Helping up injured old ladies in China

by **2dimes** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:13 am

I'm sure he was a sweet heart most of the time. Everyone has an off day once in a while?

Hey sab, what's the translation for the ladies story?

by **_sabotage_** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 10:44 am

Whole story:

A man was walking past a scene which he began to video, scene 3 from the [posted link. This was a Chinese man, and he assumed that it was another case of a fallen woman, which is a hot topic in the news in China. He takes the video and titles it, Old Lady cheats Foreigner. Old people falling and cheating people is getting more press in China as the Pope is in the US. So it gets a lot of views and starts the media circus going. They go to the police and ask for the details. The police hand over the first video to the press and some basic info, such as the foreigner being a student with a Chinese girlfriend. So now the reporters go back to the poster of the Old Lady cheats Foreigner video and say; wtf: the video on the street cam shows the foreigner hitting the lady. Guy says, well I just videoed from when I arrived, I didn't know how it started. So he after watching the street cam video, the poster renames his video- Foreigners rams Old Lady.

Meanwhile Dumb and Dumber are at the police station giving their statement. The Foreigner tells the police that he is working with his daddy teaching English. Police say great, but you don't have a work visa and neither does he. The guy doesn't have a license either, though tbh, his bike didn't look to be over 49 ccs. So they get charged for working illegally (they are the Mexicans of China) and have a fine of about 33% of a months teaching salary, a couple days in detention followed by deportation.

The Old Lady says, it's isn't something she wanted to happen, but it did and has caused her some distress so she feels she should be compensated. She initially asked for 3k, which is a perfectly reasonable starting point (500US) and accepted 1800RMB after the police mediated. I would have said, Auntie, I am so sorry I have done this, it is such a relief that you are ok. Let's go get some tea. How about 300RMB? 500? I would have tried to keep it under 800, but if I was without a license and she really wouldn't come down, I would still pay. 20% of my salary to ram someone down in public after massively cutting the inside two lanes off past the intersection is fairly reasonable: I've paid more for less.

by **mrswdk** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 10:58 am

What does she need 3,000RMB for?

by **_sabotage_** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 11:03 am

What did the McDie's coffee person need the millions in compensation for?

If this happened in the US or most countries, there would be a much graver and greater form of compensation than 500US, and that was his only penalty for that crime, and would have been his only penalty had he just paid it before it became a police matter.

by **mrswdk** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:15 pm

The hot coffee women didn't need it either. And that women managing to scam some compensation doesn't justify the woman in Beijing demanding money.

What did the woman in Beijing need the money for? Unless the accident caused her 3,000 kuai then she doesn't need to be compensated 3,000 kuai.

by **_sabotage_** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 12:29 pm

So you feel that there is no such thing as crime and punishment?

You f*ck up, you concede and you pay the penalty. The better you are at conceding, and the better at negotiating, the less the penalty. Seems pretty fair.

The law that you are refering to as a distortion of the system is there, but you are putting your foot in your mouth with your chosen sample and seem to have acquired a taste for your own toes.

i will give you two decent examples of distortion to use if you decide to let this one go gracefully.

by **mrswdk** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 2:04 pm

Did she need that money? No. So there was no reason to demand it. She was just seeing what she could milk him for.

by **mrswdk** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 2:05 pm

I don't understand your last two paragraphs about distortion. What do you mean?

by **BigBallinStalin** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:22 pm

Just wanna clear up something. The Hot Coffee case isn't as clear cut as it may seem. That particular business was heating up the coffee at degrees well beyond normal. It makes sense to keep the burner at higher temperatures for peak demand because usually the coffee pot is changed over quickly enough so that each pot shouldn't get too hot. However, for that lady, it was at ~130 degree F IIRC.

There's monetary compensation for damage/cost incurred in legal cases (i.e. the money the victim deserves), and then there's punitive damages, which is why some cases can extract mucho dinero (well beyond what the victim deserves).

by **_sabotage_** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:27 pm

I can't imagine that you do understand what I mean, since you have attempted a similar distortion, but if that's how you roll, then roll.

And just to clear up, for BBS, if you put any soft container drink, be it hot or cold, between your thighs while driving, you should expect to die in a car accident.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:11 pm

_sabotage_ wrote:I can't imagine that you do understand what I mean, since you have attempted a similar distortion, but if that's how you roll, then roll.

And just to clear up, for BBS, if you put any soft container drink, be it hot or cold, between your thighs while driving, you should expect to die in a car accident.

That's not relevant, and I don't see how that expectation should hold true, but whatever.

by **_sabotage_** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:40 pm

In the Coffee case, the lady was decided to be the victim and it was decided that the guilty party should pay restitution. You seem to feel that it is punitive in the US, but simply a form of compensation in China.

The first point, the woman was foolish, I should know because my biological mother died spilling her drink while driving. So I couldn't if the case were presented to me take the temperature of the coffee into much account, but simply consider the act of acting to impeded your driving ability is negligent of the driver and not something which the business should expect. I mean, I cut vegetables everyday with a knife, I don't stick the knife in my pocket and do sit-ups and turn around and sue the knife company.

In the Old Lady story, she was merely crossing the road, which is dangerous, but doing it according to rules and common sense. And a vehicle comes breaking several traffic rules and rams her. In this case there is an actual and responsible perpetrator. For all involved, it would have been best if he had followed protocol and paid the money, and not for Mrs belligerent demands of show me the injuries for the money, but merely because, I rammed the shit out of you without a license and you should not be forced to leave the situation worse than you came in, which is hard to accomplish except through some punitive damage to the perp.

Had he just owned up, which seems to be very hard for some people, then he could have come out much better. Instead, he acted like the most self-righteous Chinese dick around and should expect the reward. More often than not, it will go unpunished, the victim won't receive anything and the guy will ride off.

But for some reason, you would like to flavor your sentiments with "But it's big bad China". Sure some things suck, and I will happily present two "real" cases of how the law can be distorted if you like.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 10:05 pm

lol, I haven't commented on the China case, but thanks for creating my opinions for me. Please continue debating between you and sab-BBS.

by **mrswdk** on Fri Dec 13, 2013 11:44 pm

_sabotage_ wrote:I can't imagine that you do understand what I mean, since you have attempted a similar distortion, but if that's how you roll, then roll.

?

by **_sabotage_** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 7:01 am

The guy quite clearly was in the wrong,mas you are quite clearly in the wrong for sourcing him. Both of you refuse to acknowledge that you are in the wrong. In the guys wrong, he pays a compensation, in your wrong, you say sorry for the bad source. In his wrong, he hurts only himself by doing so, in yours, you hurt only your credibility.

You wish to show how fucked China is, and in this thread you are using many examples, some suck, but there are much better ones. But I don't give good sources to those who provide me with bad ones with the intent to mislead and don't apologize.

by **_sabotage_** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 7:33 am

And BBS, yes you were making a comparison to the Chinese case, because you discussed the coffee case to show that there was punitive damage. Why did you discuss the coffee case? Because I had compared it to the Chinese case. What was your intent? To show that my argument was a false one differences unknown to me. But they are not unknown to me, the comparison stands, trying hiding your motives to cover your weak shit all you want, just don't do it with me.

by **mrswdk** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 9:31 am

I acknowledged that he did actually hit her. I still don't think that makes it okay for her to demand cash from him at the scene though. The only thing that makes her demand money before carrying about her day as normal is greed. She doesn't need it, she just wants to see what she can get out of him.

What's more, people getting away with behaving like that is exactly the sort of thing that encourages idiots to feign injury in order to turn around and demand money from whoever's nearby, and the fact they get away with it is exactly the reason I won't be helping any injured strangers until I live in another country.

by **2dimes** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 9:53 am

I don't think she should be entitled to monetary compensation since she was not harmed but that's how it is there so basically she is. I don't have a problem with that. He ran right into her riding in a way he should not have been riding. Then instead of offering to help tried to leave.

How did he even do hit her? Was he just that inept at controlling a scooter or is he blind in his right eye?

You have a point about the poor judgement from the judge in the case of the original post if true.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 12:48 pm

Thanks again, sab, for recreating some more opinions for me. Your internal debate has been most creative.

by **Gillipig** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 1:24 pm

_sabotage_ wrote:So you feel that there is no such thing as crime and punishment?

You f*ck up, you concede and you pay the penalty. The better you are at conceding, and the better at negotiating, the less the penalty. Seems pretty fair.

The law that you are refering to as a distortion of the system is there, but you are putting your foot in your mouth with your chosen sample and seem to have acquired a taste for your own toes.

i will give you two decent examples of distortion to use if you decide to let this one go gracefully.

The system is a distortion of the system. If the goal is to do justice why allow the game, the show, the spectacle around the sentences? One guy can have better chances at getting away from punishment because he hired some other guy good at appealing to the judges emotions rather than their sense of logic. Why bother with the lawyers and defense lawyers when all that is needed is present the jury with the evidence that exists? If it is enough to warrant a sentence then they pass that sentence, if not, well then he's set free. Let them make their decision without being influenced by these professional bullshitters that we call lawyers. And eyewitness testimony has no place in our civilized society. The only reason it's considered a valid method of finding out the truth is because it's been around forever. It's outdated however and needs to go.

/rant

by **_sabotage_** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 4:35 pm

I think the Chinese system predates the one Gilli is talking about.

In the West, we have a court heavy tort system. We spend more on setting up the circus than the show is going to bring in. This forces up the cost of justice and means a lot of third party beneficiaries while not making a great change in the percentage of justice meted out.

If the same case were to happen in Canada, what could we expect? The police would arrest the guy on the bike and charge him with, reckless endangerment, hit with intent to run, driving without a license, working without a visa, and if they wished they could throw in several other infractions. The guy would go to jail for a couple of years and the victim would be forgotten. The courts would make their money and the prisons theirs.

In China, the compensation plus the fine didn't equal even a month's salary, 2 week's detention and a see you later. Were the working without a visa not involved, the only money would go to the victim, which up to the culprit could be paid within the first minute or he can decide to go through all the steps and fully expect to pay more the longer he goes. It encourages quick settlement, direct compensation from culprit to victim and a clean break for both parties quickly, easily and 99% of the time with no authority involved.

If Mrs doesn't think the wronged party should be compensated, then it is ok in some circles to be a bitch, go find solace among them and not me. But in the country you're in, the on-going and long-running system is appreciated universally by the citizenry, it won't be changed and it is a stupid idea to try. It could have a few caveats added, but the basic system is one of great public convenience and thrift.

Yes, BBS I do argue with myself since you disappear as soon as you can't face up to what I am saying and leave my argument unassailed.

by **2dimes** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 4:42 pm

Sab are you still in Canuckistan? If yes, how's it going?

by **mrswdk** on Sat Dec 14, 2013 9:37 pm

_sabotage_ wrote:But in the country you're in, the on-going and long-running system is appreciated universally by the citizenry

Then why has every collision I've ever seen in Beijing resulted in either:
- both parties stopping, calling the police and waiting;
- one party trying to flee while the other makes demands and tries to stop them; or
- the guilty person fleeing within seconds of the accident

by **mrswdk** on Tue Mar 11, 2014 6:20 am

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNjc3MzcwNDA0.html

by **muy_thaiguy** on Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:54 pm

mrswdk wrote:http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNjc3MzcwNDA0.html

Chinese youtube I guess? Anyways, seems to be blocked, for one reason or another. Not sure, as I cannot read Chinese.

And a quick question, is the smog in Chinese cities like Beijing really getting to the point it looks like a permanent cloud has settled in the cities?