《刑法修正案（十一）》出台后，《刑法》对袭警行为的规制由妨害公务罪的从重条款变为一种独立的犯罪类型。袭警罪的设立，在有效惩治暴力袭警行为的同时，也造成了一系列的司法适用问题。实践中，由于缺乏明确的裁判标准，各地法院对袭警案件的审理出现了大量同案不同判的现象。在此背景下，如何在司法实践中正确理解和适用袭警罪的规定，是目前极为紧迫的问题。

袭警罪的立法初衷在于保障人民警察的执法权，袭警行为本质上是对社会秩序管理的对抗。基于行为手段的特殊性、行为对象的明确性，行为人在实施暴力袭警行为时必然会威胁到人民警察的人身安全。因此，袭警罪的保护法益应当包括人民警察的执法权与人身安全。根据本罪的立法沿革，袭警罪脱胎于妨害公务罪，二者的保护法益具有延续性。根据本罪的体系定位，单独设立的袭警罪置于《刑法》的“妨害社会管理秩序罪”一章中。本罪的保护法益应当与其他同章节犯罪的保护法益在类型上保持一致。由于行为人并不具备特殊身份，对袭警行为从重处罚的原因是其侵犯了基本法益之外的其他法益，即人民警察的人身安全。根据本罪的规范设置，本罪的保护法益应与构成要件和不法程度相融洽。一方面，“袭击”要素强调对警察人身安全的保护，“执行职务”要素强调对警察公务活动的保护。另一方面，将袭警罪与故意伤害罪、故意杀人罪相对比，根据禁止间接处罚的原则，本罪的“暴力”不应当包括可能造成他人轻伤以下危险或结果的轻微暴力。将袭警罪与抢劫罪对比，袭警罪的保护法益亦应属于复合法益。

在袭警罪的基本犯构成要件要素中，应当将“暴力”界定为具有突袭性、人身伤害性的强制有形力，不包括软暴力与无形暴力，也不包括实践中仅是抵抗挣脱、消极抵抗、应激防卫等程度轻微且不足以真正妨碍人民警察执行职务或对其人身安全构成实际威胁的行为。在暴力的类型上，袭警罪的“暴力”限于狭义暴力，不包括对物暴力和间接暴力。在暴力的程度上，一方面，暴力要达到足以造成人民警察轻伤以上的程度。另一方面，暴力需要达到足以阻碍人民警察依法执行职务的程度。同时，本罪的成立不要求袭警行为造成实害结果。

袭警罪基本犯的主观罪过包含“阻碍正在依法执行的公务”及“暴力袭击人民警察”的双重目的，这种目的应当被理解为意志因素而非主观超过要素。行为人的主观罪过表现为“积极攻击故意”而非“消极抵抗故意”。抽象危险犯中，只要行为人实施危害行为就必然产生抽象危险，由此导致抽象危险不能被行为人的主观心理放任。袭警罪的基本犯只存在直接故意犯罪，不存在间接故意犯罪和过失犯罪。在判断辅警是否属于袭警罪的保护对象时，应当着重判断辅警能否获得合法的执法地位与资格。当辅警单独执行职务时，由于其不具备合法的执法资格，暴力袭击辅警的不能适用袭警罪的规定。当辅警正在配合人民警察依法执行职务时，由于辅警依法具备相应的执法资格，其职务行为因此受到保护，暴力袭击辅警的应当适用袭警罪的规定。此外，人民警察“正在”执行的职务必须具备合法性及适时性。只有在紧急情况下，非工作时间执法的警察的行为才具有合法性。

在袭警罪的加重犯构成要件要素中，行为人使用特定工具或手段的行为应当严格受到“严重危及其人身安全”的限制。行为人使用的工具或手段应当与袭警罪加重犯所列举的物品或手段具有同等的危险性，且相应物品或手段应当被有意识地作为危险工具或手段，直接作用于人民警察的身体。在犯罪形态上，袭警罪的加重犯应当被归类为具体危险犯，这种具体危险是“结果化”的危险，具备《刑法》意义上的社会危害性，能被行为人的主观心理所放任，由此导致本罪的加重犯允许间接故意犯罪的存在。

袭警罪与一般违法行为的区分遵循“刑事法定性、刑事法定量”的原则。达不到行政处罚标准的袭警行为不构成袭警罪；与妨害公务罪的规定相比，袭警罪的规定为特别法，两者存在法条竞合关系；而与故意伤害罪、故意杀人罪相区别时，根据行为的危害程度，若处在袭警罪的法定刑幅度能够评价的范围，相关行为应被优先认定为构成袭警罪；若超出袭警罪的评价范围，则应按想象竞合犯进行处理。基于我国《刑法》第13条但书的存在，行为在构成犯罪时，需要满足“质”和“量”的要求，犯罪构成需要满足形式要件与实质要件的统一。就袭警罪的出罪路径而言，应充分利用《刑法》第13条但书的规定，兼顾行为的实质内容和危害程度。

The original legislative intent of the crime of assaulting the police is to protect the law enforcement power of the people's police, and the act of assaulting the police is essentially a confrontation with the management of social order, and based on the particularity of the means of conduct and the clarity of the target of the act, the perpetrator will inevitably threaten the personal safety of the people's police when committing violent attacks on the police. Due to the particularity of the methods used to attack the police and the specificity of the target, violent attacks on the police will inevitably threaten the personal safety of the people's police. Second, from the perspective of the systematic positioning of this crime, although the crime of assaulting the police was established separately, it is still placed under the chapter of "crimes against the order of social management" in the Criminal Law. The protection of legal interests in this crime shall be consistent in type with other crimes in the same chapter. In addition, since the perpetrator of the assault on the police does not have a special identity in his or her own right, the reason for the heavier punishment for the assault on the police is that he violates other legal interests other than the basic legal interests, that is, the personal safety of the people's police. Third, from the perspective of the normative setting of this crime, the protection of legal interests of this crime should be in harmony with the constituent elements and the degree of illegality. According to the principle of prohibiting indirect punishment, the "violence" of this crime should not include minor violence that may cause the risk or result of minor injury to others. The legal interests protected by the crime of robbery are compound legal interests, and it should also be compound legal interests.

"Violent assault" shall be defined as a coercive physical force that is sudden or physically harmful, and does not include soft violence or invisible violence, nor does it include conduct that in practice is only minor in resistance to breaking free, passive resistance, stress defense, and is not sufficient to truly impede the people's police's performance of their duties or pose an actual threat to their physical safety. It is not required that the perpetrator's conduct cause actual harm to the personal safety of the people's police. On the other hand, violence must be high enough to impede law enforcement.

The subjective guilt of the basic crime of assaulting a police officer includes the dual purpose of "obstructing the official duties being carried out in accordance with the law" and "violently attacking the people's police", and this purpose should be understood as a volitional factor rather than a subjective overriding element. The subjective guilt of the perpetrator is manifested in the form of "active aggression with intent" rather than "passive resistance with intent". In the case of abstract dangerous offenders, as long as the perpetrator commits a harmful act, an abstract danger will inevitably arise, resulting in an abstract danger that cannot be allowed by the subjective psychology of the perpetrator. The basic offense of assaulting a police officer is only a direct intentional crime, and there is no indirect intentional crime or negligent crime. Emphasis shall be placed on determining whether the auxiliary police can obtain lawful law enforcement status and qualifications. When an auxiliary police officer performs his or her duties alone, the provisions on assaulting a police officer cannot be applied to a person who violently assaults an auxiliary police officer because he does not have the legal qualifications to enforce the law. Tthe provisions on the crime of assaulting police shall be applied to violent attacks on auxiliary police because the auxiliary police have the corresponding law enforcement qualifications in accordance with law, and their conduct in their duties is therefore protected. In addition, the duties that the people's police are "doing" must be lawful and timely. The actions of police officers who enforce the law outside of working hours are legal only in emergency situations.

Among the elements of the aggravating circumstance of the crime of assaulting police, the perpetrator's use of specific tools or means shall be strictly restricted from "seriously endangering his or her personal safety". The tools or methods used by the perpetrator shall be as dangerous as those listed in the aggravated crime of assaulting police, and the corresponding items or means shall be consciously used as dangerous tools or means to directly act on the bodies of the people's police. In terms of the form of the crime, the aggravated offender of the crime of assaulting the police should be classified as a specific dangerous offender, and this specific danger is a "resultal" danger, which has the social harm in the sense of the Criminal Law, and can be indulged by the subjective psychology of the perpetrator, resulting in the aggravated offense of this crime allowing the existence of indirect intentional crimes.

Assault on police that does not meet the standards for administrative punishment does not constitute the crime of assaulting police. When distinguishing it from the crimes of intentional injury or intentional homicide, based on the degree of harm of the conduct, if it is within the scope of the statutory range of punishment for the crime of assaulting police, the relevant conduct should be preferentially found to constitute the crime of assaulting police; If it exceeds the scope of the evaluation of the crime of assaulting the police, it should be dealt with as an imaginary conspiracy. Based on the existence of the proviso to Article 13 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, when an act constitutes a crime, it needs to meet the requirements of "quality" and "quantity", and the composition of a crime needs to meet the unity of formal and substantive elements.