Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Censorship The Internet

Chinese Government Sued Over Dog Height Censorship 259

Posted by Zonk from the truly-an-epic-civil-rights-fight dept.
Googling Yourself writes "More than 30,000 censors are employed in China to monitor the Internet, so it was no surprise when censors deleted a posting by Chen Yuhua protesting Beijing municipal government's regulations barring any dog over 14 inches high and restricting each family to only one dog. The surprise (reports the Washington Post) was when Chen studied China's civil code and marched into court with a lawsuit, only the second time that a Chinese citizen has gone to court over party censorship. 'I was very careful to follow the correct procedure,' Chen said in an interview, while pointing at the official legal manual on his dining room table. On December 14 Chen was told by clerks that the district court, after referring to higher-level judges for advice, had decided to reject the case. The next step, Chen said, is an appeal to the Supreme Court."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Chinese Government Sued Over Dog Height Censorship More

Chinese Government Sued Over Dog Height Censorship

Comments Filter:

  • Heightism (Score:5, Funny)

    by frisket ( 149522 ) <peter@ s i l m a r i l . ie> on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:37AM (#21839482) Homepage
    I'd ban any dog under 14 inches high...

    • Re:Heightism (Score:4, Funny)

      by aicrules ( 819392 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:41AM (#21839530)
      I'd just want them de-barked. Yes, big dog barks can become annoying to over time, but with a small dog the bark is ear piercingly deadly right from the get go. I have a "small" dog (westie) and he only has the ability to bark still because I'm so fond of him now. He didn't bark at ALL for the first month we had him. I was worried for him, but then he finally started and I was momentarily relieved. Then I had to teach him the command "NO BARK!" Gah...YIP YIP YIP YIP YIP YIP

    • Re:Heightism (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MightyYar ( 622222 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:43AM (#21839544)
      In all seriousness, as a New York City resident, I would like to ask:

      Why is it okay for a dog to piss on the sidewalk, but an arrestable offense when a human does the same? Seriously. No one has ever provided a good answer to this. Urine is sterile, and dog piss smells just as bad as human piss (asparagus aside).

      I won't even get into the poop.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by DeeQ ( 1194763 )
        Indecent exspouser. Also on your logic you are smart enough to get hit by a car so go ahead chase that car.

      • Re:Heightism (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ookabooka ( 731013 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:52AM (#21839660)
        Because dogs and humans are different.

        No, seriously, I don't think it's the urine that's a problem. For instance, if I were to take 100mL of human urine in a sealed container outside and dump it, would there be a different set of laws broken than if it were 100mL of dog urine I was dumping? Essentially I believe it is the act of urination that is an arrestable offense, not the environmental contamination caused by the urine. The reason for that is it's definitely a social norm that one goes to the bathroom, well, in the bathroom, preferably in a toilet. Expecting all dogs to adhere to the same standards is unrealistic, and the law reflects that.
        I can't believe I spent time thinking about this. . .
        • I didn't think about it much until moving to New York and having a kid. Now I'm constantly playing "avoid the yellow puddle" with the stroller.

          I understand that people like their dogs, but would it be too much to ask them to curb them? They already pick up the feces... just lead them to the curb when they squat! Surely handling fresh steaming dog shit is more of a burden than making them piss on the curb?
        • I can't believe you actually had to explain the reasoning on what is supposed to be a board frequented by intelligent people.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AKAImBatman ( 238306 )

        Urine is sterile, and dog piss smells just as bad as human piss

        Actually, that smell is bacteria getting a foothold on the once sterile urine.

        Once it leaves your body, it's not going to be sterile for long. Thus urine is actually quite a bit of a health hazard. It's "okay" for a dog to piss on the street because no one has figured out a good alternative yet. Ideally you'd want your dog to use the grass instead (where it gets absorbed into the ground and becomes plant nutrients), but grass is hard to find in

        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by JustNiz ( 692889 )
          >> It's "okay" for a dog to piss on the street because no one has figured out a good alternative yet.

          Sounds like the Chinese government have made a good start to me. Now they just need to ban all dogs.

          Gradually my neighborhood here in the US has been taken over by irresponsible dog owners. Now my 3 year old son can't play in the park across the street any more because its is filled with dog shit everywhere and every night I'm kept awake or woken at 3am because of all the barking around the neighborhoo

          • Re:Heightism (Score:5, Informative)

            by omeomi ( 675045 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:46AM (#21840332) Homepage
            Now my 3 year old son can't play in the park across the street any more because its is filled with dog shit everywhere

            Just watch the spot for awhile, and take pictures of the people who don't pick up their poo. Then call the police. After a few tickets, they'll start learning to pick it up. Actually, I've found around my house that it's usually teenagers who don't pick it up. Sending a letter to their parents can be just as effective.

            and every night I'm kept awake or woken at 3am because of all the barking around the neighborhood.

            This one's often illegal too, depending on where you live...In my neighborhood, any neighborly complaint because of dog barking is ticketable. I've called the police on one particularly irresponsible neighbor a number of times. And if anybody thinks I'm a jerk for calling the police, I've never called because of barking during the daytime. Always well past midnight. Little yippie dogs should not be left outside barking all night long.

            • Re:Heightism (Score:5, Funny)

              by EggyToast ( 858951 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @12:37PM (#21840930) Homepage
              It's good to hear that you're taking the reasonable approach to the problem. If I had more free time, and was just slightly more sociopathic, I would walk around city blocks and look for people who don't pick up after their dogs, put on some latex gloves, and then pick up the dog's poop and throw it at the owner.

              I suppose calling the cops is more civil.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by dwater ( 72834 )

            >> It's "okay" for a dog to piss on the street because no one has figured out a good alternative yet.

            Sounds like the Chinese government have made a good start to me. Now they just need to ban all dogs.

            Well, if that's the reason, then they might start by banning humans.

            It is common practice for young children to pee or poop on the street in China. All the young children have special trousers/pants with a split between the legs that reaches all the way from back to front, such that it is almost like the trousers are actually two pieces joined at the belt. It looks relatively normal while walking, but opens up conveniently when squatting. If the child is too young to squat on their own, the parent can hold

        • Once it leaves your body, it's not going to be sterile for long. Thus urine is actually quite a bit of a health hazard. - Well, first of all urine can contain bacteria if the human has a bladder inflammation for example. Secondly urine smells when it leaves your body not because of bacteria, but because of the chemicals it consists of, for example ammonia and ethanol. Also it is not much bigger 'health hazard' than any puddle of water on the ground, you wouldn't drink that either, would you?

          no one has fig

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Ravon Rodriguez ( 1074038 )

            Also it is not much bigger 'health hazard' than any puddle of water on the ground, you wouldn't drink that either, would you?

            Of course not, it could have pee in it!

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Decameron81 ( 628548 )

        Why is it okay for a dog to piss on the sidewalk, but an arrestable offense when a human does the same?


        Because as humans we can understand basic rules of behaviour while dogs can't?

        Seriously, I taught my dogs not to piss on the sidewalk, but when they need to go, you just can't stop it.
        • Can these seemingly intelligent humans realize that dogs aren't a necessity?

          How would your average dog owner respond to me walking a rat around, letting it pee on things?

          Just because dogs are cute doesn't mean that they belong in a city.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Floydius ( 811220 )

        I won't even get into the poop.

        I'd say that is a good plan.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jma05 ( 897351 )
        Yeah. So unfair. Why is it that dogs get to walk around naked while humans aren't allowed to. They secretly run the world, I tell you.
        • I know that you are being funny, but what the hell.

          I was just pointing out how people get all hung up on "piss" and would be horrified to see a man dumping a cup full of urine into the gutter - but they'll let little Fido piss all over the middle of the sidewalk.

          It's just a funny aspect of human nature, that's all, since both acts are equivalent.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by richlv ( 778496 )
          actually, the taboo and hysteria connected to human body nakedness (probably mostly from christian religion) is somewhat disturbing, yes.
    • I'd ban any dog under 14 inches high...

      Dogs that small either look like samplers or hair with teeth.
      • >>I'd ban any dog under 14 inches high...

        Dogs that small either look like samplers or hair with teeth.

        I consider dog's under 14 inches high to be dinner with bone to chew on afterwards for real dogs.

    • Re:Heightism (Score:4, Funny)

      by Stargoat ( 658863 ) <stargoat@gmail.com> on Friday December 28, 2007 @12:03PM (#21840516) Journal
      I have spent some time in Beijing, and there are some mean ass dogs there. OK - you're thinking I'm a pussy. Not true. So I have hung around with mean-ass Chessies, owned a pit bull, and dated a girl with Dobermans. These 'vicious' dog breeds have nothing on the little mutts in Beijing. Nothing. These under 14"s are absolutely bat-shit insane. They'll take a damn finger off because you'll be like, "hello little doggie, you are so cute, how are you?"

      Then BAM, no more finger. You'll be looking at the bloody stump on your right hand going WTF? How could that little thing do that much damage that quickly? And the 14" dog will be walking away chewing on your pointer for the win.

      Until the people of Beijing learn to actually train dogs, it's probably best this way.

  • How sweet. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by snarfies ( 115214 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:41AM (#21839528) Homepage
    Chen must love his dog very much. Because my guess is that he's probably going to lose his life over this. Oh, maybe they won't find a way to put him in prison. Not as such. But I'm sure this old fellow is going to have, say, problems collecting his pension. Lost your paperwork, they'll say, so sorry - come back in six months and maybe we'll find it then.

    • Re:How sweet. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by LWATCDR ( 28044 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:00AM (#21839770) Homepage Journal
      Probably not.
      This case really isn't a threat to the power of the government.
      By letting this go to court they Chinese can say "Look we have the freedom to criticize our government and we have due process."
      Why do you think we are hearing about it?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by innerweb ( 721995 )

        But, then again, it is the little things that you start with when you are going for social change. You only wind up at the big things when the time has come. By letting a case go to court, especially if it wins, they are encouraging all kinds of other citizens to start taking their issues to court as well. Once the people get a taste of self-respect, they will not want to let go.

        InnerWeb

      • Re:How sweet. (Score:5, Informative)

        by Schraegstrichpunkt ( 931443 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:21AM (#21840044) Homepage

        Not only that, but according to the article, Chen is not actually challenging the Chinese Communist Party. He's alleging that lower-level government officials are not adhering to the official policies of the CCP.

        Basically, he's fighting for rule of law [wikipedia.org].

        • Not only that, but according to the article, Chen is not actually challenging the Chinese Communist Party. He's alleging that lower-level government officials are not adhering to the official policies of the CCP.

          If you've ever looked at the official policies of many regimes that are totalitarian in practice (such as, say, the Constitution of the USSR), you'll see that challenging government officials to adhere to the official policies of the government /party very often is challenging the ruling party.

          "Offi

    • This would seem to be more about the censorship of his complaint, not about his dog. However, I do tend to agree that he's likely to get executed and the family billed for the firing squad bullet(s)...

      OTOH, given the Chinese taste for dogmeat, I am somewhat surprised they would issue regulations like this, unless the intent is to take the confiscated dogs and process them for meat. Wouldn't it be better for the Chinese to take a page out of Michael Vick's playbook and factory-farm dogs for their meat?

    • nah (Score:2)

      by eean ( 177028 )
      I doubt it, if anything the government is probably going to be less likely to bother a guy who knows how to use the system. Its the powerless peasants who get really pushed around in China.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by mea37 ( 1201159 )
      Just out of curiousity, is this the informed opinion of one who
      • lives in China and has lived there for many years
      • no longer lives in China, but did live there for many years
      • has at least visited China (and spent his time there actually observing the government)
      • holds a diplomatic, intelligence, or other position that gives him special insight into the operations and motives of the Chinese government, or
      • really doesn't know anything about it but likes to talk trash about any foreign regime

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by hax0r_this ( 1073148 )
        And why, pray, would the American "propoganda machine" be interested in ruining people's perceptions of china? If you haven't noticed, the big businesses that run the media rely on consumers buying tons of goods manufactured in China. How many times have you actually heard about human rights violations in China on the nightly news in, say, the last 5 years?

    • Chen must love his dog very much. Because my guess is that he's probably going to lose his life over this.

      Unlikely. China's not quite THAT back-asswards. Although it wouldn't surprise me if he lost his dog, since he IS breaking the law, and he fully admits that the only reason he's able to own such a large dog is that the local police are lenient. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the local police suddenly got a phone call telling them to be a lot less lenient.

  • You have to admire this guy's balls (Score:5, Funny)

    by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:43AM (#21839534)
    Of course, they'll be freezing soon in a prison. But it's impressive, nonetheless.

    • Doubtful (Score:3, Insightful)

      by WindBourne ( 631190 )
      This is not the kind of thing that Chinese gov. will use a prison. Keep in mind that the gov. actually uses the prison rather sparingly. Once they decide to punish, they are harsh, but unless a real crime was committed or the gov is out to set examples for the west or local population, prison is not used. The guy is actually fighting against a very minor item, and more importantly, he is staying within the boundaries of that the gov. wants. As long as he does that, nothing official will happen (though he m

      • This is not the kind of thing that Chinese gov. will use a prison.

        Yeah, it's less expensive just to beat the hell out of him, and you get the same result.

      • Indeed, one of the Tianamen protest causes was public perception that foreign laborers were earning more than their local counterparts. I find it funny, as I hear the exact opposite complaint where I live.
  • One 14 inch dog should be enough for anyone.

  • Memery (Score:5, Funny)

    by TheoMurpse ( 729043 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:53AM (#21839678) Homepage
    14 inch dog? No wireless. Less height than a mastiff. Lame.

  • Sigh... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jandersen ( 462034 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @10:58AM (#21839748)
    Needless to say, Beijing's Municipal Government is not 'The Chinese Government', nor is this 'a bold challenge to the legal authority of the Communist Party to decide what China's 1.3 billion people can say and read on their computers'. And strictly speaking, we don't know whether his posting was actually removed by somebody who was a member of any government or indeed the Communist Party. In fact, the most likely scenario is that some employee at whichever web-hosting company runs the blog saw some reference to Beijing's local government and automatically deleted the post without even reading it further. And bureaucrats all over the world being what they are, they don't want to be bothered with cleaning up after their mistakes, so they tried to ignore it, knowing that this is too trivial for anybody to take serious action.

    So how can this become 'a bold challenge' that illustrates that 'some of China's educated elite may be growing impatient with a one-party authoritarian system'? Well, only in the hazy minds of people who are willing to believe anything about their perceived enemies, never mind reality. I can't be bothered pointing out that this kind of things happen all the time everywhere - you already know.

    I, like many other people in the world love and respect the American nation and the American people - but, by gods, you sometimes make it bloody hard work.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by wilder_card ( 774631 )
      Good Lord, you're judging Americans by what's posted on Slashdot? No darn wonder you're upset.
    • I find your argument to be rather silly. You are basing it on extreme technicalities.

      The facts of this care are clear: a chinese citizen is suing a chinese governmental body about censureship.

      Everything else is rather picune details that are not relevant to the story, even if they are relevant to the legal case.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by 1729 ( 581437 )

      Needless to say, [...]

      Obviously not. :)

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Kineticabstract ( 814395 )
      What sort of weird bigotry leads you to decide that it's difficult to "love and respect the American nation" because you disagree with the focus of an article in a newspaper? It would make more sense if you found it difficult to "love and respect" the Washington Post - or better yet, what if you were to limit your emotional vexation to having a tough time loving and respecting the author of the article in question? It'll be far less taxing on you emotionally, which seems to be a concern.

      I'm not really t

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by tsch ( 593024 )
      Well, the law about dog height is a different than the censorship issue. Chen is suing over the censorship of his post. The dog law is only a law in Beijing; censorship is a National/Party issue.

      jandersen wrote...

      And strictly speaking, we don't know whether his posting was actually removed by somebody who was a member of any government or indeed the Communist Party. In fact, the most likely scenario is that some employee at whichever web-hosting company runs the blog saw some reference to Beijing's local

  • Um, this is not censorship, this is much more like racism.
    There are living beings that are being excluded, not words.

    you're welcome,
    - D
    • But it is censorship.

      Beijing government bans largish dogs.
      Dog owner doesn't like it, so he says so, on the internet
      Censors remove his blog postings.
      So, he sues the censors.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • It's apart-height.

      (sorry to recycle such an old joke!)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by njfuzzy ( 734116 )
      He isn't suing to change the law about dog height. He is suing about the take-down of an article he wrote complaining about that law. So yes, this is a censorship issue.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Belial6 ( 794905 )
      "this is much more like racism."

      This is the kind of comment that highlight one of the problems with dog owners. The vast majority of dog owners are insane. Not, wow, I can't believe he did that, insane. But, the kind of insane where they cannot tell the difference between reality and fantasy. This person actually used the word 'racism' when talking about dogs.

      For all the borderline crazy people that are not too far gone. Dogs are not people.

  • Wonder what the reason for the restriction is? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RandoX ( 828285 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:07AM (#21839850)
    Is it something along the lines of the people using them as weapons? Doberman Pincers, Rottweilers, etc? To keep people from having two dozen guarding a building to keep the police out, or at least delay them while they destroy evidence or escape?

  • China gets better - I draw conclusions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Gorimek ( 61128 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:09AM (#21839886) Homepage
    It's going slow, but China is clearly getting more civilized in terms of human rights and rule of law etc.

    I think it's not so much because the rulers are becoming better people, but a result of the enormous economic development and cultural exchange with the outside world. In other words due to trade. Money is power, and as regular Chinese start getting money they start getting power. It's an unstoppable process.

    Two thoughts.

    1. The Russian path of freeing up political life but not economical life has failed, while the opposite Chinese path seems incredibly productive.

    2. The strategy to NOT trade with Cuba is an incredible mistake. With the opposite US policy, Cuba would probably be another Poland today.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Bryansix ( 761547 )
      2. The strategy to NOT trade with Cuba is an incredible mistake. With the opposite US policy, Cuba would probably be another Poland today. I actually agree with this. There was a time to place a trade embargo against Cuba but that time has come and gone. The US investments seized by the government of Cuba so many years ago are not going to be turned back over. Cuba also isn't a military threat to us by proxy anymore. So the reasons for the embargo are gone and the benefits of resuming trade with Cuba are
    • Of course, Cuba is the laboratory for that little experiment, and the results aren't quite in yet that China is better off (although it looks likely). If it had turned out the other way, you'd be saying trading with China was an incredible mistake.

      Better to say that the experiment with Cuban embargo (and very non-universal embargo, at that) was not as successful as we'd hoped, over the time period we'd anticipated, and therefore, reevaluation of the embargo would probably be a good idea at this time. Sadl

  • Read their Constitution (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Blakey Rat ( 99501 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:11AM (#21839904)
    Read the Chinese constitution, or at least just skim the guaranteed rights.

    http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/constitution/constitution.html [peopledaily.com.cn]

    (See, for example, article 35:

    Article 35. Citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.)

    It's interesting that this document exists but, unlike the US Constitution, seems to hold no importance whatsoever.

    Still, I'm glad this guy's standing up for himself.

    (Completely Off-topic, but what the hell is that Dice Discussions Flash ad doing to Firefox to make it run so slow? Editors, you gotta pull this ad, this is ridiculous.)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sciros ( 986030 )
      It was the same with the USSR. Fantastic constitution, maybe even better than the U.S. one, but it didn't matter in the slightest.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by timster ( 32400 )
      Well, I don't know how the translation works out, but the line you quoted seems like awfully bad wording to me. A constitution which states that you HAVE this right or that right isn't worth the paper it's printed on. The US Bill of Rights, on the other hand, is written as a set of restrictions on the government, sort of like a law that operates in reverse.

      This may seem like a pedantic distinction but I think the difference can be important. People have rights when the government is also bound by laws.
      • The Chinese constitution grants rights to the people. What can be granted can easily be taken away.

        The US Bill of Rights recognizes pre-existing, inalienable natural rights of the people and states that the government may not infringe on them.

        Not that our government has been all that great on resisting the desire to infringe anyway.

    • Dice Discussions add must go! (Score:5, Informative)

      by Bryansix ( 761547 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:36AM (#21840222) Homepage

      Completely Off-topic, but what the hell is that Dice Discussions Flash ad doing to Firefox to make it run so slow? Editors, you gotta pull this ad, this is ridiculous
      I've said this before and always get modded off-topic but I will continue to speak out about it until I am heard. The Dice Discussions ad must go! It affects IE7 and now proof that it affects Firefox. It brings computers to a crawl when it is running in the active window. I have emailed Dice and they refuse to listen. I vote Slashdot gets rid of all Dice ads since Dice is so irresponsible with them and refuses to fix something that is slowing down thousands of people's computers!. And this from a "technology company". Boo. Boo to Dice.

      Back on topic, I hope that the Chinese people bring their Constitution up in coversations more. Everybody should use that line in the Constitution as their signatures online. Yes, the censors will have a field day but they can't squash everybody. Then they should all have a day of rememberance for Tienemen Square. They should all print photos of the man stopping the tanks and tape them to their backs while they ride to work on their bicycles or on the rear of their cars.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by pangur ( 95072 )
      What one hand gives, the other takes away. :

      Article 1. The People's Republic of China is a socialist state under the people's democratic dictatorship led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants. The socialist system is the basic system of the People's Republic of China. Sabotage of the socialist system by any organization or individual is prohibited.

      Article 28. The state maintains public order and suppresses treasonable and other counter- revolutionary activities; it penalizes

    • It's interesting that this document exists but, unlike the US Constitution, seems to hold no importance whatsoever.
      Hello, welcome to our dimension. Was your cross-dimensional trip comfortable?
    • This reminds me of the Penn & Teller skit about burning a U.S. Flag inside the Bill of rights, and both survive. Then they pulled out a "Chinese Bill of Rights" made of clear acetate.
    • The exercise by citizens of the People's Republic of China of their freedoms and rights may not infringe upon the interests of the state

      What rights were those again?
    • He is taking an awful risk if you ask me. The Chinese, as you say, have no respect for their own constitution or at best they respect it as long as it doesn't get in the way of what government officials and the politburo want to do. It wouldn't surprise me if the Chinese government decided to...ahem...settle out of court if you know what I mean. There are plenty of accidents every day in China and it would not be difficult for the Chinese government to arrange an "accident" both to rid themselves of an "inc

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Cyno ( 85911 )
      That's very similar to Iraq's constitution. The people have the right to enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of blah, blah, blah

      They do not have the right to those freedoms inherently. They only have the right to enjoy them as they are provided by their government.

      Here in the US we have a constitution that supersedes the government's ability to regulate these rights. Very different from anything I've seen elsewhere.

  • So, when St. Bernards are outlawed, (Score:5, Funny)

    by Hawthorne01 ( 575586 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:17AM (#21839994)
    only outlaws will have St. Bernards?

    Or something like that...

  • Damn.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by JustNiz ( 692889 ) on Friday December 28, 2007 @11:37AM (#21840236)
    >> barring any dog over 14 inches high and restricting each family to only one dog.

    thats not much...a large family would starve over a holiday when the dog stores are closed.
  • From the article: "Chen in effect sued his own Web site"

    There seems to be some residual effect from being in the proximity to former Soviet Russia.
  • Is China inching toward the "Gorbachev moment"? That's when an authoritarian system is that has been propagandizing its people about how free and important they are, is suddenly confronted by people believing the propaganda and demanding that power? It can lead to peaceful change or bloody revolution, but it almost never leads back to the status quo.
  • I like this law. I don't like dogs. And I find it funny. Banning dogs by *height*. I wonder how they measure them, especially the borderline cases.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rhinoX ( 7448 )
      Dogs probably don't like you much either. :P

      Typically dog height is measured to the "withers", that is from the ground to the highest point on the front shoulders when standing up straight.
  • How much time as a (relatively) free person does Chen have left?

    He'd better hope he's squeaky clean, no Internet posts with anything but praise for the government, no distant relatives in Falun Gong, etc.

Slashdot Top Deals

We are Microsoft. Unix is irrelevant. Openness is futile. Prepare to be assimilated.

Close