|
popeye1250 -> RE: bipolar man executed in China (12/30/2009 11:59:34 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
I personally believe that drug smugglers being executed for their crime in China is the business of the Chinese, just as the heavy sentences elsewhere in that part of the world for such offences are the business of the nations using them. What I feel is absolutely wrong however is to hold someone to the standards of a sane, rational person who falls so clearly short of that standard; such a response is that of an insane bureaucracy not that of a considered justice system.
Actually, while I disagree with the actions of the Chinese government and, overall, their entire political system, I do think that it is a "considered justice system". It's just not one that we like or are comfportable with.
We tend to be greatly concerned with individual rights. Huge debates are sparked by the incarceration of one innocent man, or the infrigement of the rights of a single person. A police officer arrests and detains a Harvard professor for a few hours and it is a matter so profound that the President of the United States of America became involved.
Despite the erosion of rights here in the U. S., that clearly shows the profound value we put on individual rights.
Communist China does not place their value on individual rights. Their system of justice is based on the overall good of the entire nation. The fact that you, as an individual, may be sacrificed for the "greater good" is an accepted principle.
China had a terrible opium problem. Beyond anything that has appeared in Europe or the United States. While much was said and discussed about the Chinese opium problem, nothing effective was done.
The Communists ended the opium problem when they took power. As I recall (and I could be wrong here), possession with intent or transportation was punishable by death - often dealt immediately by the police (i.e. if they caught you with a pound of opium (de facto sign of "intent to distribute") they just killed you on the spot) and any possession at all was grounds for being sentenced to twenty years of hard labor - hard labor being the sort that you wouldn't survive 20 years of.
Were innocents killed or sentenced to death by hard labor? Yes, no doubt. From the view of the government, their sacrifice (though unfortunate) was a small price to pay for ending the nation-wide problem of massive drug addiction. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
Under this sort of "collective" view of justice - even if the gentlemen in question were completely innocent - his death would still serve a greater purpose - making it clear to drug smugglers that anyone attempting to violate Chinese law will pay with their lives, no matter their nationality. In the past forty years, China has not had a resurgence of the widespread drug addiction that crippled it during the early part of the 20th century. It seems pretty obvious to me that attempting in any way to sell drugs in China will likely get you killed.
I disagree with the philosophy of the "collective good" over the "individual good". I think the greatest abuses in the history of mankind have been performed with just this excuse. I think that if you don't hold the rights of the individual to a higher standard than the rights of the group as a whole, your system of justice erodes over time until no individual has any rights and neither does the group.From my end of things, killing that man without a fair trial including counsel of his own choosing and a thorough examination of his mental state is a travesty. However, I acknowledge that other systems of justice, not based on the principles I espouse, are still systems of justice. Sometimes they're even far more effective than the ones I prefer.
This just perfectly illustrates why the continued fights for people's rights, limitations on government and reduction of bureacracy and government control remain so important for society. For any society.
Black, but that "Harvard professor" is considered to be one of "The beautiful people" who "summers" (not "vacation's") on Martha's Vinyard and rides one of those big adult tricycles all over the island!
I daresay that if the Cambridge, Mass Police arrested someone in East Cambridge ("He came from the part of Cambridge where they don't go to Harvard.") for the same offense nothing would be heard of it.
And good luck on that "limitations on government" thing, Obama's found "executive orders" now!
I totally agree with you on that and"reduction of bureacracy and government control" but with Democrats in power I fear we'll have *more* of those things and not less! They seem to believe in "govt as social worker."
Getting back to the subject at hand there appears that there was a lot *more* than "just" or "only" Bi-Polar going on in this case!
Bi-Polar is very "controllable" with medicines mainly lithium.
I don't know why many defense lawyers try to bring it up as a "defense."
The same for "Alcoholism", the alcoholic simply avoids alcohol and there is remission.
|
|
|
|
