Jackie Chan's Son Unlikely To Be Executed for Marijuana Possession

http://kotaku.com/arrested-for-marijuana-jackie-chans-son-could-face-exe-1623744009

Talk about a draconian drug policy...

But I doubt anything that extreme will happen to him, considering his influential father.

Time for the Midnight Express, Chinese (Kung Fu) style this time?

Maes said:

Midnight Express

Marijuana kills, but only if you get caught with it.

Jackie Chan could just break him out of custody with his martial arts, he learned it for a reason am I right? :P

China, always the sensible one

After searching for a different source (I won't give Kotaku a drop of my ball sweat) I haven't found anything about the possibility of an execution. He has most certainly been detained.

Humanity said:

Jackie Chan could just break him out of custody with his martial arts, he learned it for a reason am I right? :P

Shitty.

Completely unjust.

Technician said:

After searching for a different source (I won't give Kotaku a drop of my ball sweat) I haven't found anything about the possibility of an execution. He has most certainly been detained.

I saw this news on BBC yesterday and they claim it's 3 years max. Also it's not posession, but "providing a shelter for others to abuse drugs", meaning they cracked on him extra hard, because he had a bag of weed at home and "distributed" that vile poison to his guests. Those will apparently serve several weeks of detention for drug abuse.

It's silly governmental strongarming, but they're not exactly tying them to poles at the firing range. Fuck Kotaku, they need to go back to reporting on memes or whatever it is they do to bait crowds of braindead applefags.

Wait, Jackie Chan has a son?!

No law can stop cannabis use. I can agree that irresponsible use of cannabis is stupid, but I can't agree that being a crime. It's a logic failure with tons of people allowed to use alcohol irresponsibly. Or is some kind of world wide conspiracy against people to allow alcohol, but not cannabis.

All the reasons for cannabis being illegal are lies, racism, hate, greed, etc.

'execute' is an interesting word. It means:
to carry out; accomplish (like a computer executes a program).
If flowers could talk and execute was in their vocabulary, they might say 'bob, the flower, executed' and that would mean he bloomed. The word is completely non-specific as to what was executed and if a sane species ruled the planet they might have such a large umbrella word stand for 'giving birth' or something positive like that as its alternate definition. But no, for humans, the ultimate thing to execute/accomplish is killing another human so they make murder its alternate definition. Go forth and execute your primary program of execution, humans.

Its funny how selling marijuana in China is punishable by death. When in fact China is home to hundreds of millions of cigarette smokers. Further the scumbag government there has a monopoly of dealing death to its own citizens. Hypocrites.

if anything should be outlawed, it should be cigarettes. Its highly addictive like heroin, and kills millions directly every year.

Article said:

China is home to more than 350 million smokers – about one-third of the world's total. More than 1 million die of tobacco-related disease each year – about one every 30 seconds. That number is expected to double by 2025. The economic burden of tobacco-related illness has run into the tens of billions of dollars.
China's biggest obstacle in fighting its tobacco addiction has traditionally been itself. The all-powerful tobacco monopoly is government-owned, and turned over 600 billion yuan (more than $100 billion) in revenue to the state, according to a 2012 Brookings Institution report. Li Keming, the brother of Premier Li Keqiang, is a senior administrator at the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-moving-to-curb-staggering-rates-of-lung-cancer-20140817-1048sx.html#ixzz3Ax7DXMo5

I'm all for banning smokes in addition to marijuana.

Somehow, it never seems to be the outcome people who make the above argument are hoping for... ;)

Phml said:

I'm all for banning smokes in addition to marijuana.

Somehow, it never seems to be the outcome people who make the above argument are hoping for... ;)

Any kind of combustible dry plant being inhaled is bad for your lungs.

There is always edibles. That's basically what has really taken off in Colorado and Washington. Though there is still a detrimental effect on short-term memory, and motivation.

I doubt tobacco brownies would ever be that desirable though.

Nevertheless, I used "outlaw cigarettes instead" as a hyperbole. Though personally, I wouldn't care if they did.

My position on this, is that its a personal choice that has its own health repercussions. When it come to consumption, I have to agree with libertarians on this. Governments shouldn't jail you, for what you chose to do to your own body. It is akin to preventing women from having the choice of abortion.

There are very few people that would say, "The time I spent behind bars in a violent and unsanitary environment, for my consumption abuse problem made me a better person. Especially now that I can never find a decent job!"

Jimi said:

No law can stop cannabis use. I can agree that irresponsible use of cannabis is stupid, but I can't agree that being a crime. It's a logic failure with tons of people allowed to use alcohol irresponsibly. Or is some kind of world wide conspiracy against people to allow alcohol, but not cannabis.

Haha, I love the local bias projected on the entire planet. Worldwide conspiracy, eh? What about Islamic countries, dear sir? Islam tolerates hash more than alcohol. Morocco in particular is the historical Cannabis Central and pretty much ignores laws against it. It also might soon become the second country to entirely legalize cannabis, after Uruguay.

Speaking of history, the draconian laws against drugs in China are understandable (to a degree). The British Empire ruined China in the Opium wars of the 19th century. China went from its region's leading power to a weak, poverty stricken civil war zone. The Brits were history's greatest pushers and they are probably responsible for fun issues that came later like communism gaining traction or Tibet going independent and then getting reconquered. The "lesson learned" must still haunt Chinese leaders to this day.

Nearly worldwide then... other natural drugs should be allowed too. The stronger ones could have more restrictions, so dumb young people who just want some "party drugs" wouldn't overdose and die. And the usual, have to be 18 or more to use any of them sounds reasonable.

on the cannabis vs alcohol vs cigarettes ;

- Alcoholl can kill you on the exact same day you drink it ;
anybody of any age possible can die and be killed on the same day they
started drinking for the first time or be it the 40th time. It takes only one judgemental mistake on the users part and they keep going.

- Cannabis is a mind bending drug ;
It makes you slow, changes your thinking, lowers your reflexes, and for some people it is psychologically adicting. You need to inhale smoke
from burning paper and plants which means it will also damage your lungs.

- Cigarettes it just needs better age checks.
For most people it takes years upon years before cigarettes truly cause an early death. Everybody knows smokers who have grey hair
are in their 70's and 80's and they all smoked since they where 14. It is physically adicting but it is not extreme. It just needs to maintain
its age checks where somebody under the age of 18 cant buy them.

they are all damaging in one way or another and in the end it is a personal choice of a free human being.
All these fake it is 'unhealthy for others' arguments fail drasticly looking at how the planet itself is being destroyed, polluted, filled with concrete,
and overpopulated, while nobody cares. For politicians you are just a tax bill, if you live longer you pay longer. they do not care about your individual health either.

So yes, free the chan.

Another result of the failed drug policy against softer drugs like marijuana, is that people will seek terrible LEGAL alternatives. Such as synthetic marijuana, that have actually been likened to bath-salts. In an effort to avoid regulation, these companies that create these synthetics constantly change the formula without safety-testing or FDA approval. These legal drugs have been responsible for the destruction of lives. I once read a report that many U.S. military personal have had a sharp increase in abuse of this synthetic drug.

FireFish said:

- Cannabis - You need to inhale smoke

No you don't need to inhale smoke. You can eat it.

Jimi said:

Or is some kind of world wide conspiracy against people to allow alcohol, but not cannabis.

Probably. There are people down here in Tasmania lobbying the state government to support a medicinal cannabis industry, but the right-wing reactionaries who are currently in charge are understandably reluctant.

^They all need to smoke a big fat doob, that's my theory.

Article said:

China is home to more than 350 million smokers – about one-third of the world's total.

Looool so true. My father visited Mainland China in 1988 -a quite awkward period, where the first openings towards the West were made- and one thing that struck him -other than describing the place in a way very similar to modern tourists' accounts of North Korea, just a tad milder-, was how much everybody smoked.

Pretty much, the Chinese were all chain smokers, each carrying several packets of cigarettes and smoking even during lunches, carrying several ready-to-smoke cigarettes in the brim of their hats, between their glasses and their heads etc.

An important factor was that cigarettes were a State-issue item, handed out generously by the Government.

Article said:

More than 1 million die of tobacco-related disease each year – about one every 30 seconds. That number is expected to double by 2025. The economic burden of tobacco-related illness has run into the tens of billions of dollars.

I would like to see such a statistic backed up by an explanation of whether:

• The amounts quoted are net amounts after factoring in any taxes levied from tobacco products.
  
• Whether those medical expenses burden the state budget, the individuals, or are just an estimate. For all we know, they could just be an estimate of what a hospitalization would cost, but it doesn't mean it actually takes place. I don't think that most of those "tobacco-related illnesses" are ever explicitly diagnosed, let alone treated.
  

Jimi said:

No you don't need to inhale smoke. You can eat it.

Or use a vaporizer

My father's old military paybook, in the page related to NRBC warfare, explicitly states: "Smoking is allowed and is not harmful". That's good enough for me.

Article said:

That number is expected to double by 2025.

Funnily enough the New Zealand government issued a statement saying that the whole of NZ will be completely smokefree by 2025. I'm trying to be optimistic about it...

Phml said:

I'm all for banning smokes in addition to marijuana.

Somehow, it never seems to be the outcome people who make the above argument are hoping for... ;)

I can't stand cigarettes, but the last thing I'd want is to see them criminalized. However harmful they may be, banning them can only lead to greater problems - smuggling, black markets, etc. Hell, there's already a black market for cigarettes because the taxes are so high.

My general philosophy is - even if something may be a problem, it'd better be a pretty damn serious one before you start making it a crime and organizing police raids over it. To me there's a HUGE difference between, "I don't like that, I wish people wouldn't do it," vs. "Anyone who does that needs to have their doors broken down and have their faces slammed into the concrete before being hauled to jail." In some ways, I almost feel like the word "ban" is a euphemism. When you say it, it sounds so nice - you picture walking down the street without passing through clouds of smoke, no cigarette butts littering the ground, no one coming up to you at the street corner to bum a smoke... what you're not picturing is the police presence necessary to ensure that paradise. And it's not that I think smoking is so damn important, I just don't think we should be wasting any effort in making it a crime.

A very intellectual conversation about marijuana legalization in South Africa, watch this, you will not be disappointed.