中华人民共和国人民警察使用警械和武器条例

第一章 总 则 第一条 为了保障人民警察依法履行职责,正确使用警械和武器,及时有效地制上违法犯罪行为,维护公共安全和社会秩序,保护公民的人身安全和合法财产,保护公共财产,根据《中华人民共和国人民警察法》和其他有关法律的规定,制定本条例。 第二条 人民警察制止违法犯罪行为,可以采取强制手段;根据需要,可以依照本条例的规定使用警械;使用警械不能制止,或者不使用武器制止,可能发生严重危害后果的,可以依照本条例的规定使用武器。     

口头制止运用方法浅析

口头制止是《公安机关人民警察现场制止违法犯罪行为操作规程》规定的处置措施之一。但现阶段公安民警在现场制止违法犯罪时存在不知、不用、不会使用口头制止处置措施等问题。影响到执法的进程和效果。可从转变执法理念、依法使用口头制止、口头制止方式适当、口头制止方法等四个方面探讨公安民警口头制止处置措施规范化使用实现的途径,提升公安民警在实战中运用口头制止手段的能力。避免不必要的执法对抗和产生不良执法效果,以体现规范执法,保障人权,促进社会和谐发展的要求。     

人民警察警械和武器使用的法律思考

人民警察警械和武器的正当使用,主要是为了有效的制止和打击违法犯罪行为,是为了确保社会公共利益以及公民的合法权益,同时还是维护人民警察自身的合法权益的需求。在人民警察警械和武器的使用过程中,还需要注意其法律依据。本文就人民警察使用警械、武器应该遵循的原则和使用的具体要求进行分析研究,以便规范人民警察使用警械和武器行为,从而有效的确保各方面的利益,有效的提高人民警察使用警械和武器的合法性和准确性。     

警察用枪的法治考量

2014年4月初,公安部启动武器警械使用专项训练,全国公安民警特别是街面巡逻、处突一线的基层警察,进行为期3个月的武器警械专项训练,目的是让基层民警在处置暴力犯罪时,能有效使用武器警械,及时制止犯罪的发生.这一举措无疑有着强烈的现实背景.与此同时,专项训练也再次将用枪的公共议题凸现出来,需要我们从更为广阔的视野来予以法治考量.     

内江处置暴力拒捕的做法与思考

持枪、持械抢劫、爆炸、绑架人质的一些犯罪嫌疑人为逃避法律制裁,公然用武力抗拒公安民警抓捕,是当前暴力犯罪的一个新特点、新趋势。现结合四川省内江市两年多来公安民警正确使用武器,依法击毙19名暴力拒捕犯罪嫌疑人的情况,就公安民警如何正确处置暴力拒捕犯罪嫌疑人作一些分析思考,供领导决策和民警们抓捕     

中国警察使用武器的法定要件及规则

中国警察武力法规定了警察使用武器的主体要件、客体要件、主观要件和客观要件,且每一要件均包涵一些特定规则。人民警察只有全面、准确、深刻地理解这些要件和规则,才能把握使用武器的特定内涵,才能严格做到依法使用武器。     

试论武警部队使用警械武器的原则

武警部队是我国享有警械武器使用权的主体之一,根据其所担负的任务,使用警械武器应遵循的原则可以归纳为合法性原则、程序性原则和比例原则。     

警用防暴棍的开发与创新研究

1国内外研究现状述评及研究意义警械是指人民警察依法武装配备的对人犯用的强制性专用器械。其作用是为了制服违法犯罪分子和重大嫌疑人,防止可能行凶、自杀、自伤、逃脱或其他危险行为。通常分为约束性警械和制伏性警械两种。警察防暴棍主要是公安机关人民警察     

论警察防卫行为正当性的判断 ——以“庆安火车站警察枪击事件”为例的分析

对警察防卫行为正当性判断必须进行实质性的审查。规范依据是刑法中的正当防卫的规定,行政法中的相关限制警械、武器使用的规定是防卫相当性的类型化、具体化规定。对于防卫限度的认定应该考虑具体案件事实的基础上,以行为时一般的理智第三人的立场进行判断。据此,“庆安火车站警察枪击事件”应属于正当防卫。解释论的角度只是权宜之计,还应该从立法论的角度系统解决警察防卫问题。     

正当防卫立法的修改与完善

正当防卫立法的修改与完善周柏森方克勤正当防卫是刑法中一个很重要的法律制度，是国家赋予公民同违法犯罪行为作斗争的武器。实践证明，如果从立法和执法上解决好正当防卫问题，不仅能保护人民群众的合法利益，而且能够及时制止各种不同形式的违法犯罪行为的侵害。新刑法...     

运用刑法武器打击恐怖主义犯罪

武警部队处置恐怖事件,必须注重运用法律武器,彰显法律的力量。由于恐怖主义活动是一种严重的刑事犯罪,所以在对恐怖分子进行法律战时,刑法是一部必用的法律。在反恐法律战中,如果能够运用好刑法,完全可以为我方赢得战机,以期达到"不战而屈人之兵"的目的。     

Police use of deadly force: Research and reform

Police use of deadly force first became a major public issue in the 1960s, when many urban riots were precipitated immediately by police killings of citizens. Since that time scholars have studied deadly force extensively, police practitioners have made significant reforms in their policies and practices regarding deadly force, and the United States Supreme Court has voided a centuries-old legal principle that authorized police in about one-half the states to use deadly force to apprehend unarmed, nonviolent, fleeing felony suspects. This essay reviews and interprets these developments.     

Police use of force against drug suspects: Understanding the legal need for policy development

When confronted by the police, drug suspects sometimes attempt to destroy evidence by orally ingesting the contraband in their possession. Police officers have limited time to react before this evidence is destroyed. These conditions raise the question of exactly how much force officers may employ lawfully to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence. If an officer overreacts and uses more force than reasonably necessary to retrieve the drugs, the evidence may be ruled as inadmissible at trial. Furthermore, the application of excessive force may expose the officer and the agency to claims of civil liability for injury or damages. Given the myriad of legal questions arising within this unique context, this paper reviews relevant federal and state case law to assess the legality of various levels of force when resolving such situations. Law enforcement agencies need to develop appropriate policy statements to guide officer behavior during these types of field encounters.     

香港警队枪械训练对内地警察武器使用训练的启示

依法使用武器是法律赋予警察的权力，是维护社会治安、惩治违法犯罪、保护人民群众和警察生命安全的有力武器。而警察武器使用的训练是一个技能与法律法规密切结合的实战训练，也是一个不断发现问题和解决问题，熟能生巧的、有制度的、严格规范的、长期的、永恒的训练过程。香港警队的警务实战训练代表了世界最先进、最科学、最实用的训练水平，他们的枪械训练为内地警察武器使用的训练提供了很好的训练思路和训练方向。在目前形势下，我们应借鉴香港警队先进的训练理念和训练模式，开拓我们的思路，促使我们的警察武器使用训练发生质的变化，走上一个崭新的台阶，使训练与实际执法真正的结合起来。     

武警部队立法问题探析

武警部队是我国一支重要的武装力量。随着武警部队任务职能的增多和专业化,仅仅以军事法作为武警部队管理和遂行任务的法律依据不够全面。结合武警部队的领导体制、性质职能和立法现状,完善武警立法是一个颇为重要的问题。     

论“电子警察”取证的合法性

电子警察是道路交通管理部门用以获取道路交通违法行为信息，获取违法证据的交通技术监控设备。在目前电子警察广泛运用的同时，电子警察记录、固定违法行为证据是否具有合法性．尚没有形成广泛的共识。本文首先分析了电子警察取证的特征、与交通警察取证的区别，以及交通警察取证的本质；其次。论证了电子警察的法律地位，提出电子警察是交通管理部门设置、代表交通管理部门、代替交通警察记录、固定交通违法行为证据的拟制人的观点；最后从电子警察取证的法律依据、取证的形式、取证的种类以及程序方面论述了电子警察取证的合法性。     

The Federal Gendarmerie in Austria

Editor's Note: Mr. Robert Harnischmacher is a West German free-lance writer and lecturer in the Legal Sciences and Police Affairs, with a background in the German military and the Japanese martial arts. The author has been involved in developing unarmed combat skills for various German police forces and a number of foreign countries. His articles on self-defense, criminology and police history and administration have been published in the police publications of Germany, Austria, Australia, Canada, the United States, Ireland, New Zealand, Switzerland and Britain. Mr. Harnischmacher has also written some judicial books regarding the police in West Germany. He has traveled widely and delivered many speeches and lectures including highly selective and sensitive topics to highly selected audiences. He is currently an Honorary Deputy Sheriff of San Diego County in California as well as an Honor member of the San Diego Crime Commission. The Editor takes this opportunity to thank Mr. Harnischmacher for his contributions to the journal and anticipates his further cooperation in disseminating his experiences and expertise through the journal. Mr. Harnischmacher has published several articles through this journal in previous volumes.     

A Study of The New Board of Police Commissioners System in Korea

The Police Commissioners System was established on May 31, 1992 with the legislation of the Police Law in Korea. The main objective of this system, which is comprised of members from the civilian sector, is to check and regulate the activities of police, in an attempt to achieve a more democratic execution of police administration. This article attempts to analyze the problems of the current Police Commissioners System as established and thus provide some policy suggestions.     

The effects of supervisor education and training on police use of force

Police supervisors play a critical role in preventing unreasonable use of force. Despite their importance, only a few studies have examined the influences of supervisors on their subordinates’ daily practices, especially on their uses of police force. To bridge this gap, the current study explored the relationship between supervisors’ education level and use of force training and subordinate officers’ use of force practices. Using police use of force reports from 2004 to 2007 in a single urban police department, the current study examined how supervisor education and training impact on police use-of-force and found both highly educated and trained supervisors moderate their subordinate officers’ uses of higher levels of force.     

Attitudes of police officers toward their professional ethics

Professions are guided by codes of ethics to aid them in performance of their duties and to ensure maintenance of high standards of conduct. Police officers are faced with a maze of obligations in the performance of their official duties. The “Law Enforcement Code of Ethics” and “Canons of Police Ethics” were created to make explicit the conduct considered appropriate for police officers and to guide them in the performance of their duties.This study investigates how police officers in several police agencies view their professional ethics. Some of the broader questions examined in the study are the following: Do police officers have a clear understanding of the “Law Enforcement Code of Ethics” and the “Canons of Police Ethics?” Do they feel constrained by agency, societal, or other factors from behaving professionally? Do they consider their ethics adequate to guide professional conduct, and are they willing to abide by the principles? The responses indicate reliance on personal ethics in situations where standard police ethics are not clear, and suggest the need for further research in police ethics.