The child was robbed and the father beat the trafficker to death, is it justified defense?

I think this father's behavior is justified defense, because when the traffickers are carrying knives and guns to the child, everyone will go up and fight and then save the child, so I understand the father's behavior.

I don't think it's justified because the traffickers didn't endanger my father's life.

It should be determined according to the actual situation, this situation is more complicated, if the other party has been snatching the child from him, bringing danger to himself and the child, it must be justified defense.

It is not justified defense. The other party did not beat you, and you went to hit someone, which means that it is the crime of intentional injury. Yes, there will be a sentence.

This is justified self-defense, but you'd better turn yourself in, so you can get a lighter punishment because you're taking human life.

There is nothing wrong with justifiable defense! If you don't kill the child, you will be snatched away! What's more, human traffickers are also punishable by death.

Sometimes when the deterrence cannot achieve the deterrent effect and cannot protect one's own interests, the price paid must be done by oneself, not only for oneself, but also to deter similar crimes in the future!

The duel is justified defense, and you deserve to die!

Justified defense, but also for the people to eliminate harm, award certificates.

Counted as a people's hero,

This should be counted as the way of heaven.

Justified defense plus righteousness and courage. To be rewarded!

The definition of justifiable defense is vague and uncertain, and sometimes it is too lenient for the bad guys and too powerful for the good guys!

Well played! One less harmful spirit!

Traffickers should be cut with a thousand cuts!

Does it need to be a miss?

Do you protect human traffickers and support human trafficking in our country?

In the United States, the jury was found not guilty.

Eliminate harm for the people and benefit one party.

Then what is there to defend yourself?

It counts as justifiable self-defense, because the trafficker's actions are illegal, and there is no criminal liability for violence against the traffickers to stop such violations.

If it is killed in the course of a fight between the trafficker and himself for a child, it is justified defense. If the child is safe and the trafficker is killed by himself while escaping, it is not justified defense.

No, this is already intentional injury to others, and it also has to bear the corresponding criminal responsibility, but the punishment is still relatively light.

This is because the other party has already committed the act of child trafficking, and this is also considered legitimate defense, and then it will not be punished accordingly.

It should be counted, if you don't beat this trafficker to death, then your child will be lost, and you will never be able to come back, this behavior is also correct, in order to protect your child.

It is justified defense, because the father did not mean it, it was the trafficker's fault first, and if the father did not attack him, his child might be snatched by the traffickers, so it is considered justified defense.

The child was robbed and the father beat the trafficker to death, this cannot be regarded as legitimate defense, it is excessive defense, and it is necessary to bear legal responsibility.

It can't be considered legitimate defense, this is excessive defense, the child is robbed, you catch the trafficker, you should hand over the trafficker to the public security department, not beat him to death.

Of course, it is justified defense, but some evidence is required, otherwise it is difficult to define justifiable defense, and the father can beat the trafficker, but there will be excessive defense.

After reading it, what I said is not right, let me give you the most correct answer.

Traffickers, depending on his specific behavior.

If he is only trafficking in human beings, such as stealing, cheating, etc., and the trafficker commits the crime of human trafficking, then the father finds out and beats the trafficker to death, which is excessive defense.

If he snatches the child, or fights with the father to tear up the child after being discovered, it is a crime of kidnapping, then killing him casually is not excessive defense, but the father, all the people in the neighborhood can help, and they all enjoy unlimited defense.

The key is whether the traffickers have committed kidnapping.

I don't think so, because my father didn't have to do it, it was over-defense.

This is not justified defense, child abduction and trafficking is a felony, but compared to the current stage of China's law to convict, it is difficult to sentence the death penalty, in the process of beating the other party to death, parents also need to bear the corresponding criminal responsibility.

This is not justified self-defense, justifiable defense is excessive, and it is suspected of intentional homicide.

In this case, if the child kills the trafficker, this is justified defense, and generally speaking, the child is not responsible, and if the child is under the age of 16, he is not required to bear criminal responsibility.

Children don't need to be held accountable and will be praised, traffickers are already guilty of violating the law, and children are all doing it for their own preservation.

Then there is no need to be responsible, because the child is not yet an adult, so he does not need to be criminally responsible. And he's just trying to protect himself.