Representative Zhu Lieyu, deputy to the National People’s Congress and director of the Guangdong Guoding Law Firm, suggested that “one drug use, life-long ban” should be written into laws and regulations, to rectify the drug-related chaos of stars, and promote the formation of a good atmosphere in the entertainment industry that does not dare to involve drugs. Representative Zhu Lieyu said that drug abuse by public figures has a great negative impact on society, especially the youth group, setting a bad example, and affecting the formation of young people’s right and wrong views; allowing drug addicts to come back will tarnish the atmosphere of the entertainment industry. The stipulation that “one time drug use, life-long ban” can increase the cost of star drug use and form a certain legal deterrent, which is conducive to the effective development of drug prevention education, and has a profound impact on purifying social atmosphere and advocating healthy values.

The National People’s Congress will be held in 2021. Zhu Lieyu, deputy to the National People’s Congress and director of Guangdong Guoding Law Firm, has prepared a number of proposals and suggestions, including the star drug abuse incidents that have attracted social attention in recent years and the application of law. Regarding the frequent appearance of drug-related artists in the entertainment industry, Zhu Lieyu said that the chaos manifested in the industry norms, insufficient restrictions on “star drug control” by public opinion, and the absence of laws and regulations. Therefore, Zhu Lieyu suggested that “one time drug use, life-long ban” should be written into laws and regulations to rectify star drug-related chaos. In addition, Zhu Lieyu made suggestions on the legal application of the controversial and courageous actions in recent years. He believes that it is difficult to grasp the behavioral standards of the courageous actions of justice, and should not be too strict for those who seek justice. “One drug use, life-long ban” On June 24, 2020, the “China Drug Situation Report 2019” released by China Anti-Drug Network pointed out that by the end of 2019, there were 2.148 million drug users in China. The report specifically mentions that entertainers are the main abusers of marijuana. For this reason, Zhu Lieyu, after investigating the investigation with the police officers in charge of anti-drug work, put forward the “Proposal on “One-time drug use, life-long ban” (hereinafter referred to as the “Proposal”). Zhu Lieyu believes that while enjoying the social resources brought by millions of traffic, public figures should take up corresponding social responsibilities, establish a positive public image, and promote positive values ​​to the society. “The drug abuse behavior of celebrities breaks through their own moral bottom line, but also creates a huge negative demonstration effect for the society and others.” Zhu Lieyu wrote in the “Suggestion” that behind the drug-related chaos in the entertainment industry, the industry norms and society are revealed. Public opinion has insufficient restrictions on “star drug control” and the absence of laws and regulations. Therefore, Zhu Lieyu suggested that “one time drug use, life-long ban” should be written into laws and regulations to rectify star drug-related chaos. Zhu Lieyu told China News Weekly that in the current society, celebrities are idols and role models for many young people, while young people have shallow social experience, immature psychological development, and weak ability to distinguish right from wrong. They recognize the harmful effects of marijuana, methamphetamine, ecstasy, K powder and other drugs. Knowledge is extremely limited, and drug use by public figures may make the teenagers who admire them do the same. In addition, the high relapse rate of drugs is also one of the reasons Zhu Lieyu made this proposal. Zhu Lieyu revealed that the relapse rate of drug abuse is very high. In previous reports, most drug-related stars in the entertainment industry took synthetic drugs represented by methamphetamine. This type of drug withdrawal is very difficult, even after compulsory drug treatment, returning to acting. The tremendous pressure in the world may cause drug-related persons to regenerate their cravings for drugs. “There are many examples in the past news. After the administrative detention of drug addicts, celebrities who took drugs were arrested again for drug abuse, and several others were arrested,” Zhu Lieyu said. Regarding whether the restriction on the comeback of drug-related artists and the prohibition of broadcasting their film and television works violate the principle of equality for all at the legal level, Zhu Lieyu believes that this is not a discrimination against drug-related artists, nor does it infringe on their rights to employment or social security. “Some people questioned why drug use in other industries has no such consequences.” Zhu Lieyu explained that restricting the broadcasting of film and television works of drug-related artists is a special occupational problem, just as people with infectious diseases cannot be chefs. People with a history of sexual assault and harassment cannot be teachers. “Prohibition of employment has a legal basis. Lifetime bans restrict drug-related personnel’s participation in behaviors with broad communication significance, and are restrictions on their occupation or work content.” Some local drug-related laws prohibit drug-related personnel in the cultural market. The entry system provides some references. On April 1, 2016, the “Shanghai Drug Control Regulations” was formally implemented for trial. The regulations stipulate that for those who have been investigated and dealt with by the public security organs for less than three years or have not yet given up drug addiction, they will participate in the production of movies, TV series, and radio as the main creators. Television programs and endorsements of commercial advertisements are not broadcast. In 2018, the “Shandong Drug Control Regulations” introduced similar rules. Zhu Lieyu said that although local regulations and industry norms punish celebrities for drug-related behavior to a certain extent, the current measures are still not enough to curb drug abuse by celebrities, and some drug-related artists can still exploit loopholes in the system. Therefore, it is necessary to accurately define the scope of the “banned performance” and clarify the joint and several liabilities of stakeholders and the company. The “Fuzhou Zhaoyu case” and the “male student kicking and attacking the chest man” incidents in Yongzhou City, Hunan Province have made the case of fighting for justice and being held accountable have become a controversial topic in recent years, and the scale of fighting for justice has become the focus of the topic. This year, at the National Congress of the People’s Republic of China, Zhu Lieyu brought “Recommendations on Proper Defense for the Casualties of Gangsters Caused by Acts of Righteousness”. He believes that the boundaries and scales of Acting for Righteousness cannot be too strict. At the same time, it is necessary to improve the legal protection system for the courage of justice, clarify the legal attributes of the courage of justice, and the casualties of gangsters caused by the courage of justice should be handled in accordance with legitimate defense. “(The scale) is very difficult to grasp and is very precise, and you cannot be too strict with those who do what is righteous.” Zhu Lieyu told China News Weekly that stopping illegal and criminal acts is a kind of righteousness, and the perpetrators of illegal and criminal acts are generally in the process of crimes. Using violence, without special training, ordinary people can easily cause the offender to be injured in the process of doing justice. Taking the “middle school student kicking and attacking the chest man” incident in Yongzhou, Hunan Province as an example, Zhu Lieyu said that although Hu had kicked the molester Lei, Lei’s illegal activities had been terminated, but because Lei was trying to escape at the time, Hu stopped it. It is reasonable for the suspect to run away and kick him down, and it is an act of bravery. “Mechanical understanding of relevant laws and regulations and taking compulsory measures not only are unfair to the parties, but also violate the general perception of the public on the moral level.” Zhu Lieyu introduced, when illegal and criminal acts are taking place, criminals often will Using violent means to resist or try to escape, the safety of those who act bravely is also at risk. “Courageous actions for righteousness and legitimate defense have a high degree of overlap.” Zhu Lieyu believes that from the provisions of the two, what is important for action on justice is to protect the interests of others. The legal consequences are that if one is harmed, civil liability is borne by the infringer in principle; justified defense emphasizes It is to protect one’s own interests and not to bear civil or criminal liability for illegal infringers. Since the legitimate defensive behavior to protect one’s own interests causes the injury or death of the illegal infringing person, no legal responsibility is required, and the courageous behavior made to protect the interests of others causes the injury or death of the illegal infringement person and should not be held legally responsible. How to reduce the cost of righteousness from a legal point of view is the focus of Zhu Lieyu’s proposal. He said that handling it in accordance with legitimate defense can provide certain legal support for righteousness. Taking the Zhao Yu case written in the Supreme Procuratorate’s work report as an example, if the act of acting bravely is not protected by the law, and the person himself has to fight against actual risks, the public’s ability to act bravely will be greatly reduced. On September 3, 2020, the Supreme People’s Court announced the “Guiding Opinions of the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security on the Application of the Rightful Defense System in accordance with the law,” stating that it resolutely recognizes and effectively corrects “who can cause and who is justified” and “who is dead or injured” in accordance with the law. The erroneous tendency of “who has reason” effectively defends the spirit of the rule of law that “the law cannot make concessions to lawlessness.”

zhiwo

By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
helpmekim
7 months ago

Support, because drug use is a terrible thing for anyone. Especially “stars” have natural influence. Ta’s behavior is a great harm to many people who have not yet formed the ability to make systematic judgments. And having said that, these suggestions will definitely make some people more daunted, and these daunting are beneficial to their lives, health and safety. And this will definitely benefit the workload of the anti-narcotics police. However, the interpretation of the two terms “star” and “forbidden performance” still needs to be clarified. Because now many people think that Internet celebrities are also stars, and some people think that they are not considered as celebrities. Some people think that short videos are counted as acting, while some people think that acting in a TV series is counted as a movie. Therefore, the specific division still needs to be further moved forward in the future. But any thing, from the moment it starts, is already a big step! In the future, I will add slowly and elaborately. This is a process of development, but it will definitely get better and better in the future. Because there is a beginning, just think about the future.

heloword
7 months ago

I definitely support it! More than just a lifetime ban on drug abuse, the 14 situations in the “Administrative Measures for the Self-discipline of Performing Artists in the Performance Industry” should be banned! According to the Measures, various levels of industry boycotts will be implemented for entertainers who violate the practice norms according to the severity of the violation of the practice norms and the degree of harm. There are 14 types of permanent boycotts. situation.

.

helpyme
7 months ago

Celebrity drug use seems to be nothing new. Drugs have also brought the careers of popular artists such as Ke Zhendong, Chen Yufan, and Li Daimo to an abrupt end. Why do they prefer to walk on the verge of losing their reputation rather than stay away from drugs? A well-known folk singer who had been involved in drugs said in an interview with the media: “Drug use is definitely a bad thing, but maybe everyone is thinking about it a bit serious.” At first, when I saw this casual remark, it felt incredible, but later After thinking about it again, such a statement is also “reasonable.” After all, he is a person whose “brain circuit” has been controlled by drugs, and such a person will subconsciously whitewash his drug behavior. If drugs can’t even do this, how can they confuse people?

sina156
7 months ago

As a malignant man-made “source of happiness”, drugs enter the human body and the main script is to destroy and replace the emotional control mechanism in the brain. As a high-level creature, our own “source of happiness” is actually a “reward system” run by the brain circuit responsible for dopamine secretion. In daily life, as long as our certain needs are met, whether it is physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, respect needs or self-fulfillment needs, this system will increase the release of dopamine, allowing us to produce different levels of happiness.

yahoo898
7 months ago

You can imagine the joy of being promoted to PK in the game, the joy of being promoted in the workplace, and the joy of winning a lottery ticket. However, theoretically speaking, the happiness brought by drugs will surpass the above three. Because the dopamine dose it can provide at one time completely exceeds the brain’s “reward rules”, just like cheating codes in the game, it can directly fill the happiness value, so that drug users will shake their heads, produce sexual excitement, and appear hallucinations, visions, and visions. Auditory hallucinations, even a sense of floating. At the same time, the body of drug addicts can only operate at an overload in order to satisfy the extreme excitement required by the “pathological brain”. Therefore, when the happiness is over, there will be severe emotional depression and a series of “dementia” behaviors such as slow response, decreased discrimination and memory decline, and hallucinations, delusions, mania, and violent tendencies [1]. At this point, the harm of drugs is enough to spread from the user himself to innocent family members.

leexin
7 months ago

In 2017, a Nanchang addict who had been taking drugs for three consecutive days came home from an Internet cafe late at night. He suddenly remembered a prompt in an online game: “Start the human removal plan! The killing game begins!” So he was hallucinated. He picked up a kitchen knife and slashed at the mother’s neck and father’s face, and finally stabbed his son a few times before fleeing. In this real violent assault case, there is no financial entanglement caused by drug use, nor the torture of withdrawal reaction, it is just an inexplicable illusion.

greatword
7 months ago

Once you take drugs, it will leave “marks”. Everyone knows that urinalysis is an important means to identify drug users. The same is true for police tracking drug consumption. What they need to do is a large-scale “urinalysis”-sewage monitoring, scientifically called “water trace drug monitoring” [3]. Unexpectedly? After a long circle, the addict was still exposed by urine. This is a method of real-time monitoring and evaluation of regional toxicity through the residual levels of heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, marijuana, amphetamines and other drugs in sewage. my country has already been put into use in 2012. After years of practice and improvement, the current monitoring results can accurately reflect the time of drug abuse in a certain area, such as a weekend or during a large-scale event such as a music festival. The geographic space of drug abuse in a certain area can be traced back to streets, communities, communities, and even specific residential buildings, KTVs, hotels, etc. Does this look like a quietly conducted test? This monitoring method provides data support for the police to determine potential drug production and drug use sites and personnel. After all, gathering crowds to take drugs is a high-risk and secretive thing. Under the instigation of addiction, the first time that addicts commit crimes collectively, there is a high probability that the second time. With such obvious clues, how can the “big urine data” be let go? And your hair can leave traces of drugs that can’t be erased, and a single strand of hair can trace the trajectory of drug abuse for several months. It seems that “lucky psychology” is becoming increasingly unreliable. Therefore, don’t let this “mind control technique” that has been circulated for hundreds of years be a fluke. Once you take drugs, you will definitely stay.

loveyou
7 months ago

Strongly support “stars once drug addicts are banned for life.” Those fans yelled to give drug addicts a chance. Then who gave the drug police who lost their lives a chance? For public figures such as entertainers, it is not just about drug addicts banning performances. My suggestion is to refer to civil service standards for management. Article 17 of the “Regulations on the Punishment of Civil Servants of Administrative Organs” If a civil servant of an administrative agency that violates laws and disciplines has been sentenced to criminal punishment, recalled, removed from office, or resigned from his leadership position in accordance with the law before the administrative agency makes a sanction decision on him, the administrative agency shall be subject to sanctions. The agency will give sanctions based on the facts of violations of law and discipline. If a civil servant of an administrative agency is sentenced to a criminal punishment in accordance with the law, he shall be expelled. 3. People unable to apply for civil service examinations (1) Persons who have received criminal penalties for crimes or have been expelled from public office; that is, as long as they violate the criminal law, all performances will be banned for life.

strongman
7 months ago

For example, is the ban on performances forbidden to participate in film and television work, forbidden to appear on the scene, or forbidden to broadcast his works? For example, foreign actors such as Iron Man actor Downey are forbidden to come to the mainland to film, or is the movie he participated in is forbidden to be released? Then there is the definition of poison. Heroin, methamphetamine, and K powder cannot run away. What about marijuana? What should I do if new drugs are not included in the list? Betel nut, tobacco, alcohol? Then there is the definition of celebrities. Are Internet celebrities considered celebrities? How much influence is a star? Not in the entertainment industry, but is it a celebrity with a reputation? Are cross talk actors counted as stars? Is the host considered a star? The last thing is the old question. If it is really corrected, should it be counted from the revision, or should it be counted as before? Old ways for the elderly, new ways for the new? In addition, one respondent mentioned that there should be a distinction between active and passive, which is even more confusing. How to obtain evidence? Pouring poison in alcohol can kill the entire audience? But if it doesn’t work, you obviously sucked it yourself, pretending to be passively killed? In addition, ordinary people are prone to the illusion that “heavier penalties are more deterrent”. Why hasn’t this been explained to many lawyers under the knowledge of other legal-related issues. Individuals support stricter management and sanctions at the implementation level, but do not support playing these unclearly defined things at the legislative level, and oppose excessive use of administrative orders.

stockin
7 months ago

Hey, this is not an unsupported matter at all. This is an imperative move and it must be done like this. The entertainment industry has always been the hardest hit area for drug abuse. People in this group have money and leisure, low education, and low morality. Strong rebellious spirit, ignoring the rules, likes fresh excitement, and poor self-discipline. This group has all the necessary qualities of drug addicts. When drugs first came out, they immediately became popular in two groups, one is the ruffian, and the other is the entertainment industry. The role of drugs in that circle is the same as that of alcohol. If you take drugs, you are your own person. “You are a newcomer who wants to be part of the circle, and you want others to praise yourself. Sometimes you can’t do it without smoking. Under this circumstance, there will definitely be some relief, and the spread of drug use will become inevitable. Drug use has another function, controlling people, so you can see that some big bosses are forcing famous celebrities to take drugs, to satisfy their desire for control, to show majesty, to let their subordinates obey, and not to smoke? Okay, I don’t have anything for you, and I still want to suppress you, you won’t be able to get out of it forever. So this is why many people are curious about how the national anti-drug education is so well done, and there are so many drug users in the entertainment industry? This group of people are not fools, they also know that they can never touch them. Many of the reasons are forced by the general environment. The big environment is like a briquettes stove. There are too many black briquettes and too few burning red briquettes. If you put the red briquettes in, they will be destroyed. Only the black briquettes are cleaned out one by one so that the rest are red. The briquettes, whether they are red briquettes or black briquettes, will be burned together. Let the black briquettes take their place and ruin the atmosphere, and the stove will eventually go out. This is a deeper truth than “punishing the typical” and “killing the chickens and the monkeys”. With the environment and the atmosphere, more people are bound to have a fluke mentality. Only when the black briquettes of drug addicts are taken out of the stove can they be “cured”. “In order to create a clean and upright entertainment environment. At this time, severe penalties are the best method and the highest method of establishing a sense of group. Before drunk driving was sentenced, the common people drank and drove just like everyday meals. Not only that, but some people were not ashamed but proud of it, and felt that “you can see that I drank a pound of white wine and drive while driving”, and use this as their own “amount”. Niubi”. Now that drunk driving is sentenced, do you still dare? None of them are left. Really, ethos has to be treated like this. When everyone understands that taking drugs is not cost-effective anyway, no one will take it. So, don’t intercede with those drug-related stars, just don’t let them be public figures, and keep him from staying alive. What’s the distress of the house where the savings are spent? You spread pancakes at the gate of your community to support your family, and you haven’t seen your poor family. Have that kung fu, hurry up and feel sorry for yourself, ah. PS: Ah yes, especially that Ke Zhendong, I have to call this person by name. In the past few years, I still have a face to make a comeback. The anti-drug ambassador takes the lead in taking drugs. He is the only one in the world. If this were me, I would have long waited to find a seam to get in, why would I have to come back again and again? Really, don’t show your face when you go out in the future, show your butt, your face is not as good as your butt.

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x