Hong Kong rejoined China under specific agreements. Those agreements were in place because the people of Hong Kong did not want to becomes just another piece of China. As such they retained high levels of legal, government and economic autonomy. Colloquially it's known as "one country, two systems."

So, yes, someone probably foresaw this issue and didn't want Hong Kong to become a puppet of China used as a giant fly swatter after re-unification.

You're probably being down voted due to the utter lack of history and context (ie: lack of basic research) you're showing which generally makes intelligent discussions pointless.

edit: A example of similar systems in the west are native reservations which enjoy varying levels of autonomy despite being part of the country they're located in.

1. Which part of the discussion were not mature?

2. The situation is not loophole left by the British. But it was specifically left in place so the one country two system would work for the next ( then ) 50 years. To guarantee the certain freedom of the Hong Kong people which was clearly listed out in the Sino-British Joint Declaration.

3. It is not a Riot. ( I am sorry but that has to be one of the most insulting thing ever said ) No one started a Riot, What was once, one of the most peaceful protest. by 1M people, was fired with Rubber Bullet and Later Metal Bullet to eyes and head shot ( Both in ER ), Along with Tear Gas with NO Prior warning, Against a group of people with bare hands and no weapon.

It is not about disagreeing per se, it is just plain wrong.

2 + 2 will never be 22, doesn't matter how you spin it. ( Edit, Ok may be in Javascript )

He made a statement, about not being able to put trial in the same country, I also made a statement about it is a future not a bug. And the reply I got was discussion were not mature.

Had the first sentence been a question as to why, you cant have the trial inside the own country, I would have replied about one country two system. But since he made a statement, I presume he does understand the topic on a certain level. May be that was my wrong assumption.

( Not to mention the article linked explains the fear of doing so )

> And the reply I got was discussion were not mature.

I believe, and his further comments strengthen my belief, that this wasn't aimed at your comment, but at the fact that he got mass downvoted. That has since changed considerably, as it tends to do when it's highlighted. The counts are not public, but at the time I wrote my comment, his was practically background-colored.

> "I don't agree with this opinion so I will downvote this comment"

If that bothers you, then HN is not the site for you. Downvotes for disagreeing has received the thumb of approval from PG[0]. Upvotes are for agree and downvotes are for disagree. On reddit people like to pretend otherwise (even though it's true in practice there as well), but here on HN there are no bones about it.

[0] one example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658683

Thanks, that explains it, I suppose.

I try not to let myself be bothered by hyper-tribalism too much, but it does put the good parts in perspective for me.

I'm not saying it's a great system that never goes wrong, but with the seal of approval from PG you're swimming against the tide if you're trying to change how people vote on HN.

You're feeding a troll. It would have been better to walk away a few comments ago.

Possible, but I do personally rule that out, as the downvotes are very selective.

>The point is that it makes no sense to have extradition treaties with, say, the US but not with mainland China for a Chinese territory.

It also make no sense for Hong Kong to have its own currency, HKD, pegged to USD. Along with its own laws and system. Even driving is on the "wrong" side of the road as one might say. And it is everything about the One Country Two System which is promised and now trying to be broken. You might have a point if this was happening in 2046.

>The insults and the fact that people now track my comments history to downvote all of them on random topics prove my preceding point about "red guards"... Disgraceful tactics.

HN can downvote comment that is well pass a few hours. You can only upvote pass comments. And since most of your recent comment are about the same topic, may be they just happen to disagree with you.