Citizen Yu Ping: First of all, I would like to give you a piece of good news. A few days ago, I wrote “This verdict of Zhenjiang Central Court is simply great”, criticizing the court’s verdict on the four international students who committed theft is too light, and the article provoked strong reactions.
In response, Zhenjiang Central Court also responded positively, saying that the four international students will be sent back to their home countries and the relevant departments are working on their implementation.
This result is not bad, right? It is a waste of taxpayers’ hard-earned money to lock up these scourges for food and drink, and it is clean to deport them directly.
Obviously, this case is a wake-up call, I really hope that our judiciary will take this as a warning, in the future, in the face of foreigners breaking the law, must be straightened up.
Today, Uncle Fish I would like to talk to you about the issue of vaccination against the epidemic Chinese Communist virus.
A few days ago, a place in Wanning, Hainan, announced the so-called “five no” precautions to punish people who do not vaccinate.
The incident provoked a public backlash, and Xinhua News Agency issued an article criticizing similar practices as simple and brutal, and at the same time calling for mandatory vaccination to be undesirable!
In the aftermath of this incident, also in Hainan, it was revealed that the Danzhou City People’s Hospital had issued a notice stating that serious accountability would be initiated for employees who refused vaccinations, and that the most serious could be dismissed.
After being questioned, the hospital argued that it did so at the request of the city government and the municipal health committee. In response, the Danzhou City Health Commission refuted this, saying that it was not mandatory for the units.
The hospital and the health commission, as if playing a game of dumping.
I personally support universal vaccination and the construction of a barrier against epidemics with both hands, and I think it is necessary to speed up our pace at a time when developed countries such as Europe and the United States are rapidly promoting vaccination.
However, this is not a reason to mandate vaccination. Nothing should be imposed on people under the banner of “for your own good”. It is the bottom line of a civilized and lawful society that my body should be my own.
The rude practice of this hospital in Hainan is only the tip of the iceberg, I’m afraid.
Two days ago, I learned from a friend who works in an institution that vaccination has long been mandatory in his unit in disguise.
The friend also told me that there is actually a “vaccination rate” ranking among various units, and once the vaccination rate of a unit falls behind, the leaders will be under pressure and immediately take those disobedient employees.
I also learned that this kind of performance assessment for the vaccination rate exists not only in the institutions, but also in some functional departments, which also put pressure on enterprises to require the vaccination rate to be more than 80% or even 100%.
For example, a netizen engaged in the education industry left me a message saying that the education department before the full restoration of offline required vaccination of 80% or more, otherwise no qualification was given. The company has been asking for it, and the head of the department even asked us to vaccinate 100%, and those who didn’t must issue a certificate.
In this regard, I think the Xinhua News Agency article did not hit the nail on the head, and simply called for “mandatory vaccination is not desirable! I’m afraid it’s not enough, the key is to go back to the source of the problem.
In other words, the ranking of “vaccination rates” should be stopped as soon as possible.
It is an ironclad law that in our society, anything that is implemented as a one-size-fits-all numerical assessment will immediately become chaotic.
Some people may say that if you don’t assess the “vaccination rate”, then how can you promote and popularize vaccination.
I think there are two ways to crack this.
One is to promote further transparency of information and use more informative data to dispel people’s concerns about the safety of vaccines, especially for those special groups, such as those with allergies, those preparing for pregnancy, and so on.
The second is to provide more choices and promote domestic quality vaccines, but also accelerate the introduction of foreign quality vaccines, so that different people can get what they need.
All in all, mandatory vaccination is not the only way to promote vaccination, and it is not a good way. In that case, why can’t we change our thinking a bit?
P.S. “Tsk, tsk, tsk! This verdict of Zhenjiang Central Court is simply great
Recently, the Zhenjiang Intermediate Court in Jiangsu Province published a verdict of a theft case on the Chinese Magistrate’s website, and I was simply dumbfounded!
The defendants in this case are Makalo, Kiffinda, Chama, Benard, four people are Jiangsu University students, all from Zambia.
The verdict shows that between February 6, 2020 and March 16, 2020, the defendants Makalo, Kiffinda, Chama, Benard Zhenjiang a shopping mall, to take the wine hidden in the clothes to carry out the theft of the way out of the mall.
The four committed a total of seven times, stealing 15 bottles of various types of foreign wine, a total value of 4,770.97 yuan.
Among them, Makalo participated in the theft seven times, the amount of $ 4770.97; Kiffinda participated in the theft four times, the amount of $ 3469.98; Chama participated in the theft three times, the amount of $ 3410.97; Benard participated in the theft three times, the amount of $ 3150.99.
After the crime, the defendants Makalo, Chama and Benard were arrested and returned to the case. Later, the public security authorities arranged for defendant Makalo to call defendant Kiffinda, who took the initiative to come to the case after receiving the call. The four defendants withdrew a total of 4,000 yuan of stolen money.
Zhenjiang Central Court made a first instance verdict, all four defendants were found guilty of theft, Makalo was sentenced to a fine of 2,000 yuan, and the remaining three defendants were each sentenced to a fine of 1,500 yuan; the four defendants were ordered to continue to refund the discounted value of the stolen goods of RMB 770.97 yuan.
The law on the crime of theft is this, personal theft of public and private property, the starting point of 1,000 to 3,000 yuan, is “a large amount”, can be sentenced to less than three years of fixed-term imprisonment, detention or control, and a fine or single penalty.
In this regard, the verdict of Zhenjiang Central Court seems to be fine. However, the single fine, after all, is the lightest punishment, for the four thieves, really applicable?
These thieves theft of property seems to be less valuable, but obviously belong to the habitual thieves, more than a month, committing up to 7 times, at least 3 times, and three of them were caught by the police, and no surrender circumstances.
That Makalo a phone call to Kiffinda, let it take the initiative to surrender, two people a count merit, a count surrender, although can barely justify, but also let people drunk.
Finally, four people do not have to do a day in jail, not even a suspended sentence, justified? Is it too much for the judiciary to be so humane?
Similar theft crimes, if the perpetrator is a citizen of the country, the result will be how to sentence, here may try to cite some relevant cases.
Xiao took advantage of the electric car store no one, theft of the store computer desk in the bag of cash RMB 3800 yuan. Committing theft, he was sentenced to one year of control and a fine of RMB 4,000.
Liu was sentenced to four months’ imprisonment and a fine of four thousand dollars for stealing an electric car worth RMB 2,771.
Shi Moumou stole 14 packs of Yellow Furong King cigarettes and 9 packs of Red Liqun cigarettes in a store, with a total value of RMB 485 yuan, and was sentenced to three months’ detention and a fine of RMB 1,000 yuan.
Liu Moumou took a cable worth RMB 1,870 from a renovated room by hand and was sentenced to ten months’ imprisonment and a fine of RMB 1,000.
……
Similar verdicts, a search on the Internet can say a lot, it can be seen that our current law, for the crime of theft, is extremely severe.
However, why are these four international students superior to others? Why are they given special privileges under the law?
Where is our strength and dignity?
The education department has given them a lot of subsidies, they are well fed and housed in the university, but they are still insatiable to steal, this kind of goods are not sentenced, not expelled, not deported, still keep as a treasure?
The relevant departments of the state previously issued a document, clearly requiring the violation of discipline international students to deal with serious, suspected of illegal crime, will never condone condoning!
In response, some places also responded positively and took severe punishment for international students who violated the law and committed crimes.
For example, an international student from a school in Nanjing stole underwear worth 200 yuan from a shopping mall and was deported and not allowed to enter the country for three years. A foreign student in Handan was detained for ten days and deported for molesting others.
These minor administrative offenses are still punishable by detention and deportation. On the contrary, a criminal offense like theft, instead of being fined three glasses of wine to deal with, can it be justified?
Recent Comments