In order to protect the state, public interests, personal, property and other rights of oneself or others from ongoing illegal infringement, stopping illegal infringement and causing damage to the illegal infringer, it belongs to self-defense and does not bear criminal responsibility.
When the police perform their duties normally, they can kill "criminals", but in any of the following circumstances, they shall be deemed to have committed the crime of intentional homicide:
1。 If the "gangster" does not carry any equipment that can cause serious personal injury or death, the police will kill him, which constitutes the crime of intentional homicide.
When the "outlaw" does not carry any offensive weapons or instruments that can hurt people, there is no possibility that the "outlaw" will infringe upon or seriously infringe upon the lives of others. The most direct purpose of police shooting criminals is to protect the lives of people controlled by criminals (hereinafter referred to as criminals) from infringement. Criminals (criminals) do not carry equipment that can threaten others' lives, so there is no possibility of seriously threatening others' lives, and on-site shooting is not applicable to them. For example, in the behavior opposite the police, everyone takes hostages, but does not carry any weapons. They just hugged the hostages with their arms. There is no possibility that the lives of hostages are seriously threatened. Police can use police equipment to subdue criminals. At this time, the police shot and killed the abuser, and put aside the abuser's right to life, which was abuse of power. The imbalance of legal interests protected by his behavior is that the legal interests protected are seriously less than those infringed. This is not allowed by the criminal law, and the police should be investigated for intentional homicide.
2。 If the "criminal" can be subdued by destroying property and the police kill him, it constitutes the crime of intentional homicide.
The legal interest of human life is higher than all the legal interests of property, and life is priceless. If the hostage's life is seriously threatened, the legitimate interests of life can be protected by sacrificing property, but not by hurting people; If the damage is enough to protect the interests, it can't be protected by killing. If the police can stop or control the behavior of the perpetrator by destroying public or private property, it is absolutely forbidden for the police to achieve the purpose of subduing or controlling by killing the perpetrator. If, for the same purpose, behavior and interests, the situation can be controlled by destroying property with less legal interests, and the situation can be controlled by shooting, the behavior of the police can constitute the crime of intentional homicide.
3。 If the "criminal" can be subdued with police equipment, the police will kill him, which constitutes the crime of intentional homicide.
4。 If the "criminal" can be subdued by physical injury, the police will kill him, which constitutes the crime of intentional homicide.
For those who meet the above four situations, the criminal responsibility of the police should be investigated for intentional homicide, and their official status or performance of official duties should be regarded as an umbrella for wantonly infringing on the legitimate interests of citizens. The objective behavior of sacrificing less legal interests to control the situation and choosing to sacrifice more legal interests of life to control the situation obviously has the intention of depriving others of their lives. At the same time, it also shows that the police who make this kind of behavior lack the concept of respecting people and life, and the improper behavior of treating citizens' lives does not conform to the basic professional ethics and professionalism of a people's police.
Under what circumstances can the police kill people?
If the objects and targets of guards, guards and watchdogs specified by the state are attacked or destroyed by violence, or are in imminent danger of being attacked or destroyed by violence, the police can only shoot in case of legal emergency and the warning is invalid. The police have strict restrictions on shooting, and they can only shoot in special emergencies. If it is serious enough to endanger public safety, it can be shot.
I hope the above content can help you. Please consult a professional lawyer if you have any other questions.
Legal basis: People's Republic of China (PRC) Criminal Law.
Article 20
Self-defense in order to protect national interests, public interests, personal, property and other rights of oneself or others from ongoing illegal infringement, and stop illegal infringement, thus causing damage to the illegal infringer, it belongs to self-defense and does not bear criminal responsibility.
If justifiable defense obviously exceeds the necessary limit and causes great damage, criminal responsibility shall be borne, but the punishment shall be mitigated or exempted.
Taking defensive actions against violent crimes such as assault, murder, robbery, rape, kidnapping, etc., which seriously endanger personal safety, and causing casualties to illegal infringers, is not excessive defense and does not bear criminal responsibility.