The measurement of specialization and escalation in the criminal career: An alternative modeling strategy

Recent research using indices of specialization and escalation, such as the forward specialization coefficient and the escalation coefficient, have generally shown that repeat offenders tend to commit the same type or a more serious type of crime on successive arrests. Unfortunately, there are two important limitations to the use of specialization and escalation indices: (1) the meaning and interpretation of the coefficients is often unclear, and (2) the coefficients cannot be tested for statistical significance across groups. In an attempt to account for these limitations and to extend prior research in this area, this paper applies a class of log-linear models developed for studying social mobility tables with matched categories (for one or more groups) to crime-type switching tables. The benefits of using these models, in comparison with prior specialization and escalation research, are that the parameter estimates can be interpreted directly as tests of specialization and escalation in a meaningful way and the parameter estimates can be tested for equality across groups, such as age, race, and gender. The application and interpretation of these models are illustrated with arrest data from a sample of felony offenders in Michigan.     

中国成功解决民族问题的道路

我国是一个多民族的国家,正确处理民族问题至关重要。坚持民族平等、民族团结和民族区域自治,贯彻落实以人为本、全面、协调、可持续的科学发展观,促进各民族共同团结奋斗、共同繁荣发展,是适合中国国情的、具有中国特色的解决民族问题的正确道路。     

Regulation by generalization

Both criminal and regulatory laws have traditionally been skeptical of what Jeremy Bentham referred to as evidentiary offenses – the prohibition (or regulation) of some activity not because it is wrong, but because it probabilistically (but not universally) indicates that a real wrong has occurred. From Bentham to the present, courts and theorists have worried about this form of regulation, believing that certainly in the criminal law context, but even with respect to regulation, it is wrong to impose sanctions on a “Where there’s smoke there’s fire” theory of governmental intervention. Yet, although this kind punishment by proxy continues to be held in disrepute both in courts and in the published work, we argue that this distaste is unwarranted. Regulating – even through the criminal law – by regulating intrinsically innocent activities that probabilistically, but not inexorably, indicate not‐so‐innocent activities is no different from the vast number of other probabilistic elements that pervade the regulatory process. Once we recognize the frequency with which we accept probabilistic but not certain burdens of proof, probabilistic but not certain substantive rules, and probabilistic but not certain pieces of evidence, we can see that defining offenses and regulatory targets in terms of non‐wrongful behavior that is evidence of wrongful behavior is neither surprising nor inadvisable.     

想象竞合犯处罚原则新探

想象竞合犯在罪质上兼具一罪与数罪的特征,对其处罚原则的理解、界定在立法和学理上有种种不同的主张.在我国刑法基本理论的框架中,基于想象竞合犯罪质不法内涵和罪刑法定原则的制约,对"从一重重处断"提出质疑,进而对"从一重处断"的内涵解析与重构,借鉴德、日立法例,提出以结合刑为内涵的"从一重处断"的处罚原则.     

论共有房屋转租中的优先购买权

共有房屋转租是当前市场经济中的普遍现象,但是我国现行的法律对此规定过于简单,在实践操作中遇到不少难题。租赁权是一种具有“物权化”的债权,其不利于保护善意的次承租人。当承租人的优先购买权和共有人的优先购买权竞合时,共有人的优先购买权优于承租人的优先购买权;当承租人、次承租人的优先购买权竞合时,次承租人的优先购买权优先于承租人的优先购买权;共有人与次承租人的优先购买权竞合时,共有人的优先购买权应当优先于次承租人的优先购买权。     

契约式治安保险联防——一种探索中的中国现代辅警机制

随着我国经济社会的发展,维护社会治安已经不仅仅是公安机关自己的事情了。如何在强调警察职能转变的基础上,充分发挥和挖掘社会力量在社会治安秩序维护中的作用与潜能;如何使社会力量与公安机关形成良性互动,构建具有中国特色的现代辅警机制,契约式治安保险联防树立了一个新典型。     

对刑法第133条"逃逸"的逻辑解释——以加重犯为视角

刑法第133条第二段和第三段规定的两处"逃逸",在罪刑理论上意义不同。各处"逃逸"的法律属性及功能应根据交通肇事基本罪的成立与否来决定。当基本罪成立时,第二段的"逃逸"属于加重处罚情节,第三段的"逃逸致人死亡"是基本罪的结果加重犯。其中,在基本罪无死亡结果情形下的"逃逸"又导致死亡结果时,为基本罪的(行为结果的)复合加重犯。当基本罪不成立时,第二段的"逃逸"是以交通肇事行为为基础的犯罪构成要件的内容,具有被独立评价的地位;第三段的"逃逸致人死亡"是以第二段"逃逸"为原因力的结果加重犯。现行的立法规定是以"逃逸"为重叠要素的两个加重结构的简化形式。     

论共有的法律适用——以《物权法》为视角

物权法中的共有是指不动产或者动产的所有权共有,仅为狭义的共有。广义的共有尚包括所有权以外的财产权共有和准共有。将共有作狭义和广义区分,才能更好地衔接《物权法》与《民法通则》及《民通意见》中有关共有规定的关系。共有类型没有约定或者约定不明确时,应推定为按份共有。按份共有人约定不得分割共有物,而共有物经占份额2/3以上的共有人同意而被处分时,其他共有人有转让自己所持份额的权利。共有物分割请求权应视具体情形来确定其权利性质是请求权还是形成权。     

P2P网络借贷犯罪侦防研究

P2P网络借贷作为互联网金融的一种创新模式,在当前得到蓬勃发展,但由于其目前尚无相关法律、法规以及行业标准对其进行规范和监管,使得一些受不法利益驱动的经营者利用P2P网贷平台私设资金池,违规动用资金,吸取高额利息,严重者甚至涉嫌非法吸收公众存款、集资诈骗以及洗钱等犯罪。对此,公安机关经侦部门应当积极应对,及时打击利用P2P网贷平台实施的犯罪案件,并配合相关行业、部门逐步建立起P2P网贷的监管平台和监管机制。