Connect with us

China Insight

Victim of Violence or Rage-driven Killer? BMW Owner Attacking a Bike Driver Stabbed to Death with Own Knife

The BMW driver pulled a long knife to stab the biker, but the knife killed himself instead.

Gabi Verberg

Published

on

A road rage incident occurring in Kunshan, Jiangsu province, has become a trending topic on Chinese social media this week, when the driver of a BMW pulled a knife to attack a man riding a bike. Unexpectedly, it was the BMW driver who turned out to be a victim of his own violence. Is this a case of “self-defense” (防卫过当) or “intentional injury” (故意伤害)?

An incident in which a BMW driver hit a man on a bike was captured on surveillance cameras and attracted major attention on Weibo and Wechat this week.

Update: Video link here (YouTube) (NOTE! Viewer discretion advised, this video is the direct surveillance video and is not blurred.)

The incident occurred in the night of August 27 in Kunshan, Jiangsu, when a BMW switched from the car lane to the bicycle lane, colliding with a man driving his bike, who seemingly refused to give way.

Two men then stepped out of their BMW vehicle to confront the cyclist, with one man going back to his vehicle, suddenly pulling out a long knife.

The moment the BMW switches to the bike-lane is captured by surveillance cameras from one angle (the incident was captured from two different angles).

Circulating videos of the incident show that the BMW driver tries to attack the bike driver with the knife, the bike-driver (in white shirt) seemingly not fighting back.

Electric bike driver (white shirt) is attacked by the BMW driver with a knife.

In the midst of the fight, however, the BMW owner suddenly lets the knife slip out of his hands, after which the bike owner quickly picks it up. With the knife in his hands, he now starts attacking the BMW driver.

Tables are turned when the bike driver picks up the knife and goes after his attacker.

Various videos (another angle here) show how the bike driver runs after the man, hitting and stabbing him with the knife at least five or six times.

The electric bike driver hits the BMW driver with the knife for the fifth time.

When the police and rescuers arrived at the scene, the BWM driver had already died from his injuries, Kunshan authorities stated.

According to various sources, the man had been drinking before stepping into the car.

 

“I support the bike driver. He is not guilty; this is justifiable defense. He did well.”

 

In response to the incident, a hot discussion sparked on Chinese social media, where a main point of discussion was whether or not the stabbing, which led to the death of the BMW driver, could be called a “legitimate act of self-defense.”

Some netizens argue that the bike owner acted in self-defense, and therefore must not be held criminally responsible for his death. In doing so, many refer to Article 20 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, which states that people who act out of “legitimate defense” to protect themselves against personal danger should not bear criminal responsibility.[1]

The question is whether the cyclist exceeded the necessary limits to defend himself.

In the Legal Evening News, lawyer Zhou Baomin (周保民), a partner of the Beijing Asia-Pacific Law Firm, states that the bicycle owner might in fact be held responsible for intentional injury and death.

Zhou argues that the video shows that the bicycle rider chases the BMW driver once he gets hold of the knife. At that point, the BMW owner clearly wants to escape, and is not attacking the man anymore – making the stabbing incident one of attack instead of defense.

Although the fatal stabbing is not visible in the videos, the bike rider stabs his attacker many times, which, according to lawyer Zhou, also goes beyond self-defense, since it would require a situation in which the one being attacked is powerless.

Zhou further states that causing deliberate injury leading to death is generally sentenced with more than ten years in prison or the death penalty. However, they add, the supposed fact that the cyclist is not committing a premeditated crime and that he does not own the lethal weapon, are factors that would be taken into consideration by the court.

Most netizens still feel sympathy for the bike owner, saying: ‘If you encounter such a situation, between life or death, the desire to survive will dominate everything. I think that the bicycle owner is not crazy. If he hadn’t defended himself, it would have been him who would have been stabbed to death instead.”

Many Weibo users express their hope that the man will not be punished too severely for his deed, with some even writing: “I support the bike owner. He is not guilty; this is justifiable defense. He did well.”

 

“There are very few purely good or bad people. Most people are neither very good nor very bad.”

 

The appearance and background of the BMW owner also seem to play a role in netizens’ perceptions of the events.

Various media sources report that the deceased man, who is now dubbed ‘BMW Guy’ (Bǎomǎ nán 宝马男), was the 36-year-old infamous ‘Liu Hailong (刘海龙), commonly known as ‘Brother Long,’ who was known to have a criminal record.

But in March of this year, this same man, as Sina News reports, also was allegedly rewarded a certificate of Justice and Courage (见义勇为奖励) from a Kunshan foundation for giving out valuable information to the police about drugs trafficking.

However, many Weibo users write: “Having a long knife in your car that you can use whenever needed – is that what you call being prepared to be brave and handle in the name of justice?!”

Or: “Still talking about his behavior being justified and courageous? Why not talk about him being jailed five times?”

And: “If a person like this, who has the habit of stabbing and driving while being intoxicated by alcohol, with a criminal record as thick as a book, still has recently gained recognition from the government [for his justice and courage], then this is not the tragedy of the people involved in this matter, it’s the tragedy of this country; a tragedy of society.”

But there are also those who express a more nuanced opinion, writing: “Come on, are you all primary school students? It’s not all black or white, not being a very good person doesn’t mean you are a bad person. Most people are grey; they have a good side and a bad side to themselves. There are very few purely good or bad people. Most people are neither very good nor very bad. Could we please discuss such matters in a slightly more mature way?”

This case is currently under police investigation. Meanwhile, the hashtag “Man Chasing Biker with Knife is Killed Himself” (#追砍电动车主遭反杀#) has gathered over 390 million views on Weibo today.

UPDATE: August 30 17:00 (China time):

A day later, this topic is still among the biggest topics being discussed on Chinese social media, as more information emerges on the cyclist in this story. What’s on Weibo was the first news blog to cover this topic in English (just sayin’!), but now other foreign news outlets are following with more information, too.

China Daily USA reports that the cyclist is a 41-year-old man by the name of Yu.

Meanwhile, photos are circulating that show that Yu has injuries to his face. Netizens, siding with the cyclist, are nicknaming Yu “the Terminator of Brother Long”:

Yu is currently being detained by police and has no life-threatening injuries. The hashtag for this incident has now received over 670 million views on Weibo.

UPDATE: CYCLIST IS ACQUITTED!

By Gabi VerbergManya Koetse, with contributions from Miranda Barnes

[1]”In order to protect the state, the public interest, the personal, property and other rights of the person or others from being illegally infringed upon, and causing damage to the unlawful infringer, it is a legitimate defense and does not bear criminal responsibility. Unlimited legitimate defense refers to violent crimes committed in the situation of serious dangers to personal safety, and the use of defensive behaviors, resulting in unlawful infringement of human casualties. […] If the defense exceeds the necessary limit and causes severe damage, it shall be criminally liable, but the punishment shall be alleviated or exempted.”

Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us.

©2018 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com.

Gabi Verberg is a Business graduate from the University of Amsterdam who has worked and studied in Shanghai and Beijing. She now lives in Amsterdam and works as a part-time translator, with a particular interest in Chinese modern culture and politics.

Advertisement
6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. Avatar

    Eric

    August 30, 2018 at 11:01 am

    “Justifiable defense” or “legitimate defense” is rarely seen in the law cases in China.
    Unless you are a Kungfu master and you are able to stop the thug without injuring him, you will have only two options:
    (a) keep yourself safe at once by injuring/killing the thug and let the “law” persecute you, or;
    (b) let the thug hurt you without any fight-back, and let the “law” connive at the thug.
    Now we see that the Chinese “law” is not protecting normal, law-abiding people. Instead, the law somehow becomes the criminals’ accomplice. Even if your life is threatened by intruders in your own room, the “law” is still very strict in granting you the right of justifiable defense.
    “When my life is threatened, the ‘law’ is absent; when I fight back to save or rescue myself or my family, the ‘law’ shows up at once.” says many Chinese netizens, feeling disappointed about their legislation and jurisdiction system.
    Because in China the most important thing is the authority’s power and reputation, not people’s lives…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

China Insight

Looking at Your Phone While Crossing the Road Will Now Cost You Money in Zhejiang

Pedestrians looking at their phones while crossing the road are getting a red light in Zhejiang.

Manya Koetse

Published

on

Zhejiang Province in eastern China has recently launched a new policy: pedestrians crossing the road while looking at their phone risk getting a 50 RMB ($7) fine.

The policy has been attracting the attention of netizens on Chinese social media, where the so-called “Bowed head clan” (dītóuzú 低头族) – a slang word for smartphone-addicted people – has been a recurring hot topic.

People paying more attention to their phone than watching traffic while crossing the road can lead to very dangerous situations. Some graphic videos making their rounds on Weibo today show security camera footage of people getting run over by cars while looking at their phone.

The majority of people responding to the hashtag “Should people be fined for looking down to their phone while crossing the road?” (#低头玩手机过马路该罚款吗#) agree that this kind of behaviour is a risk to traffic safety, but some wonder if a small fine would be effective in combating this problem.

Some cities in China have introduced sidewalks with a “phone lane” and “no phone lane” over previous years, with Chongqing being the first city to do so in 2014.

Mobile phone sidewalk in Chonqgqing. Source https://tech.qq.com

As of earlier this year, the Pedestrian Council of Australia is also looking to implement a law that makes it possible to fine pedestrians who cross the road while looking at their phones.

In Honolulu, the ‘distracted walking law’ already makes it illegal for people to be distracted by their cellphones while walking in a crosswalk.

“Fine them!”, some commenters on Weibo say: “And also fine those people using their phone while driving their electric bicycles!”

“I’m not sure about the fine,” another person says: “I only know I bumped into a tree today walking looking at my phone..”

For many commenters, however, the issue is a no-brainer: “Just don’t use your phone while crossing the road. Personal safety comes first.”

Also read: The ‘Bowed Head Clan’ (低头族): Mother Watches Phone While Son Drowns in Pool

By Manya Koetse, with contributions by Jialing Xie.

Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us.

©2019 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com

Continue Reading

China Arts & Entertainment

‘American Factory’ Sparks Debate on Weibo: Pro-China Views and Critical Perspectives

‘American Factory’ stirs online discussions in China.

Avatar

Published

on

Award-winning documentary American Factory is not just sparking conversations in the English-language social media sphere. The film is also igniting discussions in the PRC, where pro-China views are trumpeted, while some critical perspectives are being censored.

By Anna Wang and Eduardo Baptista

Even as China posts its lowest industrial output growth since 2002, Weibo’s ongoing reaction to Netflix documentary American Factory is rife with declarations of the Chinese manufacturing sector’s impending victory over its US rival. This, however, is not the full story.

The first documentary distributed by Higher Ground Productions, owned by former US President and First Lady, Barack and Michelle Obama, American Factory painted a damning picture of Trump’s protectionist policies.

US manufacturing cannot keep up with the brute efficiency of its Chinese competitors. The story of a shuttering American factory revived by Chinese investment and an influx of Chinese workers, opening up a Pandora’s Box of cultural clashes, paints a telling, but pessimistic, picture of the current strategic conflict between the two superpowers, from the ground-up.

Image via Netflix.

Despite the Great Firewall, Chinese netizens found ways to watch the documentary, that was made by Ohio filmmakers Steve Bognar and Julia Reichert. Temporary links to streaming and subtitle services litter the Chinese Internet, making any accurate count of total mainland viewership nigh-impossible. However, one indication of the film’s popularity among mainlanders was the 259,000 views for a trailer posted on Bilibili.

One likely reason for netizens’ interest is that it neatly plays into Chinese state media rhetoric on the US-China trade war.

The inevitability of China’s rise up the global supply chain (and a corresponding decline on the US side) is a recurring theme in opinion pieces penned by the likes of Xinhua and Global Times, but also an increasingly louder cacophony of bloggers.

 

American Factory shows that the US will probably lose out to China in manufacturing.”

 

One Chinese company (Wind资讯) posted on Weibo that “what Obama means in this film, in a very oblique way, is that anti-globalization will produce a lose-lose scenario.”

The official Weibo account of Zhisland, a Chinese networking platform for entrepreneurs around the world (@正和岛标准) posted a review of the Netflix film titled: “Behind the Popularity of American Factory: Time Might Not Be on America’s Side” (“《美国工厂》走红背后:时间,或许真的不在美国那边了“).

It warns the audience right off the bat to “not assume that this film will promote cooperation between China and the United States. In contrast, it will surely stir up mixed feelings among both audiences.”

American Factory shows that the US will probably lose out to China in manufacturing,” Zhisland writes. The article argues that China will win out due to its lower labor costs, lack of trade unions, and more disciplined managerial styles. “It’s an uneven playing field,” the author continues: “Time may not be on America’s side.”

Toward the end, the author claims: “We are about to enter a new era in which China will gradually become the most dominant player in the global marketplace.”

The fact that many on Weibo shared these kinds of pieces as a reaction to the documentary suggests there is confirmation bias at work here. As is common on Weibo and other social media, comments on the pieces like the above simply rattle unsubstantiated claims, frequently descending into ad hominems.

Another Weibo user (@用户Mr.立早) adds comments when sharing the above article: “The American workers repeat Trump’s mantra, but won’t act on it. They’ve been idling for almost a century. They’re hopeless.”

 

“American Factory tells you: separate the US economy from China, and the US will go bankrupt.”

 

Chinese state media also chimed in on how American Factory proved their most important talking points on the ongoing US-China trade conflict.

Xinmin Evening News, an official newspaper run by the Communist Party’s Shanghai Committee, published an article by Wu Jian called “American Factory Tells You: Separate the US Economy from China, and the US Will Go Bankrupt” (“《美国工厂》告诉你:将美国经济从中国分离,美国会破产“).

In this piece, Jian claims that “in the age of globalization, ties between China and the US cannot be cut. Using high tariffs to force U. S. manufacturing return to the States… is simply not realistic. Separate the US economy from China, and the U.S. will go bankrupt.”

The article was also shared widely on Weibo. Thepaper.cn, an online news site affiliated with Shanghai United Media Group, published a review titled “American Factory: The Things that Are Spelled Out and the Things that are Implied” (“《美国工厂》:那些说出来的,和没有说的“).

The author, Xu Le, writes: “What struck me most about the film was the look on the faces of the American workers. All of them … had the same burnt-out expression… Their faces reminded me of photos of people in the late Qing Dynasty. That dull expression reflects a civilization in decline.”

“We’re a family at Fuyao” American workers listen to a rosy speech from their new bosses.

In the film, When American foremen visit a factory run by glass manufacturer Fuyao in China, they are alarmed to see Chinese workers picking up glass shards without safety glasses or cut-resistant gloves.

A Chinese worker picks up glass shards with minimal safety equipment, shocking his American co-workers.

Xu comments: “Why is it that Chinese workers are able to put up with even more drudgery while being paid far less than their American counterparts? This is something we Chinese are very familiar with.”

 

“Are you the glory, or are you the cost of the glory?”

 

Qin Hui, professor of history at Tsinghua University, once argued that China’s economic growth isn’t because of economic liberalism or government oversight, but because of China’s refusal to guarantee certain basic human rights.

In Maoist China, the state stripped the underprivileged of all political power in the name of the greater good dictated by socialist dogma. Post-Mao China continues to exploit the underprivileged, but now for monetary gain. He called it China’s “advantage” of “low human rights.”

Despite the nationalism sentiment fanned by American Factory, it has also provoked reflection on China’s advantage of low human rights summarized by Qin Hui.

Weibo user ‘Zhi21’ (@ZHI2i), a recent college graduate, writes on Weibo: “I just finished an internship at a factory. I worked 12 hours a day. More than 11 hours of every shift was spent on my feet without stopping, just to keep up with the assembly line. It didn’t make sense to me. After watching American Factory, I feel like American workers are lucky to only work 8 hours a day. That’s why the production costs are higher in the States. They pay too much attention to whether or not workers are comfortable.”

Another Weibo blogger (@GhostSaDNesS) notes that “in American Factory, Fuyao employees believe that to work is to live. They defend the interests of capitalists while they are actively exploited. Unions in the West chose human rights, Chinese capitalists chose profit, and Chinese workers have no choice at all.”

Some of these posts were apparently censored; threads that displayed as having over 200 comments only showed 12, and users complained that their posts were being deleted or made invisible to other users by Weibo censors. “They didn’t give any explanation,” one blogger wrote: ” I only expressed that I felt sorry for the people at the bottom. I didn’t question the system. I didn’t ask to change society.”

Views like that of @Crimmy_Excelsior (“I was confused. Which country is the capitalist one and which country is the socialist one?“) are apparently sensitive enough to be taken offline – they touch upon the tension between the CCP’s espousal of Marxist-Leninism and the plight faced by hundreds of millions of Chinese that have their working conditions driven down by capitalist markets.

Many users don’t buy into nationalist interpretations of the film, and argue that economic gain achieved at the expense of human rights is shameful. @陈生大王 raises a poignant question: “This is a glorious time for China, but I hope this film inspires you to think about who you really are as an individual. Are you the glory, or are you the cost of the glory?”

“The cost of the glory” is derived from a quip popular on China’s internet. The Chinese government often urges its citizens to rally together, using the rhetoric, “We must win this trade war at all cost.” Some netizens then twisted the phrase, saying, “We must win this trade war at all cost, and we later find out that we are the cost.”

 

“China’s prosperity did not just happen overnight – Chinese people worked hard to make it happen.”

 

Even among those in favor of China’s controversial work ethics, there have been concerns over the status quo. Earlier this year, engineers in the tech industry publicly aired their grievances about their “996” lifestyle. The term refers to a high-pressure work schedule of 9am to 9pm, six days a week. This is the kind of life workers in Fuyao are living, with no hope of improvement – they are that the company would find a replacement in no time, making any form of complaining moot.

Recent events in mainland China only increase the credibility of this representation. Factory workers at Jasic, a maker of welding machinery in Shenzhen, attempted to start a union last year. All those involved were fired. A number of college students and activists who actively supported the workers were detained and persecuted.

According to the “China Labor Movement Report (2015-2017)” by China Labor Bulletin (a NGO based in Hong Kong that promotes and defends workers’ rights in the People’s Republic of China) “intensification of social conflicts, including labor-capital conflicts, has crossed a tipping point, and directly threatens the legitimacy of the regime.”

More conspicuously, there are netizens that don’t buy the narrative that Chinese workers are innately “tougher” than their American counterparts. As user @胡尕峰 observes: “(In the film), a new Chinese CEO explains to his fellow Chinese that Americans have been encouraged too much growing up, and can’t take criticism. Chinese born after 2000 have been raised the same way! In my circle of friends, some mothers nearly faint when their babies are finally able to poop. Is China going to end up the same as America?”

American Factory’s objective portrayal of cultural shocks between American and Chinese workforces clearly generated thoughtful reflections and incisive criticism from a sizeable number of netizens, while also being another reason for Chinese state media to highlight the rise of China in the global market.

The chairman of Fuyao Group, Cao Dewang, made headlines this week with the quote: “China’s prosperity did not just happen overnight – Chinese people worked hard to make it happen.” “We indeed worked hard for it,” some commenters agreed: “That’s definitely true.”

By Anna Wang and Eduardo Baptista

Edited by Eduardo Baptista

Spotted a mistake or want to add something? Please let us know in comments below or email us. Please note that your comment below will need to be manually approved if you’re a first-time poster here.

©2019 Whatsonweibo. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce our content without permission – you can contact us at info@whatsonweibo.com

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Support What’s on Weibo

If you enjoy What’s on Weibo and support the way we report the latest trends in China, you could consider becoming a What's on Weibo patron:
Donate

Facebook

Instagram

Advertisement

Contribute

Got any tips? Suggestions? Or want to become a contributor? Email us as at info@whatsonweibo.com.

Popular Reads