Slashdot Mirror
China Sentences Bank Cracker/Thief to Death
Many submitted this brief Excite News item: two Chinese brothers pulled a $87,000 bank robbery by cracking the bank's computers. One brother talked and got off. The other got a death sentence. Slashdot reader malroth commented, "Now MAYBE theft of $87,000 constitutes a crime worth execution in China, but i find it hard to imagine. This is sheer speculation, but i presume that what ticked off the Chinese judiciary was the hacking part of the crime."
In article , Anonymous Coward wrote:
/ drow-facts.htm e /st-98-3.txt . html
> [From FHM magazine...] Apprently in 97, they executed a 1,876.
All right:
In 1997 Texas carried out 37 executions among 19.4 million people.
One out of 524,000 people in Texas were executed in 1997.
China's population is about 1.25 billion. One out of 666,000 people
in China were executed in 1997.
Sources:
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/statistics/deathrow
http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/stat
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ch
--
Shields.
No matter if it's legally okay or not, it's illegal, and there are severe penalties.
;-)
Oops, I previewed before submitting, but I must have overlooked this - of course I meant "morally"...
-- Eavy (: Linux Is Not UniX
Socialism. Again, it's no more Communist than, say, those who worship Minerva as God can claim themselves to be Christian (which has also been tried...).
Chinese communism stemmed out of nationalism and disgust with the corrupt ruling regime; it's no coincidence that Lenin and Mao both strengthened their followings during wartime suffering. It was never a worker's revolution; heck, China was not heavily industrialized beforehand -- hence the 5 Year Plans in an attempt to build up heavy industry.
Government ownership by the few Party members -- that's Socialism. Communism would require vast party membership encompassing the entire proletariat, with shared production -- and that has never been done on even the scale of Soviet Russia, let alone the PRC.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
was right. I'd prefer my presonal freedoms over social security any day. And there is no need for common insults.
Off topic, but this reminded me of a discussion that was had with a few friends yesterday, on the well-known prisoner's paradox:
/. community?
:)
Consider a prisoner who has been sentenced to execution. The executioners want to execute him on one day during the week (monday thru friday) but do not want him to know in advance when he is being executed.
Now, consider the date chosen is Friday. The instant Friday begins, the prisoner will know he must be executed that day since there are no more days left. But the executioner's wishes prohibit this. He can't know. Therefore the execution cannot be on Friday.
Now the prisoner knows he cannot be executed on Friday. In turn, then, the moment Thursday begins he will know he must be executed Thursday. But this can't be! So the execution can't be Thursday.
You can work this logic all the way to Monday, and by that argument, the prisoner can never be executed! How can this be?
Now, this paradox has to have a logical fault, as it's obviously able to carry out this execution without the prisoner knowing the exact time in advance. But neither me nor those I discussed it with could find it. Any ideas from the collective brains of the
Maybe these hackers in China could exploit the laws of logic via this paradox and `hack' their way out of execution... hmm...
kugano
Capital Punishment is, to my mind, an ineffective policy that causes needless suffering. This is merely a case of it being used for an exceptionally petty crime. The principle, however, holds true whatever the offence. The flaws with capital punishment are basically as follows: Vital evidence may not come to light until after the individual has been executed, therefore making the jurisdiction guilty of killing innocent people. Even with the US's hugely complex and drawn out appeals system, this has been shown to occur over there with a significant frequency, and most other countries take less time and effort over it. Capital Punishment has yet to be shown to limit the offences which it punishes upon institution. Therefore it is just as effective to lock the felons up, and killing them is wholely unnecessary. Somebody has to be employed to execute the condemned man/woman. Basically, the legal system paying people to kill defenseless individuals. In the US, where extensive appeals procedures are in place, it often costs more to kill the criminal than to lock him/her up. Juries might be more likely to find guilty people innocent if they know that by finding them guilty they may be killing them. To sum up, capital punishment is unethical, expensive and unfair. In my firmly held opinion, it serves only to satisfy the bloodlust of those who consider themselves 'righteous'.
"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist." Salman Rushdie
I think, when a samari was to commit sepliku (stab and entrail him-self and hold his guts in his hands before his dimo, while sitting on a small stool) and is unable to do it, a second man cuts off his head and the price of the executioner was billed to their family.
I lived for six months in China 8 years ago. I recall reading in an English language newspaper of a person who was executed for stealing about $40,000 more than this person was executed for.
China does not like crimes of this sort. Capital punishment applies to many more crimes than in other countries. I doubt the "hacking" offence had any bearing on the severity of the punishment.
Agreed. Let the punishment fit the crime. This is a noble statement that probably any sane person would agree with.
Now... If the puishment for going 10 MPH over the speed limit was 10 years in jail I would say that is totaly unfair. However if I choose to go 10 MPH over the speed limit then I had better be prepared to serve that sentence. In fact I would have to be some kind of a complete moron to exceed the speed limit by 10 MPH knowing that I'm gonna give up 10 years of my life.
To summarize my point: Yes the punishment should fit the crime; so don't commit the crime. It's really not that difficult.
To your last point: Would you say there are any 'wealthy and stable societies' which are not flatly Western? I can't think of any non-Western countries that have what you call a 'reasonable judiciary system,' which means that you should probably call it a 'Western judiciary system.' Maybe you think Western means reasonable, but this is a global forum.
It IS communism in China regardless of what you want to label it as. That is what they call it when the government owns the means of production
I don't usually respond to ACs but what is practised in China isn't true communism.
[from http://www.monadnock.net/ismbook/ ]
Communism is the political theory that the individual's actions should benefit the community or the state rather than the individual himself. It is the most radical kind of political collectivism, and depends on an equally radical collectivism or altruism in ethics. In practice, communism has always been a form of authoritarianism or of totalitarianism.
From what I've read about China in the past decade (I love the country's history) it seems to have shed most of its communist roots and is now almost completely totalitarian or authoritarian.
I'm also not a big fan of communism in its pure form. If an individual cannot reap the rewards of his/her innovations then the individual won't innovate.
Bad Command Or File Name
..but whilst there are a few wealthy people in China the average per capita income is extremely low, so it could probably be compared to stealing several million dollars in the US.
You also have to remember that a lot of countries look with repugnance on the US use of the death penalty. For example in Britain, murder has not been a capital offence since the 1960's and AFAIK we've even got rid of hanging for the treason, piracy and arson in HM dockyards, which were the last offences for which there was a capital penalty. Anyway I do believe that, whilst human rights should be an international issue, punishment of felony type crimes should generally be a national issue and up to the government concerned.
I personally don't know whether the death penalty should be used for any crime - on the one hand I think the death penalty should be an option for murder cases, yet on the other I am aware of the potential for mistakes in the judicial system. I think the US has the worst of both worlds, where it allows use of the death penalty, yet takes more legal time and money to execute someone than it would to use life sentencing instead.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
If memory serves, it may have been at least partly an inside job -- i.e. at least one of the brothers was an employee.
The standard penalty for embezzlement over there is death, hacking or no. That's also common for large amounts of theft regardless of means.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
I think you are confusing the Japanese and the Chinese. The Chinese used heavy swords more like sabers which were no match for the samuri sword in close combat. In fact the samuri could actually cut through the inferior sword leaving the opponent defenceless.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
If they had stolen from an American bank they would have probably have been given a job.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
I think he had a very good understanding of what Leftism and Communism are. You, on the other hand seem to be reciting cracker barrel wisdom. In England, we have a leftist Gov. at the moment and amongst the famous socialist governments of this century we should not forget Germany's National Socialist gov. led by Adolf Hitler. History changes society's memory but the reality is that all politicians lie, Hitler said he was a socialist, Moa wanted what was best for the people and Clinton didn't have sex with Lewinsky.
Let the cracker go and shoot the politicians.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
I have my doubts that the PRC provides computers to prisoners.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
You can call it whatever you like. Totalitarian socialism, neo-Proudhonist Wankerism, I don't care. A socialist movement would vote itself into office. Communism is extreme, abrupt socialism that doesn't ask first before shitting all over a nation. Has it occured to you that perhaps socailism has changed since Karl Marx was hanging out at the British Library? Why is is that all of the governments the world knows as communist all act like the Chinese did? You are trying to pick a nit to make a minor philosophical point, while ignoring the fact that international communism as a political phenomena is not what you think it is.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
I think that they want to make an example out of him. P.S. Did you resd that his brother got a pass on his sentence by testifying for the prosecution.
Byte me, Doughboy!!!
Ummm, electronic theft of $ hurts.
I'm pretty sure that $87K is a substantial amount over there considering that their cost of living is likely rather low.
If, say, somebody stole everything out of your bank accounts and online investments, it might be pretty hard to pay the rent, utilities, gambling debts to the Gambinos... that can lead to some pretty physical pain.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
Unlike America where you can get away with murder if you are a famous black ex-football film star.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
I was under the impression that China does not have trial by jury, instead its a trial by a panel of judges.
Actually, it is quite common to sentence
theives to death in China. Not that I condone
it, but citizens of China certainly aren't surprised by the sentence.
I remember back some time this exact same thing
had happened, and they were sentenced to death.
While scrolling though the comments, I believe I
read that the death sentence is the STANDARD sentence
for bank robbery. It would have been the same
sentence if they had physically broken in in the
middle of the night or done a hold-up. Not that I
either agree with the sentence, but you have to
admit that when applying western thought to easter
culture, it only can go so far. I have heard that
many chinese are OK with the policy, but either way I don't like the way western/american culture applies itself as being the supreme moral judge
Well I agree that if stealing $87,000 should be enough to get the death penalty then those crackers should get the death penalty.
But I don't believe in the death penalty. There is too high a chance of you getting the wrong person...
Sodomy, jaywalking, and smoking pot, are against the law. Should careless, stoned, homosexuals be killed too, Nazi-Boy? BTW, I bet you have done 2 of the 3.
OK, now this just makes me sick. They two crackers were _BROTHERS_, and one of them still ratted the other one out. Is there no hope for the underground community? It's bad enough when hacker goes against hacker, but brother against brother? that's just sick. ... and i blame it all on the AOL kiddies ;P
===== Warble://VX
Only in name, bucko -- no more than the United States is a democracy. Go read some Communist literature, and then compare and contrast.
They are not Communist, and never have been even remotely close to achieving it. It would be more accurate to label them as Totalitarian Socialists, that are (slowly) privatizing to be simply Totalitarians.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
So your point is that poorer countries need to be more severe in their punishments so that people steal less. You "remind" us that China has more people, but really what you are trying to say is that what justice is differs based on how well-off a country is. Actually, that's my question: Does is matter than China is poorer? I would say no.
What you call "imballances that needs to be taken care of by 'non-standard' means" really refer to the problems China has trying to pull themselves out of terrible poverty and overpopulation by moving slightly towards a free market. However, this will always be problematic, for two reasons:
First, a totalitarian regime is always most threatened when it is giving up power. Do you really think that the Chinese people feel that they are the ones who run the country? They get a taste of freedom, and you'd better believe we'll see a new government (unless the army uses 'non-standard' means to take care of some imbalances).
Second, communism means that the rulers should rule for the benefit of the people, but of course the people can't themselves rule, so it falls to a small group who know what's best for the people. They also want to keep their grip on power, since the Party officials are the only ones with a decent standard of living. So, they are always willing to sacrifice the lives of some small number of people (say, less than 10%) for the benefit of the larger number (or themselves).
Correct me if im wrong but dont they shoot you and send the bill for the bullet to your family?
icq:=22921393;
I wonder what China's legal system defines guilt as? It would also be interesting to find out about their rules for introduction of evidence, questioning of witnesses, police procedures, etc.
A lot of the assumptions that I'd make when looking at the original story have a lot to do with the picture of the communist governments that the media has provided. I almost get the picture that that the legal system operates sort of like a military court martial, with a lot more variability on procedures and punishments.
Can anyone speak on this? I found a link on Google to this page that has some analysis that I'm going to look over. I'm not certain that I want to buy completely into a single source - and it is a little dated. Can anyone follow up on this?
So now stealing becomes a capital offfence? Much as I would like to severe punishment for *crackers*, I don't think that the death penalty is going to work. And his brother was let off for turning state witness? How many years is he going to spend in prison? Capital punishment should be reserved for murder (and maybe rape) but not for simple stealing. Even Islamic law is not as bad as this. You merely lose your hand.
I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
I agree with him that China isn't like America, and that China is "really bad", but that doesn't alter the fact that his "point" has nothing to do with what the previous poster said.
BTW, my girlfriend is Chinese, and I am not that badly informed, thank you.
It IS communism in China regardless of what you want to label it as. That is what they call it when the government owns the means of production.
(a) "the government owns the means of production" does not in itself imply communism. It merely implies some form of totalitarianism.
(b) It's not entirely clear that the Chinese government completely "owns the means of production" any more.
(c) It's kind of funny how Plato is so popular in China -- he was an advocate of clear class divisions ( like in CHina ), and an infallible, supposedly superior ruling elite ( like in China ). He was a member of the aristocracy ( like the Chinese leaders and their families )
"Equality" is certainly not the goal of the current Chinese leadership. Indeed, they embrace Plato's philosophy ( Plato is very highly regarded in China ) -- including well defined class boundaries
A communist is a leftist with a stronger ideological bent, one who will use any means necessary (almost always brutal force hence the guillotine
I know communists who don't and won't use any such thing.
Simple answer. Don't kill anyone. Just because I think that a crime is worthy of execution, that does not mean the sentence needs to be carried out.
Let me explain more:
I believe that there are crimes heinous enough that death would be a just penalty. Yet I am against anyone implementing capital punisment for any crime. My reasoning for the apparent inconsistency? I do not believe that anyone should be granted the right to kill anyone for any reason. Vigilantes are no exception. Granted, the administration of justice is about as valid of a reason that I can can think of to allow the taking of a life. Even so, I still do not think that it is compelling enough to warrant the empowerment of anyone to carry out the sentence. Throw in a government or a lynch mob with its own agenda, and there the possibility that justice will be perverted. In that case, execution is a weapon of control or revenge and not an instrument of justice. Overall, I dont think that anyone should be empowered to kill another, and I wouldnt trust anyone with the responsibility anyway.
-BW
Actually, if you have incontrovertible evidence, of course I would be interested in seeing it. Can you show me some resources? Email to anon0103@hotmail.com. I'm still forming my own opinions about China and if you have good evidence it will definitely contribute.
I take a position based on my experiences, which have shown me that China is getting much better. As I said, though, China is a big place. Perhaps you have the other side of the story that I have somehow missed.
Somehow, though, I think you are missing part of the story too. Try to look at why so many people nowadays are saying China _is_ getting better. You might learn something too.
IMHO, it is *always* wrong to put someone to death, regardless of the reasons. I understand that society must make rules (laws) to keep some semblance of order. I understand that society must punish those that violate the rules. However, the death sentence is, quite simply, not a form of punishment. Punishment implies that the person will (hopefully) change as a result of the punishment. The death sentence is, quite simply, a vindictive action. There is no element of punishment in it.
Oddly enough, the US is one of the few nations in the "first world" (sorry if this terms offends--I'm not sure how else to state it) that still has capital punishment. When we see an issue like this from China, it should be used as a wakeup call to show how barbaric we, ourselves, are (that is, we in America).
--Be human.
Actually, no. And we don't own the Panama Canal, and we have clear access to it for another 20 years or so regardless of who is a service provider (china) for the locks.
So we are not 'giving' away anything.
This is prime capitalisim in action. If China had owned the canal, america would position itself into their place, and dropped bombs to secure it. So spare me American Brother.
I have a nagging feeling that crimes would drop *extremely* fast.
Right behind it you would find freedom falling just as fast. Would you really want to live in this kind of totalitatian state? Sure, you could walk the streets and not be afraid of muggers. It would the police who would make you cower in fear.
Your values system is fubar. Death for major theft? What is the dollar value of a human life? On the other end of the spectrum, random acts of violence are treated with kid gloves. Lashes heal, but you dont grow a new hand. Just out of curoisity, I have an opening for the position of dictator is a Southeast Asian country. Would you be interested?
-BW
is the real reason.
Lots of under-the-table money to the Party elite.
Lew
"The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
How about tax evasion? You clearly are stealing from the state if you don't pay all your taxes, but how many have gotten the death penalty for that? In China or anywhere else.
I agree with malroth here, it must have been the hacking part that caused the punishment to be so tough. The Chinese government is sending a very clear message to all: "Don't fuck with our computers". And I bet after this, no one living in China will attempt to hack goverment computers.
It's hardly fair to say China has the most executions since it's got over 1/5th of the world's population.
Perhaps it'd be more fair to count PER CAPITA executions? I would be surprised if China still ranks first then.
Now, since you have already been in jail (ie, had your one chance), next time you break the speed limit and are caught, you will die, right?
Oh... it would only apply to violent crimes I hear you say.
Okay, you drive round a corner, and accidently hit a kid in the middle of the road.. you're okay, right? But what if the kids father runs out waving a gun? He's going to shoot you - what do you do? Drive off? That's hit and run - and there are witnesses. You die!!!! Okay.. you're going to stay. You talk to the guy and try and calm him down - there's his kid lying on the road and you're there saying "It's going to be okay" he's crying, he's waving this gun around... you try and sit him down, and he (being distressed) thinks you're attacking him. Bang! The gun goes off, and he's dead. Manslaughter.. you die.
Imagine none of the gun stuff had happened, but the police had proven by the length of the skid marks you were driving too fast. You die.
I'm sorry, but it just doesn't work like "one chance and you're out". Life isn't a game of quake - taking someone elses life is a very bad thing, always, no matter what they have done.
In case you hadn't guessed, I'm not a supporter of the death penelty. Since you people over in the US are so enthusiatic about it, I'm not going to argue with you about it for really, really bad crimes. But One strike and you're snuffed? How anyone can even think that and claim to be civilised is beyond me.
Moderators... do you're worse. It's not meant as flamebait, but I believe strongly in this and I'm prepared to burn some Karma on it...
In December, rootshell had a note about a case just like this, except that the sum was under half as big ($31,400). They still were sentenced to death.
/* Steinar */
(This comment is of course GPLed.)
I never claimed that China's human right's records was good, I mearly said it was better than the U.S.A.'s. I pointed out the hyprocracy of people who condem a country for human rights violations against criminals, (or in your example dissenters) while they support a government that regularly lets children die for no crime other than being born into poor families. I agree, China has some major problems, but untill we take the plank out of our eye, we cannot remove the speck from our neighbor's.
Little Brother, watching the watchers
He didn't say or imply anything of the sort. His point is that China is totalitarian, but not really "communist" or "leftist".
If by some criminals, you mean only the most hardened - here's the kicker. They generally fall into two categories:
A: Those that don't have any concern for their own life, or
B: Those that don't think they'll ever be caught.
In either case, the death threat isn't a deterrent.
You're right, it's not a deterrent. None whatsoever. Because of this, I feel that they should be put to death. I dunno, I'm still not saying kill all bad people, but maybe, one chance. If after threat of death they are still committing crimes, then they should be put to death.
Martyrdom I don't think is that big a factor. At least not in my experience. Most people I know, sane or otherwise are wanting to or even willing to get themselves killed for a cause. Yes, there are a few, but not most. And probably not too many in this country (America).
This kids are probably kept in stone cells, with no electricity. They are fed once a day if they are lucky, and have already been beaten.
The one who is going to die will probably be killed before the new year, especially if there is some rich foreginer who needs his organs.
They don't get phone calls, and they don't get visits. They will be shown on TV saying how bad they were, and then the one who dies will be lead out and shot.
You do realise that if someone needs his coronas (sp?) they shoot him in such a way it doesn't damage his eyes?
There is one organ that can only be trasplanted (normally) if both people are still alive... so the guards are directed to shoot him in the head, but in a location where the bullet passes between the lobes of the brain (I think that is how it works). Anyway, then the doctors remove the organ, and the guy is left to die.
Even if what you said was supposed to be a joke, it's not real funny.
If you were serious, go and help amnesty international.
Having lived there for a few years, just wanted to point out that people are killed for much less. I watched the 'trial' of a ring of tv theives in Xinning, 3 men two women, all found guilty. Not suprising given that there was only a prosecutor present. Anyway, they don't actually kill people in public. They parade then around town for awhile, and then shoot them in the back of the head one by one somewhere else.
Everyone seems to figure this guy was killed because it was a computer crime, but in reality the only reason anyone is shocked is that it was a computer crime. Computer people somehow figure if they steal with a computer it they should be let free. Mostly because they use computers I would guess.
Anyway, dont be too alarmed, per capita Texas is smoking the PRC, and per capita incarceration is much lower there too. In fact the crime rate in general is way lower. I actually spent a few weeks being detained there without being raped in a shower or becoming a junkie. The death penalty is just as stupid on this side of the ocean, don't kid yourself.
As for "communist", I believe you are confusing this with the word "totalitarian". They are becoming more and more like a capitalist totalitarian nation ( much like Singapore is today )
Remember Vietnam, Dictators in South America, Dictators in Africa?
Remember the experiments done with exposure to Nuclear radiation?
Remember how the Iran/Iraq war was kept going for seven years beacuse the USSR was worried about Iran, and the USA was worried about Iraq?
BTW, we here in Australia sometime have a Socialist govenment.
France, Sweden and England all have or have had socialist govenments.
Socialist Communist!
In these places, the police and criminal justice system ( which makes "criminals" of people who would be thought of as law abiding citizens anywhere else ) become more of a danger than the criminals.
(Long time /. lurker, first time poster)
Ok, someone send me a clue on this one. It is my understanding that China has had a one-child only policy in place for some time now. How is it that they are "brothers". Wouldn't that automatically nail them or their parents for another "crime" ?
Correct. Communism is somewhat utopian. It doesn't exist in the real world, and can't exist ( since it relies on Marx's flawed optimism regarding human nature ). So "communist country" is an oxymoron.
You might accuse me of "dwelling on semantics", but in this instance, the semantics are important, because you are insulting a lot of people in your abuse of the word "communism" -- you are insulting both people who are communists ( in the true, not abberent sense ) and people who are wrongly labelled as communists ( Linux users, leftists, etc ).
I was a grad assistant several years ago, and we all had cubicles in a large common area. The mainland Chinese grad assistants were absolutely abhorred that they had to worry about theft in their cubicles. One Chinese student said to me "In China I could leave everything on my desk all day and never worry about coming back and finding it stolen. If someone stole my calculator and got caught, they'd be shot in the head." He was proud of this and felt it was the "right" way. It was interesting that he was as disgusted by theft as I am by capital punishment.
I never said, first of all, that things were ideal. A great improvement over the Cultural Revolution is to be welcomed, especially if it continues. But China has a long ways to go yet.
Second, have you been to China? Have you talked to Chinese Christians, both inside and outside the official church? China is a big place. In some areas, yes, this kind of harsh repression continues. In most it does not.
Have you looked at the documents stating state policy towards religion? It explicitly says that these "house-church" movements are in principle not to be permitted, but that they are not to be forced to register but rather persuaded using gentle means. This document has been around long enough for people to know about it. Unfortunately, and this is where the biggest problem lies, not all the local leaders care to read the "persuading" part. Obviously, this policy needs to change. But it's not all as black as many think. That's my point.
You saw the members of the Falun Gong sect being arrested... wasn't it? The government sees these people differently. They see them as definitely anti-government. If your group is not anti-government and doesn't disturb the peace, as helarno said, you should be OK. And that's the approach that so many Christians are taking these days-- working around the problems, and going quietly about their business of expanding the church almost faster than anywhere else in the world.
Now, I noticed you have a tendency to post strongly anti-Communist posts in the last few weeks. Your views are pretty extreme. I suggest you temper them a little. The world is not black and white, 0s and 1s, much as we'd like to simplify it to that point. The real world is a fuzzy, complicated gray mix. That doesn't mean we should just accept it that way. We should strive to approach the white. But we should realize the complexity of issues and not polarize them so much. Hmmm. I am against Communism just as much as the next American. Yet in history there were a good number of Communists-- especially in the lower ranks-- who really believed they were working for the good of their country, and had very noble and admirable goals. They just had the wrong method. Can you grok that? I imagine that if you are reasonable, you can accept that, but if you continue to show the knee-jerk reactions you have shown in your past posts, you will begin to accuse me of being a Communist myself, and all sorts of nonsense like that.
Oh, one more thing:
You are right in some of your comments. You have only part of the truth though. Try getting the whole truth before making yourself sound like an authority on things.
The death sentence is more than likely because the govenment is scared of anybody putting hacking (or cracking in this case) skills to malicious use. The chinese government is of course communist and keeps MUCH inorfmation that they want the public to have no access to. Hell the don't even want the public to know it exsists.
As for the punishment of death, it is probably more merciful than life in some cold, starved, wet, cramped, abusive dungeon that they dare to call a prison. If you think our prison system is bad check out China's or Turkey's. Death is more than likely an easier way to go.
Sorry if this double posted.. I am on a really crappy connection.
www.mp3.com/Undocumented
I wonder whether, if neither brother had talked, the appeal would have been sucessful. If so, this looks like a classic instance of the prisoner's dilemma being acted out in real life.
I expect that they got death because they stole from a state bank. They didn't have much choice, since (almost?) all banks in China are run by the government, but had they instead stolen from an american or other foreign bank, I bet that they'd have gotten off more lightly.
The punishment probably did not have much to do with the fact that it was a computer crime -- rather the Chinese government probably saw robbing from them as close to treason.
Play and design text adventures online.
".It has happened in the US already...pass out wake up with a note telling you to call an ambulance NOW because your kidneys are GONE...."
m
This is an urban legend:
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/robbery/kidney.ht
gives more information about it.
Theives are regularly condemned to death in China. This probably has little to do with his use of a computer. This is not News for Nerds, and such as most of us thankfully are not subject to China's laws, it is not Stuff That Matters. Maybe I'm wrong, and there are ways to read Slashdot from China.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
You shouldn't assume that just because something that seems excessive happens to a hacker in China of all places that it is because that person is a hacker.
Last time I checked China is still communist, and communist countries have been known to do rather nasty things for rather insignificant acts (like protesting in Tienniman (sp?) Square for instance). You have to remember that Chins is a whole other country.
Another human rights violation, another reason China shouldn't be allowed in the WTO. Bleh.
They'll shoot you for tax evasion, and about 67 other offenses, at least.
Literally.
See Amnesty International's report on the death penalty in China.
It is most emphatically not the computer aspect.
Only the dead have seen the end of war.
As it was a Chinese State Bank (I doubt that there are privately owned banks in China, but with the SEZs, Special Economic Zones, I have no idea, and haven't really kept up), it was a crime against the state.
In a Communist Nation, is there any greater crime that stealing from the state? As everything is owned "by the people," his robbery was a crime against the people of China. That, arguably, is a capital crime.
In a Western Nation (private ownership), when you steal from someone, there is a criminal and civil element. Ultimately, you stole from a single individual, and while the state has a vested interest in protecting people from each other, it isn't the victim, which warrants a lesser penalty.
In a Communist Nation, everyone is supposed to work towards the common good. Someone betrayed that trust by taking from the community instead of contributing to it. Arguably, that warrants the death penalty.
Mostly playing Devil's advocate here,
Alex
P.S. I don't advocate the Communist mindset, but I'm giving my view on how you have to treat the crime based upon that philosophy. I realize that China does not live up to the Communist ideals, but I'm going to assume that it writes its laws with them in mind.
why do people all of a sudden forget the attrocities commited by the soviets, north koreans, etc in the name of making the world a socialist "utopia"? North korea may not be gone but it is definitely getting there. You people have forgotten the cold war's victims (aka the russians and all other socialist nations' citizens). I remember the USSR and what it did to the world and I am 16.
The Chinese are no longer truly communistic. There is extreme capitalism there, in some ways they have more of a competive economic system than the U.S. of A. What confuses most people into thinking China is still a communistic state is the extreme levels of nationalism in China, individuals willingly act for the good of the state, a communistic ideal, but still strive to attain personal wealth.
Now the real suprise is that the Chineese IMHO have a better human rights record than the U.S. of A. True the chineese will sentence theives to death while we won't. But then we regularly sentence the poor those who cannot afford medical attention to death by not providing them with the care we have the capibility to provide.
It has been said that a sociaty is best judged by how it treats its weakest and most hepless members. In the U.S.A. the numbers of children without medical insurance of any kind is staggering. The number of elderly on the streets is mind-numbing, the number of sick, dieing because they can not afford a life-saving procedure is astounding. The U.S.A. has sentenced all these people to death.
So ask yourself which is a worse violation of human rights: execution of one man for theft, or execution of thousands of children, thousands of elderly, and thousands of sick.
Yes,
Little Brother, watching the watchers
I really doubt that the amount of money involved has anything to do with them passing the death sentence. Consider that China is a country where an all-powerful elite (the communist party) has access to all resources. If you look at most other (post)communist countries, corruption is rampant and reaches into (the) high(est) levels of government. While I'm no great expert on the Chinese situation, the little I hear about this seems to point at the fact that China is as bad (corruption wise) as all/most other (post)communist countries.
...
... welcome to the 3rd millenium ...
As such the dollar amound involved is not a big deal. If it were, a large number of Chinese officials would be very scared (of course they have their connections, but you get my point). What probably scared the Chinese (govt.) was that hacking is not only a threat to their fincancial system but much more: Hacking is (in their eyes) a threat to national security. In countries like China, an amazaing amount of (seemingly trivial) things are classified as state secrets. Hacking has to potential to attack this secrecy at the core and distribute whatever (sensitive) data world wide at the press of a button. It challenges the supreme access/control of the elite (communist party) over the flow of information; a bit No-No in the eyes of this very elite. No, governments do no like you divulging their secrets and China, having the type of government they do, is almost certain to be one of the countries most pissed off by this
In an ideal world, there would be no secrets. In our world, (if you're in the wrong place) you get shot (or at least thrown into jail (if you're lucky))for divulging (so called classified) information
You make the statement that "Theives are regularly condemned to death in China." How do you know? How regular is regular? What kind of theives?
Just wondering.
[From FHM magazine...] Apprently in 97, they executed a 1,876. Capital offences include pig theft & VAT receipt theft. One women was killed for sticking thorns into the buttocks of passing cyclists.
Also, they are killed in public, with crowds of 20,000. "[They are] shot in the back of the head - to service the rpadily growing shoot-to-order organ tranpslant business."
There are no more forced labor chain gangs in the US. Prisoners who work on or near the highway are selected on a volunteer basis. They get to see the sun, and get away from the prison for a few hours, and they're paid (a teeny bit) for their labor. They may save the money until their release, or use it to purchase a limited variety of luxury items.
It is, and so is yahoo's news section.
.3 RMB)
also, when there is an execution, it's a pretty well known fact that the government will send the family a bill for the bullet (around 4 cents US,
there is no thing
what else could you want?
They call themselves communist. The distinction becomes apparent when you notice that the former East Germany and Lauren Kabila's "new" Congo call themselves "democratic". Are/were they?
If no-one should park in front of fire hydrant, make a small barrier so that no-one CAN park in front of said hydrant. Seems easy to me (and could be done quite cheaply).
"It's overkill, of course. But you can never have too much overkill." - Anonymous Slashdot Coward
Great, first Martial Law in America for exercising 1st amendment rights, and now Death for simple theft in China.
Thank God China and America aren't lovers, I would hate to see what inbred monstrosity they would bear.
China has sentenced two crackers to death for stealing $31,400 from a bank. China executes a lot of criminals. For those who haven't seen the videos, they hold mass executions where there are around a hundred prisoners on their knees in a field with a guard behind each of them, they are all shot in the head simultaneously.
There's a link to the right entitled Code where you can find the slashdot code, aka http://slashdot.org/code.shtml
No, the harsh pentalty is not a deterent. I'm half way down the slashdot list, and already 3 other back-erobberies have been mentioned, add to that the ones they didn't notice.
The current Slashdot moderation system is made by gay communists!
Now, why didn't this guy cop out and say he'd work for the government? After all, the Chinese government recently said that they were going to build a third division of their army as electronic warfare (i.e. computer/internet warfare). Heck, being a cog is better than death!
*insert pithy sig here*
The police I knew were hardly corrupt or "criminal". I might have issues with one or two individuals but that's no more different than any police officer here in the US.
Again, for those who don't know, China has more people than any other country in the world.(And probably more geeks than any other country too) But it has much less resources for them to exploit in an unregulated way. The banks simplly can't stand up to the amount of assult what will take place if every one who can, do, hack.
For those of you don't know, China is making very big social and economic changes. There are imballances that needs to be taken care of by "non-standard" means. If the United States suddenly had today's automobiles and highway system in the 40's, It would probably actually need to "nuke" a few who run red lights. The people would not have been accustomed to following such arbitrary rules as a few lights hanging in the street.
Democracy kills too. We do have the Death Penalty inthe US.
In medieval times, the death penalty was commonly used for theft. On the other hand, murder was usually penalized by a fine. Seems perverse, but it was practiced for hundreds of years in many European kingdoms.
One reason for the disparity in penalties was that the laws were written to protect royalty and property-holders. A lord or rich farmer was much more likely to be involved in murder than to steal something.
This crime was lower versus upper class. If the hacker had been the manager of a state-run enterprise who funneled money into his own pocket, it's unlikely he would have been punished, much less executed.
And don't forget that in the US, you do not have to commit a murder to be executed. For example, if you drive a getaway car for a robbery, and someone is shot and killed, you can be executed as an accomplice even if you did not know about the murder. Or you can be executed as a major marijuana dealer, I believe, even if your product does not physically harm anyone.
In medieval times, the death penalty was commonly used for theft. On the other hand, murder was usually penalized by a fine. Seems perverse, but it was practiced for hundreds of years in many European kingdoms.
One reason for the disparity in penalties was that the laws were written to protect royalty and property-holders. A lord or rich farmer was much more likely to be involved in murder than to steal something.
This crime was lower versus upper class. If the hacker had been the manager of a state-run enterprise who funneled money into his own pocket, it's unlikely he would have been punished, much less executed.
And don't forget that in the US, you do not have to commit a murder to be executed. For example, if you drive a getaway car for a robbery, and someone is shot and killed, you can be executed as an accomplice even if you did not know about the murder. Or you can be executed as a major marijuana dealer, I believe, even if your product does not physically harm anyone.
Why don't you go to his web page? He is one of the MAIN kernel developers; among the top 5. (you know who the rest are right?)
The only reason all cover-ups appear to fail is that you never hear about the ones that succeed.
i doubt that the chinese judiciary is upset at the fact that this involved a computer. i am quite sure that all they care about is the following
i am no chinese legal scholar, but i am sure that they use extreme punishments over there (stealing $87k == capital offense, that's totally ridiculous) as a quite effective deterent. i have some friends from china who insist there is virtually no crime where they come from. why? because you get caught, and it sucks big time. you say you didn't do it? yeah, ok, (wink-wink nudge-nudge), then who did?
-pal
It seems to me that this is actually part of a wider trend, which is that larger countries, (in terms of their population size rather than their geographical area, although the latter can also be significant) tend of necessity to be less liberal than smaller but equally advanced ones. This tendency has been born out through history, by for example the rigid rules imposed by the Roman, British, and many other empires. Their smaller neighbours usually tended to enjoy greater freedoms. The trend I am describing concerns me primarily because the world's population is still on the increase, and so the world's nations are likely to become more rigid to save their systems from freedoms which though permissible in a smaller structure could fragment a larger one.
"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist." Salman Rushdie
The real reason is he claimed to be
^ r1gh1 h^c|3r dudz
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
They'll be thinking about there offences against the state while they hack a palm III port to talk to the acoustic coupler.
They'll have all the time in the world to ponder there wrong doing while they fake email headers in a spam campain protesting there imprisonment.
They'll have time to think about it, as they email news agencies world wide(/.) calling attention to there plight.
They'll feel sorry for the offence against the people while world-wide public distain for there 'false imprisonment' builds into protests in the streets.
Under presure from the grown public protest, they'll be released and become heros to the hacker comunity in China.
Or maybe it'll turn into a simplistic "let's kick commie butt" session slanging simplistic insults at a very different country with a very different political system.
Don't get me wrong, I am a passionate believer in human rights and the PRC is way down there in needing to drastically improve its record, and make some major amends for some terrible acts (e.g Tibet). But I'd much prefer to read through some interesting and thought provoking postings rather than wade through low grade uninformed junk. Slashdot does have a tendency to bring out some really dumb comments as soon as politics or another country gets mentioned.
From someone who has spent enough time in China to say with a fair amount of certainty, things are much better in China now. Sure, during the Cultural Revolution of the 60s and 70s there was bizarre, cruel and extremely oppressive treatment of those who disagreed. But now even the Chinese themselves call those the "ten years of chaos" when no one was safe. Since Deng Xiaoping came in and brought the government to a more sane and moderate position, there has been a lot more freedom and many prisoners unjustly condemned were released (not all, unfortunately). The 1989 incident in Tiananmen Square was the beginning of a bit of a swing back to the extreme left, but lately things have been getting better again.
What is to keep China from going back to another Cultural Revolution? Well, no one would buy it anymore. The Cultural Revolution happened because so many people made a personality cult out of Mao. Mao's dead, and people cynicism toward Marxism is at an all-time high. The only reason China stays as far left as it does is because there are still many old-thought rulers in power. As they are replaced by younger generations, you can be sure things will continue to improve in China.
Things aren't all fine and dandy in China. But compared to twenty years ago, the Chinese feel very free. And it's only going to get better, I think, although perhaps making one step back for every two or three forward.
As for being thrown in prison for attending a non-State church, that happens only rarely. It is not official policy to do so, but unfortunately the policy is vague enough that some local Party leaders who are militant atheists interpret the policy to fit their own dislike for religions. That too is improving as education is spread about the official policy on religious freedom. Ideally, the policy itself would be more clear, but it is not likely to be changed in the near future.
Even Islamic law is not as bad as this. You merely lose your hand.
There is no such thing as "Islamic law". The Holy Koran is not a law book. The thing that's being called "Islamic law" by non-secular Islamic countries (Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Iran) is a merely a bunch of terrible laws, conjured by some mullahs based on their false interpretation of Koran. It is more of a repressive tool rather than a law-i.e. adultery is a crime in so-called "Islamic" Saudi Arabia, yet male members of the royal family can easily build huge harems by importing European models without any punishment. You can easily, legally and safely hire a prostitute in a posh Iranian hotel by simply arranging a "mu'ta", a temporary Islamic marriage made up by Iranian interpreters of Koran.
Koran is interpreted differently by secular Islamic countries and their law system is devoi of any references to Islam.
--
BluetoothCentral.com
A site for everything Bluetooth. Coming in January 2000.
Zigbee Central: A Zigbee weblog
You're very lucky there isn't a death penalty for stupid posts on Slashdot.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
. . . how many of the shocked posts here are from libertarians and conservatives who applaud Draconian punishments in the USA . . . ?
If "an armed society is a polite society" (of which I am not at all certain, but that's another argument entirely), then that's because such a society has a potential death penalty for all manner of anstisocial behavior, right?
------------------------------------
Incidentally (this is somewhat off-topic, but I'd like to hear what people think of it), the most valid objection to the death penalty even in cases of the genuinely serious crimes where it's used in the USA (e.g. murder etc.) is that it's real hard to apologize afterwards if you got the wrong guy. But as it happens, the death penalty in the USA is applied only in cases where the crime is particularly horrific, which seems goofy. A more evil crime doesn't make any given suspect more guilty. It's a non sequitur. From what I've read, I've gotten a sort of anecdotal impression that the likelihood of the criminal committing similar crimes in the future isn't even a major consideration (IANAL: Hard data on this point is very welcome). Well, I can't see much sense in any of this. If you ask me, evidence of a very strong likelihood of repetition along with horribleness-of-crime should be required even to consider execution, and then once it's being considered, there should be a more stringent standard of proof required of the prosecution. Our legal architecture only provides one definition of guilt: "Beyond a reasonable doubt". IMHO that's not enough when you're going to kill somebody. For the death penalty, you should have to prove guilt beyond even an unreasonable doubt, beyond any damn trace or shadow of a doubt whatsoever. If you can't prove guilt with that degree of certainty, default to life in prison w/o parole. In some cases, we're more certain than in others. Demoting that to a boolean value is not a good idea when the punishment is irreversible. If you set your kids on fire and people see you do it, fwwht, off with your damn head. But not all cases are like that.
We already have a kludgey imitation of this with the appeals process, but we can clean up the implementation and save everybody a lot of money and time.
I'd like to see a rational discussion about this, but unfortunately China was mentioned and we all know what means on Slashdot.
First and foremost, I DO believe in the death penalty. I feel that fear of death can be the only cure for some criminals, and that oftentimes the prison system does such terrible job of rehabilitation, it would have been more cost effective to put them down in the first place.
A good example, however fictional it might be, is _The_Shawshank_Redemption_, in which the lead character Andy makes a statement something along the lines of "You know, when I was on the outside, I flew straight as an arrow, but I had to come to prison to learn how to be a criminal."
It may seem like a bad example, but for any of you that don't have any first-hand experience with ex-cons, or prison systems (I've been to jail, briefly, and had my share of run-ins with the law when I was younger, and almost a handful of my friends have been in a little deeper), it's more often than not the truth. Sending people with criminal mentality, often criminal by necessity (at least in their minds) into an environment predominately gang controlled and replete with organized criminal activities can be the WORST thing for them.
Now I'm not saying that they deserved the death penalty, I don't consider theft a capital offense, especially not electronic theft, in which nobody can "get hurt" physically, but in a Communist environment, the traditional goal is for people to work together, for the common goal of the people. In a sense it's like stealing money from your father so that you can buy a bike he might have bought you for Christmas had you not stolen from him in the first place. (Bad analogy, let's move on)
The biggest question in my mind would be the interrogation tactics used to convince one brother to rat out the other. Not all families are close, I understand that, but if I were close enough anyone to commit electronic crime with them, I would have to feel like I could trust them with more than my life. Maybe the initiator overlooked this, maybe he made a bad judgement call, perhaps. Not having any insight into the matter leads me to speculate a scenario with hot lights, hot pokers, and even hotter tempers belonging to Chinese officials.
True, I could be completely full of shit, but I don't know. If anyone knows better, let me know. I'm not above looking stupid, I promise.
My understanding is that one can get executed in China for almost anything committed against the state; or interpreted to be that way. I have read a story of two thieves executed because of stealing four lightbulbs from the landing lights of a nearby airport. Other posts have some interesting examples, too.
As for people being able to read this from China, I doubt it.
--
BluetoothCentral.com
A site for everything Bluetooth. Coming in January 2000.
Zigbee Central: A Zigbee weblog
This is the classic prisoner's dilema. Except in China, if they both kept silent they'd probably both have gotten the death penalty.
Still, think of how it would feel to be getting the death penalty when your own brother ratted on you and gets to walk.
this is why democracy rules...... you cannot put people to death for things which cannot justify death.... these people (the commie gov) are murderers of anyone, student protestors, crackers, anyone who gets in their way. absolute power corrupts.
As someone else pointed out, we have the death penalty in the U.S., no?, and we're democratic, no?
Furthermore, I think you're making an incorrect generalization when you say "you cannot put people to death for things which cannot justify death." One of the many hot debated items in the world, I venture.. if not, at least in U.S., is what sort of punishments are justified by the many crimes (or, actions that are considered crimes) that exist. As humans, we all have our own opinions, and our own morals, values, and personal beliefs; therefore, we're not all going to agree on punishments for people. There are many people in this world who applaud the death penatly and there are as many or more so who feel exactly the opposite about it. Some are in the middle. And further still, there are disagreements over what type and the severity of punishments for crimes; I mean, we have parole! And, where you note "(the commie gov) are murderers of anyone, student protestors, crackers, anyone who gets in their way." I'd be willing to venture that our gov't has done a lot of the same type of activity. My theory? You've got an issue with communism, because you don't like it and/or don't understand it, and therefore you are going to blame all problems on the fact that China (or whoever we may speak of that's communist) is a communist country, and not stop and consider the entire situation. Sure, communism may not be the best answer, but I'm sure it isn't the worst. And think: perhaps the "drastic" punishments for such crimes serve as better deterrants against them. who knows.
Insert mind here.
Let me suggest that, next time you are in China, you try to lead a peaceful gathering of some students in a large punlic area in support of the right to practice your own religion, or vote for your own government. Then you'll see how enlightened and open the Chinese government is. It does no good at all to say "This is better than the industrial revolution". I mean, try holding them to a slightly higher standard than that.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
It thinks its time you re-read '1984'.
-
We cannot reason ourselves out of our basic irrationality. All we can do is learn the art of being irrational in a reasonable way.
Communism is based on fear within the masses and corruption of the leadership. The crimes of the leadership are never accounted for, unless, of course, the culprit falls in disgrace. Justice and truth have always been on the side of the powerful.
Do I commend theft? When it comes to justice, we live in a deploreable world and we are lucky to have more of it in the States than in other places.
Lucky? Gosh, no! Someone did pay a price for it. So are we ready to still make a stand?
On the other hand, I do agree that religion is controlled. The police pay special attention to them, just for control purposes. For the most part, as long as people don't do anything extreme, you will not be disturbed. I attended a few churches there, both for Chinese and foreigners. As long as you do not mix them (God forbid the foreigners corrupting the good local Chinese) you tend to be fine.
Life in China tends to be: Don't do anything to attract attention to yourself and you will be fine. You can have your religion, your business, your money, etc. Just don't try to make a public spectacle of yourself.
Most of you are saying "It was a government bank, they were stealing from the nation". well, what do you call counterfiting(sp)? It isn't stealing but forging legal notes. What is the penalty for counterfiting (in the US)?
They had to know what the concquences were when they started. They knew that if they got caught they would get the death sentence. It's not like China just pulled the sentence out of it's ass.
So the one ratted out the other one and cut a deal? Happens all the time. They knew they couldn't get the one without the other' testimony.
I guess they thought that their lives were worth $87,000. I don't know about you, but stealing $87k from the China Gov't is not somethng to risk a life over. They thought differently.
I'm sure you've all read about cases where someones mom gets sent to jail because their son bought them a car using drug money. It does not matter if they didn't know their son was selling drugs to earn the money. They are still an accessory to the crime.
We also lock people away for 20 years or more because they grow a simple green plant on their own property, harvest it and smoke it.
So there is room for improvement here in the US too.
Sorry I mean Cultural Revolution, not Industrial Revolution. hehe.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
That's starting to go the right way. If only everything was punishable by death. Yes it seems harsh, right? Look at the mindset of a criminal psychopath. Some people measure it against, "well they could take away my computer", or "well, they could put me on probation for 2 years." If *all* crimes were punishable by death, they'd think, "hell no, i'd be put to death." you *damn right*! are you going to take a chance and rape this 15 year old girl walking home from school if it means certain death if she tells? hell no, you aren't going to. you aren't going to do *anything* 'wrong.' and our society would become an amazing place to live. all the people that ruin the world for us would be killed off, or straighten up. sure there be the one mental patient who actually wants to be killed, but 95% of the crime would be gone. people would have to get over it if there loved ones were put to death. they didn't love you back enough to not be an idiot and commit a crime, punishable by death. you must teach and raise your children the right way. i know this sounds harsh and cruel. but look at it in general, in the long run. what a nice world.
China is not leftist and not communist. HAND,
First off, let's get two things straight about the Chinese legal system. They didn't execute hackers in China because China is "scared" of hackers, nor is it because China is some "evil communist" country who routinely puts people to death because they don't embrase our democratic form of government.
The Chinese civic system of punishments stems from the Chinese Legalist school of thought, a philosophical system which was instrumental in setting up the dictatorship of Ch'in in 221B.C., and in unifying China around the same time.
The cornerstone of Chinese Legalism is the accumulation of the power necessary to rule what (and is) the largest country in the world, using stone-age tools. Legalism's aim of controlling such a large mass of humanity (at a time when Plato was extolling the virtues of a city-state whose size never exceeded about 5,000 people) was done through a system of rigerous and intensive set of laws backed by generous rewards and severe punishments. In short, Legalism extolled the virtue of setting up a system of well-defined laws that everyone could understand, and dealing out severe punishments to those who violated the law.
"Legalism", while not as fully embrased by the Chinese as Confusianism and Taoism, does make up one of the three pillars of Chinese civic philosophy. It's been around for a couple of thousand years, and is the reasoning why littering (i.e., dropping a wad of paper on the ground) is punishable by prison time, and why thieves are routinely put to death.
You also have to keep in mind that our more "humanist" approach to punishment has only evolved in the last hundred years or so. It wasn't all that long ago when we in the west were dropping thieves into a 50-foot pit onto a stone floor and leaving them to rot without food or water. (In fact, the Hollywood image of a castle dungeon is rather inaccurate--most dungeons were nothing more than stone pit 50 or more feet deep where prisoners were literally dropped. The ones who didn't die due to the force of impact with the stone floor died for a lack of water.)
The principle difference between the United States and Chinese philosophy are threefold: first, our stated goal in punishing a criminal is to rehabilitate--this stems from the Judeo-Christian need for redemption. The Chinese use punishment not to rehabilitate but to set a harsh example to others who would break the law.
Second, as we are trying to achieve redemption of the criminal, we set punishments which "fit" the crime--a modified form of "an eye for an eye" where we make habitual litterers pick up trash, and make thieves pay back their victim. In China, as their goal is to set an example, they create punishments which indicate to the public how unacceptable the crime is. Thus, putting first time litterers in jail, or putting thieves to death.
Third, as we are a common-law country, our laws evolve as we struggle to find a balance between maximizing freedom and creating stability. This is because in the United States, we are a country "of the people" where citizens are presumed to have entered into a "compact" to get along with each other. In China, Legalist philosphy has authority stemming from a central figure, so their ultimate goal is not to balance freedom with cooperation, but to create stability and peace. Thus, even if you execute the wrong person for theft, it's okay--he set an example for everyone else.
Chinese Legalism has been around a lot longer than Karl Marx. And it's been around a lot longer than computer hackers.
The difference between China and the US's legal system is that, the brother who talked would have still gotten hard time, and the brother who got the death sentence would have probably got 20 years to life in federal prison. I bet that makes you think twice about commiting a crime in a foreign country, eh?
-PovRayMan
----------
Check out my blackbox styles
Any of you have talked about this subject with any mainland Chinese will find that it's not really uncommon.
I talked to a Chinese guy a few months ago, and he told me that when there were two gangsters fighting with each other, the millitary police would just stand back and watch - when one of the gangsters die, they got to the other gangster and execute him. Human right is a joke. The judiciary system is a fraud.
Communism, what do you expect?
There's no doubt that part of this is due to the tradition, but I suspect the true cause behind it is both economical and political. Compare China with other Chinese government systems. Taiwan is the capitalism counterpart of China, Taiwanese no longer have any human rights issue. But that's only after Taiwanese economic miracle. Look at Singapore, a very wealthy country but also a country of dictatorship, there are quite a few human rights issue there, too.
Economically, if the govn't is not rich enough to pay for trial and jailcells, the only resolution is to execute people.
Politically, i suspect any country with dictatorship would not let people to stand a fair trial.
Disclaimer... blah blah blah
China is a communist state. Committing a crime against 1 person is just as bad as committing a crime against the entire population fo the country. You need to see it not as 2 people stealing from a bank, but rather 2 people stilling from the population of China.
Yes they do. This tradition dates back, well into the feudal times of China.
Communism is not evil, it is not a terrible thing. It is DIFFERENT and it's very hard to understand something this different when you live in a place like the United States. Just because they don't have the same basic freedoms as we do, doesn't mean they don't have anything. This man was sentanced to death because he commited a crime against someone in China, and in a communist state, that means he committed the crime against all of China.
The Chinese government, like an other totalitarian regime, cannot abide any organized activity that is not controlled directly by the State. No computer clubs, no Churches, no gatherings, no political parties - unless authorized and controlled by the State. This is directly contrary to most fundamental human rights.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
Maybe we should just execute all the criminals, then, DumbFuq.
.. and so on.
Actually, i think "body-punishment" (I don't know the english word. I think of when you "physically" punish the perp) is a Good Thing(tm). Cold blooded murder should be punished by Death. Theft should be punished by cutting one hand of, or death - if its "major theft". Random violence (when the victim didn't provoke the attacker knowingly) should be punished by 50 kisses from the whip
All in public of course.
I have a nagging feeling that crimes would drop *extremely* fast.
"Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
Many many crimes are punishable by death in china. Family even gets an invoice for the cost of the bullets.
It doesn't matter whether or not *we* believe in the death penalty. We're talking about China; no one outside the country gets a vote. (Nor, for the moment, do people inside the country.)
Yes, they use the death penalty heavily. They have too many people, and the government doesn't want to expend resources taking care of people who are troublesome.
Everyone likes to quote the "total cost of execution" figure, but that's based on our system with appeals and everything. It's a lot cheaper in China; you spend enough to have someone dig a grave, and you spend a bullet.
Good? No. Bad? Very likely. But also not something that we can evaluate plausibly given *our* experience. It's a different world over there.
(Personally, I am not very fond of the death penalty, but I do believe it's a reasonable response to some crimes. Just not very many.)
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
I don't think there's anything fuzzy or complicated about a country that rounds up harmless religious believers and puts them in forced labor camps. Your ignorance of the extent and severity of this is obviously willfull. You do a tremendous disservice to those who are unjustly imprisoned, some of them for decades. The Roman Catholic Church has several bishops who have imprisoned since the 70's. Numerous priests, nun, and lay people, and hundreds of Protestant Christians have been imprisoned and tortured for their faith. This continues up to the present moment, with no sign at all of abating.
There is incontrovertable evidence for this. The Chinese Government knows this. So why do you make excuses for them? Why do you apologize for this systematic policy?
Thank you for noticing the anti-communist tone of some of my posts. I happen to loathe communism. I have family members who died under communist regimes. There is no excuse for the mass slaughter of tens of millions of people. not to mention the incredible repression of so many more people.
I am aware that the world is not "black and white" as you say, and it's not like I would defend every action of my own government, or criticize every action of another. But one thing is clear - communism is one of the most destructive and deadly ideas ever to creep out of the leftist mind and poison the world.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
You know what I find totally and completely rediculous about this? The fact that people kill, and rape women and children all over the world, and the one thing that China is concerned about enough to kill a person is money and how stupid their administration is because their bank got hacked. People should stop hunting hackers. Yes the brothers were wrong for stealing that money. It was un-ethical. However I dont think they should die for it. As for the one brother that got off by narking his brother out. WTF is that? Talk about a loser. He should be the one to die. -Godess
A communist is a leftist with a stronger ideological bent, one who will use any means necessary (almost always brutal force hence the guillotine, the Gulag, and the Logai prison camps in China) to restructure society to his liking. He is necessarily totalitarian, since a gradual democratic approach to his ideal never happens spontaneously.
It's certainly true, of course, that many of the Chinese leaders are no longer True Belivers, and some regions have been allowed economic reform of a sort. It is very limited, though. For example, compare the Chinese banking system, or notions of contract law to those in a free economy. They are a long, long way from the economic freedom of someplace like Singapore. But indeed, if they ever come close, they will be much less communist than simply totalitarian.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
Of course China is not a communist country in the sense Marx envisioned. I am my father's son, but I am not exactly what he had in mind. So what do you call it, then, when the government owns all capital and means of production? What do you call it when the labor theory of value is strictly enforced through taxation and regulation of pay scales? It is not enough to call it Totalitarian. (Chinese) communism is totalitarian, but is much more than that. Your understanding of the ideological roots of Chinese communism is apparently attenuated by ignorance.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
I thought samurai were Japanese?
Bad Command Or File Name
Beyond a reasonable doubt is the strongest measure you can enforce. An "unreasonable doubt" is the nagging suspicion that it was really aliens that came down, performed the crime, and then framed the accused. It is unreasonable because it is irrational. Capital crimes in the U.S. always have guilt and sentencing determined by a jury, and precisely because there is no chance to say "sorry" after the fact, in theory any juror would want to be quite certain before condemning the accused. In practice, those on death row are disproportionately black and poor, but that is a separate problem, or perhaps several problems.
The American justice and penal systems do not have a Mission Statement of the variety that all our corporate organizations seem so intent on wrting these days. In some order, they are meant to provide:
- punishment (from society)
- revenge, or retribution (nominally on behalf of the victim)
- deterrence to others who might commit a crime
- rehabilitation
- threat removal (removal from the general population via jail or execution)
Different people have different priorities; your's seems to be threat removal, and that's not a bad one to pick. I think historically the people who have taken the most interest in the system are much more in line with the punishment or revenge angles, and that produces the system that we have.The 'grisly' angle to capital cases in the U.S. is an important one to note. Capital punishment provides little (well, no) deterrent, rehabilitation, threat removal, or economic advantage compared to life imprisonment without parole. It does, however, provide a measure of revenge. Personally, I somewhat uneasily endorse the death penalty in these cases, and recognize it for the revenge (under the cloak of righteous indignation) that it is.
China is entirely leftist and communist. Are you visiting from a parallel universe, or are you just an ignoramus?
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones