受到唯结果论与客观主义的影响，我国正当防卫条款自诞生之日起就一直受到“僵尸化”问题的困扰。尽管我国刑法学界在研究中偏爱徳日法律，但是单纯依靠徳日理论已经难以对我国正当防卫适用问题的解决提出新的思路。而美国正当防卫制度中的主观主义、城堡规则、受虐妇女综合症等内容对于解决我国正当防卫适用困境则具有积极意义。因此，为解决我国适用困境，有必要对美国制度展开全面研究，明确其背后的法律文化背景，理解其具体规定的产生原因、适用形式、相互作用，再根据我国司法实务中的具体问题加以借鉴。整个研究脉络将从背景介绍到美国制度研究再到中国制度“僵尸化”问题的解决。无论是美国制度研究部分还是解决问题部分都围绕理论、构成条件、特殊类型三大核心，并结合两国的实际案例，探讨相关规定或解释在司法实务过程中的适用形式，使研究结果最终能够落到实处，激活我国正当防卫制度。具体的研究内容将包括以下几个方面：

第一章，对中美两国之间正当防卫领域的相关术语进行对接，对美国正当防卫制度的发展历史、政治特色进行梳理，提炼出美国正当防卫制度深层的暴力性、歧视性与不公平性，并对当代的过度扩张发出预警。

第二章，当前美国较为完善的正当性理论是较小罪恶理论。这一理论将攻击者责任、个人自治、社会法律秩序这几大核心因素全部纳入自身的框架之内，使各因素之间能够互相取长补短，具有普遍适用性。

第三章，分析美国正当防卫的七个构成条件及其特点。在适用范围方面，它具有无限性，且保护一切合法的个人利益与公共利益。在危害行为方面，它包含一切“不正当”的行为，强调无辜攻击者行为的不法性，且这一攻击无论从形式上还是损害程度上都不受任何限制。在紧迫性方面，考虑到某些并不紧迫但必然发生的未来结果，不应该将紧迫性视作独立条件，而可以考虑将其视为必要性条件的判断因素之一。在必要性方面，它的产生是基于对社会法律秩序的考量，评判必要性必须基于行为本身的武力程度和实际手段而非最终结果。在相称性方面，比较的是防卫行为造成的预期结果与其避免的损害结果。在合理确信方面，它强调理性人标准的重要性，但需要否定过度主观化的理性人标准。在退避义务方面，退避义务主要通过城堡规则豁免，而随着城堡规则的革新退避义务在现代美国正当防卫制度中正在逐渐消亡。

第四章，分析三种特殊类型正当防卫的成立条件。首先是防卫自身。需要关注不完全自卫、受虐妇女的防卫和针对心理攻击的防卫。不完全自卫的实质是一种从宽处罚方式，能够对因为缺失条件而无法成立正当防卫的行为降低罪名处罚。受虐妇女的行为由于特殊心态的影响，很难成立正当防卫，所以美国通过对受虐妇女综合症专家证据的使用，改善正当防卫在此类人群中的适用困境。针对心理攻击的防卫虽有一定必要性，但目前还只是学者理论并未付诸实践。其次是防卫他人。影响正当防卫成立的主要是防卫人的权利来源，共有两类学说，其中，合理表象规则强调防卫人的合理确信，实际处境规则强调客观事实。前者可能会导致防卫权利的滥用，后者则一定程度上会抑制防卫他人行为的发生，美国目前采用的是前者。再次是防卫财产。主要分为防卫一般财产与防卫住宅。在防卫一般财产中受保护对象是合法占有而非所有，通常不允许使用致命性防卫武力但可以使用一般武力自行恢复占有。在防卫住宅中，影响正当防卫成立的是住宅的定义与致命性武力的使用问题。当前美国的住宅定义正在向空间与属性两方面不断扩张，并借此侵蚀退避义务的存在范围，从而实现对正当防卫领域的扩张。而美国对致命性武力的明确规定则在一定程度上使这种扩张被限制在合理的范围之内。最后是执法防卫。美国在执法防卫层面赋予了警察过多使用暴力的权限，虽然已经通过宪法加以限制但实际情况依然并不乐观。

第五章，我国的不少正当防卫理论都存在一定缺陷，法益衡量是其中较为完善且在司法人员中认可度较高的主流学说。但由于对法益衡量的错误理解，对抽象利益的过度忽视，以及我国传统思维的影响，我国司法人员容易出现唯结果论。通过美国较小罪恶理论对我国法益衡量的修正，将法秩序与攻击者罪责纳入衡量范围，提高对抽象利益的重视，能够有效缓解我国的唯结果论，减少理论困境对正当防卫适用的消极影响。

第六章，构成条件的缺陷同样是致使我国正当防卫“僵尸化”的原因之一。就不法侵害范围来说，我国范围过窄，针对轻微不法的防卫很难具有正当性，美国不法侵害中对抽象利益与轻微利益的重视值得我们借鉴。就判断标准来说，我国的客观标准高估了行为人能力，忽视了行为人的主观认识，应该借鉴美国的合理确信进行一定的主观化改造。就防卫限度来说，我国在对“必要限度”与“重大损害”的解释上存在错误，容易模糊正当行为与过当行为的边界。应该借鉴美国的相称性与必要性条件，将防卫行为造成的预期结果与避免的损害结果进行衡量，明确致命性武力的适用情况减少法官自由裁量，对多人攻击行为进行分别衡量并以判例形式改变认识错误。需要注意的是，我国当前已经明显出现对正当防卫的过度纠偏趋势，为了防止这种激进思想给我国正当防卫制度造成不可逆的消极影响，应该考虑借鉴美国的退避义务，将其作为评判致命性武力必要性的因素，根据具体情况设置不同的退避义务，防止权利的滥用。

第七章，特殊情况下正当防卫的成立困境同样会阻碍我国正当防卫制度的全面激活。我国当前正当防卫成立的特殊问题主要存在于以下几个方面：司法人员在瑕疵防卫人行为定性中存在道德洁癖；受虐妇女防卫行为难以获得正当性；入室侵害案件中正当防卫与防卫过当界限不明；警察防卫难以定性。就瑕疵防卫人的问题，美国虽然以不完全自卫对行为人从宽处罚，但我国部分学者却承认行为人先行行为合法时可以成立正当防卫。所以将我国学者观点向实践转化更有利于解决正当防卫的适用困境。就受虐妇女防卫的问题，我国虽然无法直接借鉴受虐妇女综合症证据，但却可以在衡量行为时加入对她们特殊心态的考量，通过判例的形式逐渐推广该证据类型的正确使用方式。就入室侵害案件中的防卫问题，我国同样无法直接借鉴美国的防卫住宅，但却应该充分考虑入户行为对防卫人心理与认识能力的影响。就警察防卫的问题，我国不应该认可美国的正当防卫定性，但应该学习美国限制鸣枪示警。

Affected by consequentialism and objectivism, China's justifiable defense clause has been troubled by the problem of "zombification" since its birth. Although the criminal law circle in our country prefers German and Japanese laws in the research, but it is difficult to put forward new ideas to solve the problem of the application of justifiable defense by relying solely on German and Japanese theories. The subjectivism, the castle rule and the battered woman syndrome in the American system of justifiable defense are of positive significance to solve the dilemma of the application of justifiable defense in China. Therefore, in order to solve the application dilemma in China, it is necessary to carry out a comprehensive study of the American system, clarify the legal cultural background behind it, understand the causes, application forms and interactions of its specific provisions, and then according to the specific problems in China's judicial practice to draw lessons from the American system. The whole research context will be from background introduction to the American system research and then to the solution of the problem of "zombification" of Chinese system. Both the American system research part and the Chinese problem solving part are constructed around the three cores of theory, constitutional conditions, and special types, and combining with the actual cases of the two countries, to discuss the applicable forms of relevant regulations or interpretations in the judicial practice process, so that the research results can be put into practice and the system of justifiable defense in China can be activated. The specific research content will include the following aspects:

Chapter 1: This part transforms American terms into Chinese terms, sorts out the development history and political characteristics of the American justifiable defense system, and distills out the violence, discrimination and unfairness of the American justifiable defense system, and gives a warning to the excessive expansion of the contemporary society.

Chapter 2: At present, the relatively perfect justifiable defense theory in the United States is the lesser evil theory. This theory integrates the attacker's responsibility, individual autonomy and social legal order into its own framework, so that each factor can complement each other. It has universal applicability.

Chapter 3: This part analyzes the seven constitutive conditions and characteristics of the justifiable defense of the United States. In terms of scope of application, it is limitless and protects all legitimate personal and public interests. In the aspect of harm behavior, it contains all the behavior of the "unfair", emphasize the wrongfulness of innocent attacker behavior. In terms of specific attacks, this attack is not subject to any limitation either in form or in degree of damage. In terms of immediacy, considering certain future results that are not immediate but inevitable, immediacy should not be regarded as an independent condition, but can be considered as one of the judging factors of the necessity. In the aspect of necessity, its emergence is based on the consideration of social legal order, and the evaluation of necessity must be based on the degree of force and actual means of the act itself rather than the final result. In proportionality, the comparison is between the intended result of a defensive act and the harm it avoids. In the aspect of reasonable belief, it emphasizes the importance of the standard of rational man, but it needs to negate the over-subjective standard of rational man. As for the obligation of retreat, the obligation of retreat is mainly exempted through the castle rule, but with the innovation of the castle rule, the obligation of retreat is gradually disappearing in the modern American self-defense system.

Chapter 4: This part analyzes the establishment conditions of three special types of justifiable defense. The first is the self-defense. Need to focus on imperfect self-defense, battered women's defense, and defense against mental attacks. The essence of imperfect self-defense is a kind of lenient punishment, which can reduce the punishment for the behavior of justifiable defense that cannot be established because of the lack of conditions. The behavior of battered women is difficult to establish justifiable defense due to the influence of special mentality. Therefore, the United States uses expert evidence of battered women’s syndrome to improve the application of justifiable defense in this group of people. Although the defense against psychological attack is necessary to some extent, it is only the theory of scholars and has not been put into practice. The second is the defense of others. The influence on the establishment of justifiable defense is mainly the source of the defender's rights. There are two kinds of theories, among which, the rule of reasonable appearance emphasizes the reasonable belief of the defender, and the rule of actual situation emphasizes the objective facts. The former may lead to the abuse of defense rights, while the latter may inhibit the occurrence of defense of others to some extent. The former is currently adopted by the United States. Again, defensive property. Mainly divided into defense general property and defense residence. Mainly divided into defense general property and defense residence. The object of protection in the defense of general property is lawful possession rather than ownership, and the use of lethal defensive force is usually prohibited but general force can be used to restore possession. In the defense of residence, what affects the establishment of justifiable defense is the definition of residence and the use of lethal force. The current U.S. residential definition is expanding to both space and attribute, thus eroding the existence scope of retreat obligation, thus realizing the expansion of the field of justifiable defense. However, the clear regulations on lethal force in the United States have limited this expansion within a reasonable range to a certain extent. Finally, there is law enforcement. The United States has given the police excessive authority to use violence in law enforcement. Although it has been restricted by the Constitution, the actual situation is still not optimistic.

Chapter 5: Many justifiable defense theories in China have some defects, among which the measurement of legal interest is the mainstream theory which is relatively perfect and highly accepted by judicial personnel. However, due to the wrong understanding of the measurement of legal interest, the excessive neglect of abstract interests, and the influence of our traditional thinking, our judicial personnel are prone to results-only theory. Use the American less evil theory to revise the measurement of legal interest in China, include the legal order and the culpability of the attacker into the measurement scope, and increase the importance of abstract interests. It can effectively alleviate our country's result-only theory and reduce the negative impact of theoretical dilemmas on the application of justifiable defense.

Chapter 6: The defect of constitutive conditions is also one of the reasons for the zombification of justifiable defense in China. In terms of the scope of unlawful infringement, the scope of China is too narrow, and the defense against minor unlawful infringement is difficult to be justified. The emphasis on abstract interests and minor interests in American unlawful infringement is worth learning from. As for the judgment standard, the objective standard of our country overestimates the ability of the actor and ignores the subjective understanding of the actor, so we should use the reasonable belief of the United States for reference and carry out some subjective transformation. As far as the limit of defense is concerned, there are mistakes in the interpretation of "necessary limit" and "significant damage", which easily blur the boundary between legitimate and excessive acts. We should draw on the conditions of proportionality and necessity of the United States, weigh the expected result and avoided damage result caused by the defense act, clarify the application of lethal force, reduce the discretion of judges, measure the multiple attacks separately and change the cognition error in the form of jurisprudence. It should be noted that there has been a clear trend of over-correction of justifiable defense in our country. In order to prevent such radical ideas from causing irreversible negative effects on our country’s justifiable defense system, We should consider drawing on the United States' obligation to withdraw as a factor in judging the necessity of lethal force, and set different obligations according to specific circumstances to prevent abuse of rights.

Chapter 7: The predicament of the establishment of justifiable defense under special circumstances will also hinder the comprehensive activation of China's justifiable defense system. The special problems of the establishment of China's current justifiable defense mainly exist in the following aspects: Judicial officers have a habit of moral cleanliness in the characterization of deficient defenders; It is difficult for abused women to obtain justification for their defense behavior; The boundary between justifiable defense and excessive defense in the case of trespass is unclear; The nature of police defence is difficult to determine. In terms of the defective defenders, although the United States gives a lenient punishment to the actor by imperfect self-defense, but some scholars in our country admit that justifiable defense can be established when the actor's antecedent act is legal. Therefore, transforming the viewpoints of Chinese scholars into practice is more conducive to solving the applicable dilemma of justifiable defense. In terms of the defense of battered women, although we cannot directly use the evidence of battered women syndrome for reference, but we can take their special mentality into consideration when measuring the behavior, and gradually promote the correct use of this type of evidence through the form of legal cases. As for the defense problem in the case of invasion, our country can not directly learn from the defense residence of the United States, but we should fully consider the influence of the behavior of entering the home on the defense person's psychology and cognitive ability. On the issue of police defense, China should not recognize the definition of justifiable defense of the United States, but should learn from the United States' restrictions on warning shots.