题目内容
某甲因盗窃正在使用中的通信电缆被法院以破坏公用电信设施罪判处有期徒刑三年。某甲对判决不服并提出上诉。他认为自己的行为属盗窃行为，但所盗电缆的价值不足200元，达不到盗窃罪的立案标准，因此不能构成犯罪，一审法院不按盗窃罪而是按危害公共安全罪追究他的刑事责任是适用法律错误。 请运用法理学知识分析一审法院在适用法律方面是否存在错误。
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
每题所给的选项中有一个或一个以上正确答案 甲系某国有公司经理。生意人乙见甲掌管巨额资金，就以小恩小惠拉拢甲。后乙以做生意需要资金为由，劝诱甲出借公款，并与甲共同策划了挪用的方式，还送给甲好处费5万元。甲未经公司董事会决定就将100万元资金借给乙。乙得到巨款以后，告知银行职员丙该款的真实来源，丙为乙提供资金账户，乙随时提款用于贩卖毒品。在甲的催促下，一年后，乙归还30万元，后来就拒绝和甲见面。甲见追回剩余70万元无望，就携带乙归还的30万元潜逃。甲半年内将30万元挥霍一空，走投无路后向司法机关投案，并交代了借公款给乙、接受乙贿赂和携款潜逃的事实，并提供线索协助司法机关将乙捉拿归案。乙归案后主动交待了行贿和司法机关尚未掌握的贩卖毒品的犯罪事实。请回答下题。 关于甲的犯罪行为，下列说法正确的是：( )
Archaeology has long been an accepted tool for studying prehistoric cultures. Relatively recently the same techniques have been systematically applied to studies of the more immediate past. This has been called "historical archaeology," a term that is used in the United States to refer to any archaeological investigation into North American sites that postdate the arrival of Europeans. Back in the 1930’s and 1940’s, when building restoration was popular, historical archaeology was primarily a tool of architectural reconstruction. The role of archaeologists was to find the foundations of historic buildings and then take a back seat to architects. The mania for reconstruction had largely subsided by the 1950’s and 1960’s. Most people entering historical archaeology during this period came out of university anthropology departments, where they had studied prehistoric cultures. They were, by training, social scientists not historians, and their work tended to reflect this bias. The questions they framed and the techniques they used were designed to help them understand, as scientists, how people behaved. But because they were treading on historical ground for which there was often extensive written documentation and because their own knowledge of these periods was usually limited, their contributions to American history remained circumscribed. Their reports, highly technical and sometimes poorly written, went unread. More recently, professional archaeologists have taken over. These researchers have sought to demonstrate that their work can be a valuable tool not only of science but also of history, providing fresh insights into the daily lives of ordinary people whose existences might not otherwise be so well documented. This newer emphasis on archaeology as social history has shown great promise, and indeed work done in this area has led to a reinterpretation of the United States’ past. In Kingston, New York, for example, evidence has been uncovered that indicates that English goods were being smuggled into that city at a time when the Dutch supposedly controlled trading in the area. And in Sacramento an excavation at the site of a fashionable nineteenth-century hotel revealed that garbage had been stashed in the building’s basement despite sanitation laws to the contrary. In the third paragraph, the author implies that the techniques of history and the techniques of social science are
Archaeology has long been an accepted tool for studying prehistoric cultures. Relatively recently the same techniques have been systematically applied to studies of the more immediate past. This has been called "historical archaeology," a term that is used in the United States to refer to any archaeological investigation into North American sites that postdate the arrival of Europeans. Back in the 1930’s and 1940’s, when building restoration was popular, historical archaeology was primarily a tool of architectural reconstruction. The role of archaeologists was to find the foundations of historic buildings and then take a back seat to architects. The mania for reconstruction had largely subsided by the 1950’s and 1960’s. Most people entering historical archaeology during this period came out of university anthropology departments, where they had studied prehistoric cultures. They were, by training, social scientists not historians, and their work tended to reflect this bias. The questions they framed and the techniques they used were designed to help them understand, as scientists, how people behaved. But because they were treading on historical ground for which there was often extensive written documentation and because their own knowledge of these periods was usually limited, their contributions to American history remained circumscribed. Their reports, highly technical and sometimes poorly written, went unread. More recently, professional archaeologists have taken over. These researchers have sought to demonstrate that their work can be a valuable tool not only of science but also of history, providing fresh insights into the daily lives of ordinary people whose existences might not otherwise be so well documented. This newer emphasis on archaeology as social history has shown great promise, and indeed work done in this area has led to a reinterpretation of the United States’ past. In Kingston, New York, for example, evidence has been uncovered that indicates that English goods were being smuggled into that city at a time when the Dutch supposedly controlled trading in the area. And in Sacramento an excavation at the site of a fashionable nineteenth-century hotel revealed that garbage had been stashed in the building’s basement despite sanitation laws to the contrary. This passage mainly discusses
简述我国公民平等权的含义和判断政府采取合理差别的标准。
微信支付 
支付宝支付