On The Impossibility Sparse

From the date of the proposed of the impossible crime, it has become a much disputed topic. The impossible crime should be punished or not be punished debate continues to this day. No mater in impossible crime as a crime should be punished or impossible crime nonfeasance crime and not to punish countries, there is not the same sound with the mainstream view. Is also true of the traditional mainstream criminal law point of view, can not afford to make called not guilty of attempted classified as attempts to commit a range of them as the generic concept of impossible crime. However, in reality, there are a large number of relevant facts in line with the traditional theory impossible of attempted concept, and his conviction is clearly beyond the mental capacity and understanding of the general public, with the Criminal Objectivism "Western influence, China scholars began to reflect the different points of view can not make through.The article is divided into a total of four parts. In the first part, the author first talk about the background of the impossible crime and the present status of research both at home and abroad made summary. The second part, The author first analyzes various theories about impossible crime, comparing the development based on subjectivism and objectivism of the advantages and shortcomings of various theories. The third part is an important part of this paper, In this section, the author analyzes the drawbacks of our country impossible crime pass that, pointed out that the present, China can not make through unreasonable in that its basically belongs to the abstract danger behavior subjective thought rather than objective behavior to determine the risk of not guilty be punished shall be classified within the scope of attempts to commit a. This is actually a substantial expansion of the scope of the criminal law penalties, does not meet the requirements of the Criminal Objectivism and easy access sin detrimental to the process of legal system in China. On this basis, I select the specific dangers that judged not guilty, and is based on the shortcomings of the specific danger that, I made some amendments. The author advocates, on the basis of specific dangerous said carried out to determine the general understanding of the behavior of people, special facts known if the perpetrator is more likely to lead to harmful results of occurred while most people think that the non-hazardous, the understanding of the behavior of people determine the behavior is attempted crime. In addition, in determining the point in time, compared to the specific dangers that only prior judgment, I believe that should be pre-and post judgment if the perpetrator’s behavior was general people have a feeling of danger, even if it turned out that the behavior of non-hazardous, protection system should be based on criminal law to penalize that conduct; When most people think that this behavior is not dangerous, and they have to identify the behavior does have a risk, then, should not be based on the views of the then most people, according to later identify a factual determination for the attempted crime. Said amendments of the specific hazard, I compare specific times on the basis of the distinction between the the attempted guilty and not guilty, compared easily confused and can not make some of the related concepts, point out their differences. The fourth part, I learn from abroad can not be guilty of the relevant legislation on the basis of the additional terms of not guilty in the Criminal Law of China recommended. I also expect, can make a little contribution to the theoretical research and legislation of the country can not commit, and to promote the impartiality of the judiciary.