| The highway bridge is based on the mechanical characteristics of the bridge structure.It is a bridge that bridges obstacles such as roads,valleys,rivers,and other obstacles that are constructed using the main elements.It is an important part of major transportation facilities,and its operation status and public transportation safety.closely related.With the expansion of the coverage of highway bridges and the increase in the number of road bridges,problems such as the destruction and damage of highway bridges have come one after another.At present,specific studies on such crimes are rare.What kind of behavior can be evaluated as the “breaking” behavior in the crime of destroying transport facilities? If it cannot be assessed as a "breaking" act,can it be evaluated as "dangerously endangering public safety?" Does the act of stealing tin ore near the pier of a highway bridge constitute an "illegal mining crime" ?However,there is still a lot of controversy on the qualitative research on such issues in the related monographs,and there is a great difference between the theoretical and practical circles in evaluating and handling.Therefore,this article intends to study and discuss this behavior with the example of "Li and others who use dangerous methods to endanger public safety" as an example,and then draw conclusions and inspirations.In addition to the introduction,this article is divided into four parts,a total of about20,000 words.The first part: The basic situation of the case.The case was in the case of Li and others who used dangerous methods to endanger public safety.The main facts involved were: Li solicited Li A and other four people to steal more than 280 bags of tin ore near the pier(not mine area)near the bridge.,Each bag is worth RMB 150.After being identified,due to the five-person's robbery,the bridge was damaged and could not be used normally,posing a threat to public safety.There are four main differences in opinions in this case: First,Li and others constitute the crime of sabotaging transport facilities;Second,Li and others pose a crime that endangers public safety in a dangerous way;Third,Li et al constitute an illegal person.Mining crime;Fourth,Li and others do not constitute crimes.Based on this,the three controversial focuses of the case can be summarized: First,the tin ore mine near the bridge bridge pier can be used as a “breaking” behavior to damage the bridge;secondly,the behavior of the tin mine near the bridge pier is stolen.Whether it belongs to the pocket-size range of“other dangerous methods” that endanger public safety crimes in a dangerous way;and third,whether the act of stealing tin ore should be regarded as an illegal mining crime.The second part is the legal analysis of related issues.This part is the core part of the article.Based on the above disagreements and arguments,the discussion begins.The jurisprudential analysis of the first controversial focus mainly focuses on: first,whether the behavioral approach directly affects the transport facilities;second,the degree of “violence”of the behavioral means;and third,the direct extent of the impact of the behavioral results on the transportation facilities.The analysis of the second dispute focus mainly focuses on: first,the definition of "public safety";second,the restriction of "other dangerous methods".The analysis of the third controversial focus mainly focuses on: first,the qualitative premise—the study of the properties of the tin mine;secondly,the summary of the crime of illegal mining;and third,the act of stealing mineral resources should not be regarded as the crime of theft.The third part: The analysis and conclusion of this case.This part of the analysis based on the above-mentioned jurisprudence,combined with the actual situation in this case,came to a qualitative conclusion of the behavior,namely Li and others who stole the bridge near the tin mine caused by the tin mine damage behavior should be characterized as innocent.Part ?: The research implications of this case.This section is a summary and sublimation of the article.The author elaborates the relevant theories and behavior analysis of the behavior of stealing tin in the vicinity of bridge piers.At the same time,according to the circumstances of the case,the author analyzes the corresponding reasons,gains inspiration,and puts forward suggestions for improvement.The frequent occurrence of piracy and mineral resources cases is due to the high profits of criminals,weak legal awareness,inadequate supervision,and imperfect systems.They have given opinions such as strengthening citizens' ideological prevention,increasing punishment,and improving the corresponding systems.In terms of judicial activities,due to the ambiguity in the expression of guilt and the excessive discretion of judges,the crime of endangering public safety in a dangerous manner is often abused in the conviction.This gives a reasonable interpretation of the law and the judicial staff's correct use of discretion.The perfect proposal for the right. |
PDF Full Text Request