The Judicial Discussing On The Theft With Weapon

In recent years, with the rapid development of national economy and increment of all kinds of instable factors during social transition period, larceny is a major part on the proportion of both the total number of crime and property offence crime, which is one of the most common crimes. Though it is a usual, multiple and violent crime, pilferage with weapon still can not be punished as larceny in case of not reaching larcenous amount. The solution to these problems seems pursuing the crime to some extent out of principle, which can not play a protective role as criminal law. the being crime of pilferage with weapon reflects practical attention and strict protection to people’s property safety and personal security of criminal law and provide a powerful guarantee for fighting crime of larceny.This thesis includes three main parts. The first part is the analysis of the necessity and reasonableness of The theft with weapon through the conception of The theft with weapon. Thanks to "The theft with weapon"is a new item in Criminal Law, its pluses and minuses are not definite. How to use it in judicial practice is not clear yet. What’s more, the relevant judicial explanation is not come out yet. Writer will analyze its reasonableness and necessity and show the reasons of "The theft with weapon". The second part is about the identification of "The theft with weapon". This will be the core of this thesis. To analyze the property of The theft with weapon in theory, we should focus on its internal meaning to definite this accusation reasonably. Finally, we should comprehend the property in discussing The theft with weapon We will have different comprehensions from different standards and views.The main problem to be solved in this thesis are identified in theory and judicial practice of The theft with weapon. Due to lack of relevant explanation of specific details of "The theft with weapon"in legislation, making it difficult to accurately grasp in practice,and it can’t reflect the justice fully. However about the Identified of "The theft with weapon’,it can’t use the standard of "The theft with weapon"simply.Thus, resulting in "The theft with weapon" is difficult to identify in judicial practice. Legal and judicial interpretation provision is misty about its connotation and denotation, which lead to appear a controversial situation in theory, and it did not reach an agreement.