On the legal responsibility of using stun guns (sticks) for self-defense!

First, the fact that "the robber was disabled or died" is different. First of all, it is indeed suspected of excessive defense. However, the relevant judicial interpretation of the criminal law stipulates: "For acts that seriously endanger personal safety such as rape and robbery, taking defensive measures to kill them does not constitute excessive defense and does not bear criminal responsibility." Therefore, whether or not to be responsible depends on whether the court thinks that it constitutes excessive defense. In practice, I'm afraid different judges will have different punishments. Of course, it also depends on the strength of the prosecution and the level of defense lawyers. But in theory, it is still very likely to be judged as self-defense.

Secondly, regarding the legal responsibility of the defender for holding a "stun gun", if the gun meets the provisions of the "crime of illegally holding a gun" in China's criminal law, it is likely to bear criminal responsibility. Of course, it depends on whether the procuratorial organ files a complaint about the act or whether the court attaches importance to it.

Third, the legal responsibilities of the above two acts are different and cannot be confused. We can't simply deny the legitimacy and legality of defense by the defender's "possession of stun guns", nor can we offset the responsibility of the defender with the responsibility of robbers, but we can only do our duty.

Fourth, even if it is determined that the defensive behavior belongs to justifiable defense and does not constitute criminal responsibility, the defender may bear certain civil liability if the robber's family demands civil compensation because the defensive behavior leads to the disability and death of the robber.

In such criminal cases, if the prosecution accuses the defense of excessive defense, it is recommended to hire a lawyer to intervene. If you have any questions, please add QQ: 729 148279.