Study On The Standard Of Carrying Weapons And Theft

Compared with the traditional amount-type theft,the theft of carrying a murder weapon not only endangers the property safety of the broad masses of the people,but also poses a threat to the personal safety of the masses,which has serious social harm.Based on the fact that in judicial practice,the number of single thefts of carrying a weapon did not meet the criminal conviction standard,and it was treated as a public security case with too little punishment,the legislative department promptly revised the Criminal Code and cancelled the amount of theft with a weapon Requires that it be tied to quantitative theft as a separate type of theft.A new type of theft has been added,which has impacted the original standard of theft.At the same time,many problems have arisen in the judicial practice regarding the determination of the theft of a murder weapon.The fundamental reason is that the nature of the theft with a murder weapon is unclear.The "murder weapon" in theft with a murder weapon should be a unity of objective danger and subjective use,and the scope should be narrower than the "murder weapon" in a robbery with a murder weapon."Bringing" should take place in the form of "dark bands" at the stage of performing the act and be conscious of carrying a weapon.Compared with amount-based theft,the theft of a murder weapon in the criminalization mode removes a larger amount of requirements,and is replaced by the elements of the act of carrying a murder weapon.Correspondingly,the protected legal interest has become a plural legal interest,and personal related legal interests have been added.And the requirement of property legal benefit has been reduced.The reason for the different judgment standards for the theft of murder with a weapon is that they have different academic standards,that is,they have different identifications as to whether the behavior is a crime offender,a dangerous offender or a result offender.Theft with a murder weapon is a result crime,which is consistent with the system interpretation and purpose interpretation of the criminal law,the humble requirements of the criminal law,and the criminal policy of leniency and strictness.Based on the nature of the act of committing the crime of theft with a murder weapon,the control theory should be the standard for the determination of the theft with a murder weapon.Different from the ordinary control theory of theft,the theories of actual control are adopted for the theft of weaponry.That is,it is marked by the completion of the theft of property,that the victim cannot exercise complete factual control over the property.The legal benefits infringed by the theft of weaponry include property interests and potential threats to personal rights,and are primarily property interests.The standard of its completion should still be the acquisition of property worthy of criminal law protection,but if there is no potential threat to personal rights or the potential for potential threats to the human body is extremely small,then it should be the incapable of committing theft with a murder weapon..In judicial practice,there are two kinds of disputes,namely,the theory of no amount and the theory of unified amount,about the attempted and attempted theft of murder.Propose a solution based on the theory of no amount and unified amount in practice: should be based on whether the theft by the perpetrator is a property worth protecting by criminal law,whether there is awareness of the carrying of the weapon,the stage and method of carrying it,and whether it is consistent with the identification of the weapon Determine whether the perpetrator has committed acts that meet the requirements of theft with a murder weapon.The halt to the theft of murderous weapons is just a sentencing factor.