Third, ways to reduce college students' crime
(1) Punishing college students who commit crimes is the most direct way to reduce crimes. It has two functions: on the one hand, it greatly reduces and controls the possibility of criminal college students committing crimes again through fines or imprisonment, on the other hand, it also plays a certain role in warning and preventing crimes for other college students. However, for the implementation and effect of this method, the theoretical circle holds different attitudes, and there are mainly three viewpoints.
Some people think that the method of conviction and sentencing is not ideal for juvenile delinquency, especially if the circumstances of the first crime are not too serious. On the contrary, if we teach them, after they realize that their actions have done harm to society and have the meaning of repentance, we may postpone the prosecution and give them a chance to turn over a new leaf and let them study and live in a normal environment. In fact, in view of the fact that most college students who commit crimes do well in school, most schools hope that the judicial organs will handle them lightly after they break the law. The victims wrote letters to the judicial organs, some insisted on not investigating the criminal responsibility of the criminal suspect, and some demanded that the criminal suspect be dealt with lightly.
Based on the above opinions, not long ago, the first college student crime prevention center in China, which was just established by Nanjing Pukou Procuratorate, launched a new measure to suspend the prosecution of some plastic surgery students' criminal acts, but to deal with criminal college students fairly and fairly through help and education. At the same time, suggestions on the post-treatment of college students' crimes are formulated to make the post-treatment of college students have rules to follow, strengthen coordination and contact with colleges and universities, prevent and deal with college students' crimes, and reduce the crime rate of college students.
As soon as this news came out, it was immediately opposed by many people, who thought that this move violated the principle of equality before the law in the Constitution and violated judicial justice. Some people even think that this is actually the law conniving at college students' crimes and cultivating "criminal elites" for the society. If this kind of law is implemented throughout the country, there will be more and more high-tech crimes. These opponents point out that college students should be treated equally in committing crimes, and tolerance means trampling on the fairness and notarization of the law. As college students, their ability to learn knowledge should know more about right and wrong and what is illegal and criminal behavior. At present, the law is merciful to their criminal behavior outside the law, and thinks that college students' crime is a slip, and talents are rare. The law should adopt a tolerant policy towards them, which can only play a conniving role. There are many people who regret after committing a crime, and the law never changes its principles because of the repentance of criminals.
However, some people in the legal profession believe that the legal provisions are ruthless, and some hard rules do not allow human operation. It is a crime to reach a certain amount standard and a certain plot. However, if we can analyze specific problems, we can not only break through the legal boundaries, but also make innovations and breakthroughs, taking into account fairness, justice and openness, which is naturally the best solution, and this issue needs urgent research from all walks of life.
In practice, the attitude adopted by the court is: probation should be applied as far as possible according to law. In order to save their blunders and enable them to complete their studies, some courts try to apply non-custodial sentences to college students when sentencing, except putting them in juvenile courts for trial. For example, in 2002, 4 1.8% of criminal college students were sentenced to probation.
But from the current case, this ratio is not high. In practice, the court also realized that one of the main reasons for the low application rate of probation is that some colleges and universities, based on the consideration of their school rules and discipline management, expel all college students who violate the law and commit crimes regardless of the situation. For college students living in other places, even if they have the subjective conditions for probation, they lose the objective conditions for probation because of the exclusion of their universities, so the court can only apply imprisonment to them.
The author believes that the new measures of Nanjing Pukou Procuratorate can be used for reference, while opponents tend to simply "label" the problem. Because, first of all, the deferred prosecution system conforms to the criminal law theory of individualization of punishment and contributes to the realization of penalty function. In the past, punishment was often a mechanical confrontation against crime, and little attention was paid to the actual effect of punishment. In modern society, the focus of punishment has shifted from crime to criminals. When applying punishment, we should pay attention to the education and reform of criminals in order to prevent criminals from committing crimes again. Penalty from focusing on the past to focusing on the future has become one of the same trends in the evolution of penalty; Secondly, for society, any crime is a kind of loss, and legal responsibility is not only to punish crimes, but also to prevent crimes and reduce losses. Judging from the punishment, most college students who commit crimes are fined separately, and a few are punished. From a legal point of view, some of these students really don't need to be arrested and have a great chance to turn over a new leaf. However, schools often indulge students, which is actually irresponsible. It should be said that it is a rational choice for procuratorial organs to take such measures to let students finish their studies first. After all, the opportunity to learn is hard-won, and it is not easy for society to train a college student. And in the case that non-prosecution has little or even good influence on a person's transformation, why not choose not to prosecute? Moreover, the deferred prosecution system also has the value of litigation economic benefits, which reduces the investment and consumption of judicial resources. Of course, the application of deferred prosecution in criminal cases should be selective, only applicable to those first-time offenders who are subjectively vicious, can be reformed, have not caused serious social harm, and can sincerely repent, and not applicable to those die-hards who are subjectively vicious, have bad records and refuse to change their minds, and should be punished accordingly.