Qualitative Behavior Of Drug-related Intermediate Crimes

Intermediate behavior of drug-related crimes abound in reality, which makes the drug illegally circulating in society more conveniently, seriously violates people's rights of health and damages the National Drug Management System. Accurate characterization of this type of behavior will be beneficial for cracking down on drug offenses, especially drug-related crimes against intermediate behavior. Intermediate behavior is defined as the behavior that both or one side of the transaction provide information, create the conditions, introduce as middleman, or are on behalf of trading to making a successful transaction. The "drug-related crimes intermediary acts" refers to the behavior that the doers who do not have drugs and not be for the purpose to drug trafficking provide drug information, create trading conditions, contact the two sides or substitute for drug users to buy drugs to complete the drug trade successfully. This kind of behavior includes three parts, that is, actors (brokers), behavioral content (drug intermediate behavior) and behavior of objects (drugs) .It has features of communication, non-independence and unlawfulness of attachment behaviors and includes intermediate behaviors of both no contact with the drug and contact .Nowadays, theory circles'qualitative dispute on intermediate behavior mainly has three statements ,"Drug Trafficking Crime Said", "The Innocence Said," and "Distinguish said" . "Drug Trafficking said"holds that the drug trafficking intermediate behaviours should be crime as they conform to the elements of crime," The Innocence Said " considers that since it is not well documented in criminal law and less harmful, there is no need for criminal punishment. "Distinguish Said" deems that different behavior should be distinguished to have qualitative analysis instead of being generalized. "Drug Trafficking said " can not resolve the qualitative issues of substituting for drug addicts to buy drugs; "The Innocence Said" can not resolve the problem whether judicial interpretation has efficacy and how much harmfulness it will bring about; "Distinguish Said"can not draw a comprehensive summary on intermediate behavior and resolve somewhat confusing classification problems. Therefore , the three theories can not make a precise definition of the qualitative issues on the intermediate drug-related crime. Accurate characterization of drug-related criminal intermediate behavior need to clarify some theoretical issues: drug offences are not exactly for the purpose to make profits; intermediary having no direct contact with drug traffickers is not one-sided accomplice, but an accomplice who constitute the crime of drug trafficking with the purchasers; substituting for drug users to buy drugs is to relieve their pain, which isn't a crime.To determine intermediate behavior of drug-related crimes accurately, different forms of intermediate behaviours should be distinguished: doer who does not have direct contact with people who sell drugs is also an accomplice with the buyers in the crime of drug trafficking; broker arrested for having created conditions to transport drugs constitutes the offence of transporting drugs; substituting for drug users to buy drugs, we should make distinction between subjective intention of intermediaries, the action with a deliberate purpose to sell drugs is determined as a crime; the action to help drug addicts relieve pressure is not a crime.