Whether The Behavior Of Defensive Fights Involved In Justifiable Defense

With the profound transformation of China’s economic system, social structure profoundchanges, the pattern of interests profound adjustment, ideas in various ideologies and culturesare intertwined interactions between various social contradictions become increasinglyprominent, and a variety of traditional, new type of crime are harmful to society. Theprovision of Article2of the Criminal Law clearly stipulates the fundamental task of thecriminal law to punish crime and protect the people. The countries with the penalty to fightwith all endanger national security or other criminal acts. Especially in the period of ourcountry socialist economic and social development transition, to be resolutely cracked downon behavior that seriously disrupting public security and order, such as gathered crime willnot be tolerated. Also in accordance with the law to protect the country, the public interest, orothers personal property and other rights against unlawful infringement of the ongoingcriminal violation of the implementation of the defense, and did not significantly exceed thelimits of necessity which is Justifiable defense. Justifiable defense is to protect the urgency ofthe rights of the legal interests of law gives individual citizens in an urgentcircumstances.The state has granted individual citizens act of Justifiable defense in case ofemergency, not only can play to stop the unlawful infringement, reduce crime and detercriminals role, but also the legitimate rights and interests of the protection of victims. It hasgreat significance to encourage citizens, exercise their rights for personal and nationalinterests. On the other hand, analysis of specific cases has important theoretical significanceto grasp the connotation and the constituent elements of Justifiable defense, to distinguishdifference between crimes.This article analyses the nature of acts and the definition of justifiable defense in caseinvolving six workers in Jiangsu province. I believe that He Qiang and other people involvedin defensive fights behavior should not be identified as affray together to fight crime, andshould be characterized as justifiable defense. This paper is divided into five parts, about18000words.The first part is the cause of action, He Qiang and other people gather together to fight inthe case;The second part, based on the author collected data interpretation the through of He Qiang and other people involved in the defensive fights.The third part summarizes the controversial views and differences opinion of this case.Controversial view is He Qiang and other people involved in the fights is whether the conductof Justifiable defense or not. Some people is represented by Zhao-Bingzhi believe that theirbehavior constitute the crime of affray; another view was represented by Dr. Mao-Lixinlawyers believe that their behavior constitute Justifiable defense. There are four differentopinions: Firstly, whether the gambling debt disputes caused by fights behavior negate thelegitimacy of defensive behavior; Secondly, He Qiang and other people whether existence"provocation" behavior or not, and whether the defense on purpose; Thirdly, pre-prepareddefense tool whether to exclude the possibility of Justifiable defense; fourthly, theestablishment of the defense, does not exceed the limits of necessity.The fourth part, the legal analysis, mainly through the concept, nature, according toconstitute conditions Conceptual Analysis and comb of Justifiable defense, so as to solve thegambling debt dispute in this case due to fights whether the behavior negates the legitimacyof defensive behavior, whether they have defensive intent, the nature of the pre-prepareddefense tool in the Criminal Law, whether their behavior exist over-defense and other issues.The further assertion He Qiang and other people involved in the defensive fights behaviorconstitute Justifiable defense;Part five is Conclusion: He Qiang and other people constitute Justifiable defense;...