| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| Purse-snatching death penalty introduced in China |
| 2006-03-05 |
| A province in China has introduced the death penalty for purse-snatching. Economic good times in China have been followed by worsening crime. Southern Guangdong province, neighbouring Hong Kong, has been particularly affected, with tens of thousands of people convicted of robbery every year. Officials there have announced that purse-snatching is now punishable by death. Even those whose life is spared will still face a mandatory three years in jail. Amnesty International says it is a knee-jerk response that will not reduce crime. China officially executes about 10,000 people every year, more than the rest of the world combined. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #4 Remember China's "Strike Hard" campaign a few years ago? They were executing people for offenses like stealing gasoline, shoplifting, drunk and disorderly. This has been going on for a long time. |
| Posted by: Slens Shaitch6011 2006-03-05 19:03 |
| #3 Something that is rarely highlighted in history is whether or not draconian legal systems worked. That is, the death penalty for all sorts of offenses, great and small. It is not clear, one way or another, because usually when such penalties are enacted, the society has so many other problems that confuse the issue, that nobody knows for sure. However, I suspect, as is the case with widespread abortion, that it does reduce the crime rate significantly. First of all, it eliminates recitivism and career criminals. Second, it is like a plague that targets the rest of the criminal class. However, like a lethal disease, this signals its own demise. That is, normal, law-abiding people do not wish to live under such constant threat for punishment for petty offenses, unless their very lives are at an even worse constant threat from the criminals. So as soon as the one threat is diminished, they wish to reduce the other threat. Then, if the law refuses to liberalize, which it usually doesn't, then the normal citizens try to subvert, corrupt and ignore it. Again, for their own protection. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-03-05 10:24 |
| #2 What happened to from each according to his means, to each according to his needs? Other than cutting out the government bureaucrat? |
| Posted by: Glomort Claviger7613 2006-03-05 09:23 |
| #1 "Chang, half the Politburo needs new kidneys!" "The Pickpockets, Purse-cutters and Highwaymen workers' collective will do its fraternal Socialist duty! In accordance with the principles of Marxist-Leninist proletarianism, there will be a democratic centralist relignment of organs." |
| Posted by: Rory B. Bellows 2006-03-05 02:20 |