the chain will be held accountable and if they are, they need only grease some local wheels and they can consider themselves shielded.

    It's disgusting and it's why I tell people where they can shove it when they complain that the EPA is destroying jobs. It's not perfect but we have to cling to things that kind of work when so many other "solutions" are abysmal failures.

    The Chinese government is threatening to kill polluters but they can't see that they're part of and dependent on and benefiting from a system of habitual polluting. Increasing the impact of the punishment is a poor and maybe even more detrimental substitution for actually bringing to justice the true criminals up and down their ranks.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  6. Re:It says "environmental crimes" by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nah, this will be reserved for people who do not have sufficient political connections...or more likely for people who fall out of favor with the political powers that be.

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  7. Re:Thou hast angered thy King by Intropy · · Score: 4, Informative

    That scenario really isn't different from murder. In the US you could be tried for second degree murder for something like that.

  8. Re:Thou hast angered thy King by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...off with your head!

    Seriously, China? WTF. Going back to medieval values here? Executing people for pollution?

    They should be punished, but death is a bit much.

    Yeah, the death penalty should be reserved for angry guys who stab one person with a knife. The civilised punishment for poisoning the water drunk by thousands of people is a slap on the wrist and a fine that looks large to newpaper readers but causes no material harm to the perpetrator....

    --
    Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
  9. Re:Thou hast angered thy King by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you accept the legitimacy of the death penalty(obviously, if you don't, that's another story, and you aren't likely to approve of it for this purpose, or any other) serious pollution is actually highly logical:

    The death penalty is usually assessed in cases of murder(esp. premeditated) or grievous bodily harm(especially premeditated or particularly gruesome in some way).

    Well, guess what? Serious pollution is usually called 'serious' because it does, albeit at some epidemiological remove, cause some mixture of death and serious chronic health impairment, sometimes also nasty birth defects and the like.

    It doesn't have the emotional punch of a nice juicy murder or a photogenic teenager getting raped or something; but pollution is a totally logical thing to punish by death(if you accept the traditional uses of the death penalty). Probably even better, in fact, because polluters are highly likely to be committing their crimes out of pure greed, not out of fear, passion, or other possible-to-rehabilitate/unlikely to reoffend motive.

  10. Re:Thou hast angered thy King by triffid_98 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Even if that were true, this law is 100% effective at preventing repeat offenders.

  11. Good? More like "Good Luck" by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I seriously doubt it will be implemented against any company or person that is sufficiently connected to the PRC government - this list would include pretty much every existing big company HQ'd in China.

    Now potential competitors to the aforementioned companies, and anyone who the PRC government doesn't like? Oh hell yes it'll be implemented - even if the offender has to get a little governmental 'assistance' in generating pollution sufficient to warrant execution.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Good? More like "Good Luck" by jbeaupre · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Connected with who in the PRC?

      China is not immune to politics. Being aligned with the wrong person at the wrong time, you can end up being made a high profile example.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    2. Re:Good? More like "Good Luck" by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      China is not immune to politics. Being aligned with the wrong person at the wrong time, you can end up being made a high profile example.

      Exactly. This is the whole point of the legislation. Now they can use "pollution" as an excuse to purge political enemies, while claiming to be "tough" on the environment.

      Excessively harsh penalties tend to be counter-productive because they are almost never carried out, thus resulting in a culture of impunity. A $5 fine for littering would be far more effective.

    3. Re:Good? More like "Good Luck" by Luckyo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This isn't about littering. This is about high level leadership making choices for quick profit over sustainable methods. Historically and criminologically the only place that severe punishments ever worked has been at that level, because at that level people spend significant amount of consideration about risk/reward ratio.

      It's the same reason why tough penalties don't work for petty crime or desperate people - they do not perform same evaluations with anywhere near the same seriousness or effort.

    4. Re:Good? More like "Good Luck" by femtobyte · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Excessively harsh penalties tend to be counter-productive because they are almost never carried out

      Tell that to the people China executed over industrial-scale adulteration of milk with melamine in 2008:

      A number of criminal prosecutions occurred, with two people being executed, another given a suspended death penalty, three others receiving life imprisonment, two receiving 15-year jail terms,[6] and seven local government officials, as well as the Director of the Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ) being fired or forced to resign.

      (from Wikipedia)

      Just because the government of our Megacorporate States of America would never dream about enforcing substantial penalties against our industrialist overlords for mass-murdering in the name of profit, doesn't mean China won't.

    5. Re:Good? More like "Good Luck" by PraiseBob · · Score: 4, Informative

      Freakanomics did a great study on the effectiveness of fines that seems especially relevant to your comment: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/books/chapters/0515-1st-levitt.html

    6. Re:Good? More like "Good Luck" by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No. Our court system doesn't have the capacity to individually prosecute all the loan officers who systematically lied to people in order to induce them to assume levels of debt and then walked away from what they had done.

      No. Our court system doesn't have the capacity to individually prosecute all the bankers who systematically sold securities they knew would crash to people in order to induce them and then walked away from what they had done.

      No. Our court system doesn't have the capacity to individually prosecute all the coke snorting analysts and traders who cooked up a complicated system of CDO and derivatives and pretended to understand same, all the while demanding to be free from regulation and which later took the whole economy down , the only repercussion that they got bailed out, doubled down on their bonuses and walked away from what they had done.

      No. Our court system doesn't have the capacity to individually prosecute all the degenerate economists and lobbyists whose "free market" deregulatory theories of non-reality paved the grounds for the entire meltdown but who took no responsibility and walked away from what they had done.

      FTFY

      Ayn Rand was a amphetamine addicted speed freak who was sexually aroused by stories of rapists, child molesters and murders.

      http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2010/08/02/ayn-rand%E2%80%99s-superman-a-serial-killer-and-rapist/

      http://www.athenstalks.com/ayn-rands-role-model-her-new-society-child-rapist-and-murderer

      And those who fo9llow her are more of the same- antisocial personality disorders dressing themselves up as "philosophers"

  12. Astute Summation of China by Phoenix666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I second this. I spend a good portion of graduate school in Beijing and Manchuria, and you hit the nail on the head. The only people who will pay the price for pollution are the dumb schmucks whose guanxi is not powerful enough to shield them from scapegoating.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
  13. Re:A whole lot of crimes need stiffer sentences by kiite · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Holy bad example, Batman! A guy who robs a liquor store for $100 doesn't get 20 years for stealing $100. He gets 20 years for pointing a gun at the liquor store attendant and threatening his life for personal gain. Possibly as a repeat offender.

    What a lot of commenters don't seem to get is that the sort of pollution that hardcore offenders engage in over there often results in human deaths. So the potential for punishment is merely being brought in line with the crime. You won't deter serious polluters with a fine.

    That said, sure, many crimes are not proportional to their sentences. No news here. While we're making improbable demands, i think the act of spitting chewing gum on the street or sidewalk should be treated as vandalism, and enforced accordingly.

  14. Re:Thou hast angered thy King by ionymous · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, I can only speak for myself. If I were executed for a crime, I would definitely think twice before committing that crime again. It's just not worth it.

  15. Re:Thou hast angered thy King by Nyder · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't know. If you have the death penalty I can see pollution being a worthy offense.

    So who do you execute, then? The entire board of directors, the guy(s) that did it directly, or all of them?

    Start with the lawyers.

    --
    Be seeing you...