The Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security jointly issued a guideline on justifiable self-defense last week to rectify some problems that have become apparent in court judgments on people using force to defend themselves when attacked.

Before the guideline was issued, even if the assaults threatened their lives, the persons acting in self-defense would be held accountable by the courts if the assailants lost their lives or suffered worse injuries than those they assaulted.

That some people were convicted after defending themselves from criminals trying to kill, rob, steal, rape or bully them prompted many to raise the question as to what extent people are allowed to protect themselves.

Especially when subject to a sudden attack by well-prepared assailants, when people act on the spur of the moment, if the attackers' injuries are all the court considers in judging whether the self-defense is legitimate or not, those who gain the upper hand against their assailants will be left in an awkward position before the law.

That is because to come out on top they will probably have had to inflict upon their attackers, at the least, violence proportional to that inflicted upon them.

Few people have the professionalism and capacity, particularly in an emergency, to accomplish "surgical strikes".

Since the top court says the purpose of the move is to firmly defend the principle that "the law should never make concessions to lawbreakers", enforcement of the guideline will put an end to the legal travesty that the law favors weaker offenders. People have a legitimate right to protect themselves.

Despite this, it should be borne in mind that after the offenders throw in the towel those defending themselves must restrain themselves from using further force with the aim of causing those attacking them suffering or taking revenge, as then they become the perpetrators of an assault. Being a victim does not grant a person the right to take the law into their own hands.