On the identification of self-defense should pay attention to distinguish between the following limits

Treatment of self-defense case, the situation is more complex, often involving Zuiyufeizui boundaries. In trial practice, the general should pay attention to distinguish between the following limits:
First, no Criminal responsibility should be implemented against the behavior of people with Criminal responsibility imposed by Criminal elements to distinguish between acts of unlawful infringement
No responsibility is not the same against a competent person has the responsibility of a competent person commit a crime. For such cases should be treated differently under different circumstances. If the defense against people who really do not know is who has not reached the age of responsibility and therefore the implementation of mental illness or the defensive behavior, it should be considered self-defense. If you are aware, and generally does not permit self-defense, as far as possible to avoid abuse by other means, only in the case have been forced not only to allow the implementation of self-defense. For the reach of Criminal age of responsibility, Criminal responsibility of persons with criminal violations are different, the implementation of the national defense is to encourage support of the legitimate rights of self-defense can be directly implemented.

Second, we should distinguish between self-defense and fighting with each other
Self-defense is clearly the aggressor against the implementation of criminal, and clearly in defense of others were forced to defend the position, he conducted the defense is justified and lawful. Another assault, mob fights and other acts, both against each other intentional conduct of the parties is unlawful infringement, do not belong to the scope of self-defense.

Two such cases are worth noting: First, the two sides after the end of fighting, one for revenge, but also to re-take the initiative against each other, and the other party do not want to fight again, retreat not fight back, but in the case of no turning back Next, indeed forced to self-defense, and can not be treated as a melee cases. If there is no excessive defensive behavior should be considered self-defense. Second, the distinction between legitimate defense and fight each other, can not simply whether the perpetrator in the past misdeed, whether this was the demarcation line to carry lethal weapons, and whether the perpetrator must be conditions for self-defense standard. in trial practice, often fights some Zengyin been detained or had other criminal acts, or to self-defense and people illegally carrying controlled knives practiced self-defense, mistaken for a "melee" or "provoking fights." For such cases, the specific case must be realistic with a comprehensive analysis. It should be pointed out that any mistakes or citizens, including who committed a crime, unlawful infringement in its face, the same right to enjoy the legitimate self-defense.

Third, we should object, as self-defense against the intentionally wrongful acts and negligence of people who distinguish between criminal acts,
Self-defense to stop the unlawful infringement of a conscious act, that is a deliberate action. Criminal acts of negligence do not apply self-defense. Because it is an unconscious act, and only after the actual results in harm, crime can be established, criminal negligence Once established, the harmful acts will have ended, the natural question of self-defense does not exist.

Fourth, we should self-defense in practice, due to the fact that awareness of errors and intentional damage to third parties on a third party to distinguish between damage caused
Recognizing the fact that the error due to damage to third parties, the defense does not have the illegal intentional injury, usually the sudden appearance of a third party such as objective reasons, leaving the defense against those who mistakenly believe that is due to associates. For The error due to the fact that awareness of damage caused to third parties, they shall deal with the fact that the wrong understanding of the principles of solution. is at fault, according to the fault of responsibility, no fault to not criminally responsible. If the defense knows the third person those (mainly the families of those who did not specify the violation involved in the implementation of unlawful infringement, out of revenge or to force the aggressor to stop abuse and deliberately to harm a third party, they should be punished for an intentional crime. reposted elsewhere in the Research Papers Download http : / / www.hi138.com five, we should perform their duties and proper conduct a distinction between acts of self-defense
The proper behavior of the so-called executive functions, bears a particular responsibility is the personnel, the implementation of the lawful order or job responsibilities consistent with my behavior. Performing their duties as proper conduct and self-defense actions are ruled out criminal acts The same can not be considered a criminal act. However, the proper execution of duties not identical behavior and self-defense act, not to confuse the two together. The main differences: First, a legitimate self-defense rights of citizens, rather than a legal obligation of citizens. The act of discharging their duties are different. For the bears responsibility for a particular job in terms of personnel, it is not only a legal right, and mainly a legal obligation. the need to When performing their duties, give up the duties of public property or the interests of state and the people suffered serious losses, the current law should be held. Second, the existence of self-defense must the fact that the premise of unlawful infringement, and the proper conduct of their duties, not required as a precondition to criminal violations. Of course, some will face criminal violations, such as people wearing police seize weapons was when the mob, the practice acts of force fought back, that is, self-defense act, not to the proper conduct of his duty. However, some unlawful infringement does not exist, but the requirements of their duties. sentry duty that is serving as the criminals fled to escape the firing to stop criminals, or criminals to escape after firing warning shots when the guard shot the offender, or injury death, which is the proper legal position of power, but also obligations, otherwise, it is dereliction of duty. So who bears responsibility for duties, not an excuse for refusing to perform no criminal violations shall perform the duties.

Sixth, should the so-called "severing" a distinction between behavior and self-defense act
So-called "severing" means parents, brothers and other relatives in their "non-Xiao Zaidi" to be executed without permission. Customary in such cases in some areas referred to as the "severing" and some also use it as self-defense treatment.

"Severing" and the defense are two different concepts, not be confused. China's criminal law did not "severing" requirement. For the relatives of all kinds of evil who, if he is being violated, his parents, brothers and other relatives can be implemented self-defense. Otherwise, any close relatives have no right to so-called "family law" without authorization to death, but should be denounced to the authorities, the judicial organs according to law. without permission will be "no Xiao Zaidi" Death to the conditions and not have the self-defense, should be deliberately homicide offenses. If the family is indeed killed all kinds of evil has always been, the incorrigible, or the threat of frequent persecution, without being in possession by the informant, or indeed any other can be lighter, mitigating circumstances, the treatment can be lighter as appropriate, reduce or waive penalties. Links to Research Papers Download http://www.hi138.com