Problem And Solution Of Sentencing Of Drunk Dangerous Driving Crime

The act of dangerous driving has been added to criminal law as a provison for nearly eight years.Over the past eight years,dangerous driving crime cases account for a large proportion of the total number of criminal cases in courts all over the country,and drunk dangerous driving crime cases are the vast majority of dangerous driving crime cases.Facing a large number of cases of drunk driving dangerous driving crime,courts around the country are actively exploring balanced and reasonable sentencing measures.However,from a national perspective,there are still some problems in the sentencing of dangerous driving crime,which leads to the failure of the penalty function of dangerous driving crime to be implemented well,and the corresponding judicial and social effects are also affected.This paper mainly adopts the empirical research method,taking the drunk driving type of dangerous driving crime as the research object,and trying to find out the problems in the sentencing of drunk dangerous driving crime through the empirical investigation of the characteristics of the defendant and the characteristics of sentencing.Then analyze the causes and hazards,and finally propose a solution path for the drunk dangerous driving crime that can truly put the penalty effect into practice.This article is divided into four parts.The first part is an empirical investigation of the drunk dangerous driving crime,focusing on the characteristics of the defendant and the characteristics of sentencing.Among them,the characteristics of the defendant in the drunk dangerous driving crimes are:the defendant is concentrated under the age of 50,the gender is mostly male,the overall education level is not high,the political appearance is mostly the masses,and the work level is mostly non-fixed work and the defendant is mostly low-income group.There are four characteristics in the sentencing of drunk dangerous driving crimes:one is that the probation rate is high,the substantive punishment rate is low,and the exemption from punishment rate is almost relatively few;the second is that the term of the sentence and the amount of the penalty are basically proportional to the alcohol content;the third is that the executing of probation becomes formalistc;the fourth is that the result of sentencing has a greater impact on the official staff and party members than people without regular jobs and the masses.The second part explores the problems and practical harms in the sentencing of drunk dangerous drnving.First of all,the problems in the drunk dangerous driving crimes are:the lack of targeted punishment,the rigidity in the application of the sentencing circumstances,the simplification of the punishment type,and the vacancy of the penalty function.Secondly,the actual harm caused by the drunk dangerous driving crime is:for the one,it may cause certain social hidden dangers;for the second,it is not conducive to post-processing of accidents;for the third,it is detrimental to judicial credibility;for the fourth,it leads to high crime rate.The third part analyzes the reasons for the existence of the problems in the sentencing of drunk dangerous driving crime.There are mainly the following reasons:firstly,at the conceptual level,there is a penalty idea that the punishment is more important than the prevention;secondly,at the legislative level,the legal provisions for dangerous driving crime are too simple;thirdly,at the judicial level,the balance in consideration of sentencing circumstances is insufficient;Finally,at the social level,the wine culture is "increasingly more and more intense" and legal propaganda is becoming weaker and weaker.The fourth part is the core of the whole thesis.On the basis of the analysis of the previous three parts,the existence of the problems in the sentencing of the drunk dangerous driving crime,the harms and causes of the problems,we discusses the solution path to the problems in the sentencing of the drunk dangerous driving crime.Firstly,it introduces the control penalty and fixed-term imprisonment to the provision,enriching the level of the penalty.Secondly,it implements the criminal policy of combining leniency with severity,increasing the sentencing gradient.Thirdly,strengthen criticism and education and implement the general preventive function of punishment.Fourthly,strengthen the concept of individualization of punishment and consolidate the prevention function of punishment.