【新唐人2014年06月03日訊】自大陸警方以「反恐暴」為名，在多個城市實行警察佩槍巡邏，並允許警察在所謂「緊急情況」下可以直接開槍以來，各地警察開槍「射殺民眾」的事件頻發，引發了極大民怨。民眾擔心，在當前大陸司法不獨立的情況下，一旦警察濫用開槍權，將會嚴重威脅百姓生命安全。 但也有評論指出，警察佩槍，就是為了震懾百姓，因為當謊言不足以治國時，暴力和恐怖就將登場。

自從今年4月新疆烏魯木齊火車站發生爆炸襲擊事件後，大陸北京、廣州、上海等多個城市開始實行警察佩槍巡邏，並 鼓勵民警大膽使用槍支，遇到所謂「緊急情況」和「恐怖份子」，警察可以跳過「亮明身份、鳴槍示警」等一系列警告程序，直接開槍。

但引發輿論激烈爭議的是，截至目前，不但沒有任何所謂「恐怖份子」被警察直接開槍擊斃的消息傳出。 相反，警察直接開槍造成無辜百姓傷亡的事件，卻在大陸各地頻繁曝光。

5月30號，雲南羅平縣一名警察在醉酒後與人爭吵，並對著勸架者連開兩槍，將人擊斃，當局對外卻聲稱「槍支走火」。

而在此之前的5月15號，雲南鎮雄縣警方宣稱，當街開槍擊傷一名「駕車衝撞趕集群眾」的男子，這名男子經搶救無效死亡。後經現場圍觀的上百名民眾聯名證實，死者是名訪民，因為上訪時用貨車堵住了鎮政府的門，並在與特警對峙中揮舞了一下防身用的馬刀，並沒有危害群眾安全，卻被警方連開12槍打死。

原廣州公安局派出所副所長陳軍育：「人都給你打死了，死人又不會說話，你宣傳方面愛怎麼就怎麼說了，監控錄像也是警察控制的，他喜歡放哪段就放哪段，有沒有刪減也不知道，完全就是死無對證啊！」

類似的的事件接連發生，令民間對此極為擔憂。 網民們指出，恐怖份子固然危險，但不受控制的公權力更加可怕，尤其在一個司法不公正的社會，一旦警察濫用開槍的權力，那麼普通百姓的生命安全必將受到巨大威脅。

陳軍育：「沒有經過人大討論、沒有經過法律允許，隨便就擴大了警察的權限。那很難保證這麼多警察裡邊，如果有個別、少數的警察慾報復出於私心，他說你恐怖份子甚麼的。那沒有經過調查、也沒有經過警告、沒有經過合法程序去使用槍支，那完全有可能的，那就隨便就開槍了，當然是嚴重的危害一般人都生命安全了。」

也有法律界人士指出，雖然世界上很多國家的警察都是佩槍巡邏，但是卻對佩槍警察的人數和開槍條件，有極為嚴格的限制和規定。

反觀中國大陸，在各方面條件都沒有具備的情況下，幾乎全國的警察都配備上了槍支。

大陸社會活動家胡佳：「這麼密集的持槍，許多對槍械使用的倫理、法規、常識其實都沒有到位。而現在中國警察素質的話，它本身不是一個司法獨立的國家，所以警察好多時候是頃刻之間就淪為權貴的走卒、鷹犬，而且家奴化。它就不是一個國家公器，不是維護公共安全的，好多時候會形成一種土匪、流氓的狀態。所以現在我們看到警方是經常的濫用槍支。」

輿論普認為，當局以「反恐暴」為名擴大警察權限，其實是在「震懾」民眾。

胡佳：「中共大大的利用了反暴恐的這麼一個對他們來講的契機，完全把這個擴大化了。那現在來講，一下子大面積持槍，我們可以看到，這個社會很快會形成一個非常緊張的氛圍，警方會亂開槍，老百姓會處於高壓恐怖的驚慌中。以前它是用警車來震懾維穩，它覺得現在警車都不足以震懾那些群體事件了，那麼甚麼能對老百姓產生終極震懾呢，那就是帶槍的警察。」

原廣州公安局白雲區分局良田鎮派出所副所長陳軍育指出，大陸社會諸多所謂「暴力事件」的根源，其實是中共當局的腐敗和高壓統治造成的民怨沸騰，如果以暴制「暴」，只會火 上澆油，引發更大反彈。

採訪編輯/張天宇 後製/李勇

Authorities Implement Policy to Shoot, Claiming Civilians to

be Terrorists.

Currently in the name of “anti-terrorism and violence",

mainland police have implemented the policy

of patrolling with guns,

authorising the direct shooting of civilians under the

pretence of “emergency circumstances".

Since the policy was implemented, incidents have occurred

on a frequent basis.

This has inevitably sparked great resentment among the people.

The people are concerned, that as soon as this policy is in place

and protected by the judicial system,

the police will abuse it freely, thus becoming a threat

to everyday civilians.

Some have commented saying, when the policy ‘armed

with guns’ becomes enforced,

the purpose behind it will be to suppress the ordinary people,

because once the lies no longer have the effect the

authorities require,

violence and terror will, once again return the

stage of China.

Since the uprise of attack happened at Urumqi

Railway Station in Xinjiang this April,

Beijing, Guangzhou and Shanghai started to implement

the policy of police patrolling with guns,

encourages police to actively use guns.

Under the situation of “emergency case" and “terrorists",

the police can directly shoot anyone without taking the

correct and appropriate steps of

“expressing policy identity and then firing a warning shot."

Yet this highly provocative issue is merely chatter up to

this point,

as no news has reported any incidents of terrorists

being shot by police.

On the contrary, the incidents reported where police

have directly shot, injured or killed ordinary people,

are frequently reported in mainland China.

On May 30, a drunken police officer of Luoping County

of Yunnan Province,

got in to a heated debate with a local man. It is reportedly said

he opened fire resulting in the mans death.

Yet the authorities claimed the gun had misfired.

On May 15 prior to the incident, police of Zhenxiong

County of Yunnan Province,

claimed that the police shot and injured a man on the street

who drove his car in to a group of pedestrians

who were on their way to market.

But afterwards, the crowd of hundreds of people at the site

of the incident,

jointly signed their names

and confirmed that the deceased was an appealer.

When he made his appeal, he used his truck

to block the door of the town government office,

and in the confrontation with the SWAT(Special Weapons

And Tactics team),

he had in his pocession a saber (which is used in self-defense),

with which he waved around towards the police,

the police then fired 12 shots at him killing him instantly.

Former deputy director of one police station of the Guangzhou

Public Security Bureau Mr Chen Junyu :

“The person has been shot and killed by you,

and the dead can no longer speak in his defence.

So you can freely describe the incident at your will

for the purpose of your personal propaganda.

The surveillance video is also controlled by the police,

from which segments are chosen, cherry picked

and shown to the public."

It is impossible to know if the published segmented video

has been tampered with or has parts deleted,

it is difficult to tell.

It is made more difficult as the suspect is dead and cannot

verify whether the evidence is true or not.

Similar incidents have occurred on a constant basis ,

so the people are extremely worried.

Netizens pointed out that, despite the danger of terrorists,

uncontrolled public power is more terrible,

especially in an unjust judicial society.

Once the police start to abuse the power to shoot civilians,

the lives of many will be in danger.

Chen Junyu : " Congress has not discussed this policy.

Without authorisation from the law,

casually expanding amongst a few individuals who seek

selfish gain,

some police may want to instigate the shooting policy,

giving them power over the people with the excuse,

you are a terrorist.

So in the case of using guns without investigation,

warning or legal procedures is completely possible,

and then the police will casually open fire.

This is of course a serious hazard to the lives of the

general public."

There are also legal professionals pointing out that,

although in many countries in the world today,

police are patrolling with guns,

but the number of police and the shooting conditions that have

been laid down,

are all strictly restricted and regulated.

In contrast, mainland China’s police regulate under a different

set of conditions.

Almost all of the police across the country

are equipped with a firearm.

Mainland social activist Hu Jia : “The carrying of firearms,

we have many intending gunmen.

Given that most countries are morally aware of the principles

needed to be laid down as law,

such as ethical use of firearms, regulations

and restrictions etc,

there seems to be no common sense actually

in place in China.

On the other hand, this country is not itself

an independent judiciary,

so many police suddenly become powerful pawns, bird dogs,

and also slaves to the one family.

It is not a national public institution.

Not the maintenance of public safety.

This policy is more likely top form a group of bandits

amongst our police, a rogue state.

So now we can see police misusing the firearms policy."

Public opinion popularly believes the authorities have used

the connotation “anti-terrorist violence",

as a means to exploit police authority and keep

the people in terror.

Hu Jia:" The Chinese Communist Party fully utilised

the opportunity of anti- violence and terrorism,

largely expanding the incident.

So from this we see, implementing such a policy,

police carrying guns,

intensifies the worry of everyday public citizens.

The police are likely to abuse their power and

the freedom to shoot,

giving people more concern, creating panic and fear.

Previously, they used the police vans to deter criminals

and maintain stability,

and then they thought, the police vehicles are insufficient

to deter those group incidents.

So what can bring the ultimate deterrence

to the ordinary people?

It is the policy, police with guns. “

Chen Junyu says, the towns police station made a statement.

That the root cause of many so-called “violent incidents"

are in fact triggered by public resentment towards the authorities

who are bound up in corruption, intrigue and coercion.

If the authorities only approach is to fight fire with fire,

or use violence against violence,

this will lead to greater conflict, it will merely add more

fuel to the already rising flames.

Interview & Edit/Zhang Tianyu Post-Production/LiYong