The Research Of Life Right Emergency Hedge

Since the famous case of Ann’s board, how to measure different protectionvalue of life right and whether apply the emergency hedge theory to the savedperson’s life under the situation of conflict of rights to life lead to differentindividuals cannot coexist, are the problems of criminal law educational worlddisputed than to date. Moral and Law generally believed individual life is equivalentand not as means,so the behavior of sacrifice other’s life to preserve own life or mostpeople’s lives often does not constitute a legal necessity,but a intentional homicide.But with the development of society and economy, academic circles began in-depthstudy to the issue of behavior person choose protect themselves or secure morepersons under the conflict of rights to life, especially to the heated debate in practicecases, which make life right emergency hedge become a focus problem of emotionand law. And the current academic theory flight to the life right emergency hedge isonly a single think of legitimacy affirmative, negative and compromise saying. Thispaper will from the perspective of ethics, legal theory and practice breakthrough lifeequivalent propositions, to demonstrate the necessity and legitimacy of life rightemergency hedge, so as to comprehensive clarify life emergency hedge and to putforward own opinion of criminal evaluation and responsibility about life rightemergency hedge.There are four chapters in this paper:The first chapter raises a question. In current practice cases about the conflict of rights to life, though still identified as intentional homicide, but there is a hugecontroversy on the punishment considerations. The author raises the concept of liferight emergency hedge which based on the concept of general emergency hedge, andthrough the different criterion of self-interest or benefit others to redefine the casesabout conflict of rights to life, which shows the necessity of the conflict of rights tolife problem research intuitively.The second chapter introduces the academic classification of the life rightemergency hedge, and compares life right emergency hedge to general emergencyhedge, intentional homicide act and coercive act in depth. On the basis of fullyunderstand with the essential characteristics of life right emergency hedge, therelated debates of life right emergency hedge are introduced. The author raises ownpoint of view, that it should be allowed to implement safety behavior at the expenseof life right under specific critical circumstances, but it also should be limitedreasonably to avoid wanton justify applying.The third chapter demonstrates the core problem of whether implement safetybehavior at the expense of life right. The author demonstrates life right emergencyhedge legal nature from reasonable possibility, legal legitimacy and social necessityangles. As conflicts of extreme phenomenon, people more and more favor from theperspective of utilitarianism and human instinct to evaluate the acts, more and morefavor from law ultimate goal and social overall effect to punish the behavior result.Therefore, the life right emergency hedge is not absolute insurmountable moral andlaw in theory.The fourth chapter analysis the problems of life right emergency hedgebehavior’s legal requirements and legal liability. The author thinks it shoulddistinguish different situations to analysis the life right emergency hedge as alegitimate emergency action or an illegal intentional homicide action, at the sametime it should strictly limit legal life right emergency hedge from main body status,subjective psychological, objective result and behavior concern. In the judicialpractice of life right emergency hedge, the illegal life right emergency hedge actionshould be charged intentional homicide according to the provisions of article two hundred and thirty-two of the criminal law, and punished according to the provisionsof the paragraph of article twenty-one to give mitigated punishment or beexempted from punishment for different situations.