社会危害性与刑事违法性辨析--重在从"罪刑法定"视角观之

一个时期以来,社会危害性与刑事违法性的争论越来越引起人们的极大关注。社会危害性与刑事违法性是属于两个不同学科、不同领域的问题。在“罪刑法定”原则下,社会危害性更应当回归于犯罪学之中,而在刑法学中用法益侵害和严重的法益侵害取而代之,并且它们只有被明确规定在刑法中才能叫刑法法益侵害。这样规定,不仅剔除了“社会危害性”这一宏观、模糊的、甚至易受主观价值取向改变的犯罪定义标准,而且有利于刑事司法操作。     

ENTER THE DRAGON: INSIDE CHINESE HUMAN SMUGGLING ORGANIZATIONS*

This paper examines the inner workings of Chinese human smuggling organizations. Contrary to widely held conceptions about Chinese organized crime, most alien smugglers are otherwise ordinary citizens whose familial networks and fortuitous social contacts have enabled them to pool resources to transport human cargoes around the world. They come from diverse backgrounds and form temporary alliances to carry out smuggling operations. With the exception of a shared commitment to making money, little holds them together. The smuggling organizations mostly resemble ad hoc task forces and are assembled for specific operations. These organizations have clear divisions of labor with limited hierarchical structures. We discuss the theoretical implications of their unique organizational characteristics.     

试论忘却犯的行为性

忘却犯是指负有防止危害结果发生义务的人因为疏忽大意的过失而未尽职责致使该结果发生从而构成的不纯正不作为犯。忘却犯是历来确定行为概念时不得不面临而又最难逾越的障碍。只有将行为定义为“体现了主体的心理事实、能对社会生活产生重大影响的身体动静”方可正确地说明“犯罪是行为”这一命题。     

论社会文化对犯罪界定的影响

犯罪虽然由法律所界定，但刑法在犯罪圈的划定上受到社会化的深刻制约，犯罪的范围界定在不同国家，不同历史时期也就不尽不致。立于社会化的视界，透视各种化现象和犯罪界定的联系，不难发现犯罪界定受到法化传统，社会哲学，社会道德和社会宗教等化因素直接而深刻的影响，所以，对犯罪的理解应当植根于化之中，了解并把握立干背后制约犯罪划定的社会化机理。     

犯罪源头-未成年人犯罪

当前,未成年人犯罪逐年增多,危害日益严重,且呈现出新的动向与特点.而未成年人犯罪是犯罪的源头,要遏制犯罪,必须分析未成年人犯罪的原因,从源头抓起,预防、治理青少年犯罪中的未成年人犯罪.     

青少年犯罪的环境预防研究

青少年犯罪率的久高不下促使人们对青少年犯罪预防的理论不断进行日益深入的研究和探索。本文作者以青少年犯罪主体的生活环境为视角,展开对青少年犯罪的环境预防研究。在宏观和微观两个方面加以探讨。宏观预防方面要做到:加强社会监督,密化预防网络;弘扬传统文化,净化社会环境;整顿文化市场,清理精神垃圾;针对青少年的身心发育特点,开展青春期教育和性教育。微观环境方面应当做到:加强家庭教育;搞好学校教育;加快文明社区建设;加强在岗青年职工教育;美化暂驻型微观环境。宏观预防与微观预防要密切配合、相互补充,共同实现青少年犯罪环境预防的宏伟和长远目标。     

论销赃罪的处罚

销赃罪是赃物犯罪的一种,该罪不但自身存在较大的危害性,其对本罪的刺激和帮助作用也是巨大的。但我国《刑法》仅对之规定了较低的法定刑,起不到应有的威慑作用。笔者认为,应提高销赃罪的法定刑,以加强对该罪的打击力度。     

The Market for Scientific Crime Prevention: A Comparative Study of Canada and Venezuela

Crime prevention is an activity that, sooner or later, requires the concourse of science. But the dictates of science may not mesh well with the social, institutional and political considerations that are persistent and powerful determinants of collective action. To the extent that they are ignored, crime prevention is less scientific and more pragmatic. Using a marketing metaphor, this paper examines selected aspects of the supply of and demand for scientific crime prevention in Canada and Venezuela from 1949 to the present. In both countries, academic entrepreneurs are revealed to be a necessary factor in the sale of crime prevention to government. On the demand side, governments adopt and adapt crime prevention policies in relation to their broader perspective on social problems and social change. However, rising crime rates and climates of urgency reduce the attractiveness of crime prevention. Scientific crime prevention is easier to sell when crime rates are stable or declining.     

浅析破坏生产经营罪

破坏生产经营罪本身的构成要件含糊不明,加之为顺应我国经济体制的变化,使法律适应客观形式的发展,1997年刑法将破坏集体生产罪修改为破坏生产经营罪,并对之进行体系结构归属调整。但也为此使刑法学者对破坏生产经营罪产生诸多争议。如此罪侵犯的客体是单一客体,还是复杂客体。特别是此罪容易与其他相关犯罪混淆,给司法实践带来不便。通过重新界定生产经营的内涵、犯罪的目的等,对其进行合理的限制解释,并将其与一些极易混淆的犯罪加以比较,进一步明确此罪。     

DOES CRIME JUST MOVE AROUND THE CORNER? A CONTROLLED STUDY OF SPATIAL DISPLACEMENT AND DIFFUSION OF CRIME CONTROL BENEFITS*

Recent studies point to the potential theoretical and practical benefits of focusing police resources on crime hot spots. However, many scholars have noted that such approaches risk displacing crime or disorder to other places where programs are not in place. Although much attention has been paid to the idea of displacement, methodological problems associated with measuring it have often been overlooked. We try to fill these gaps in measurement and understanding of displacement and the related phenomenon of diffusion of crime control benefits. Our main focus is on immediate spatial displacement or diffusion of crime to areas near the targeted sites of an intervention. Do focused crime prevention efforts at places simply result in a movement of offenders to areas nearby targeted sites—“do they simply move crime around the corner”? Or, conversely, will a crime prevention effort focusing on specific places lead to improvement in areas nearby—what has come to be termed a diffusion of crime control benefits? Our data are drawn from a controlled study of displacement and diffusion in Jersey City, New Jersey. Two sites with substantial street‐level crime and disorder were targeted and carefully monitored during an experimental period. Two neighboring areas were selected as “catchment areas” from which to assess immediate spatial displacement or diffusion. Intensive police interventions were applied to each target site but not to the catchment areas. More than 6,000 20‐minute social observations were conducted in the target and catchment areas. They were supplemented by interviews and ethnographic field observations. Our findings indicate that, at least for crime markets involving drugs and prostitution, crime does not simply move around the corner. Indeed, this study supports the position that the most likely outcome of such focused crime prevention efforts is a diffusion of crime control benefits to nearby areas.