Study On The Identification Of Crimes Against Public Safety By Dangerous Methods

With the continuous development of society,the means of committing crimes have become more and more complex and diversified in recent years.In particular,criminal means that endanger public safety emerge one after another,such as the "Sanlu milk powder" incident in the field of food safety,the theft of manhole covers in the field of public safety,the interference of bus drivers in the field of road traffic safety,and the stabbing of people in public places such as railway stations and schools.Following the crimes of speculation and hooliganism in the criminal law of 79,the crime of endangering public security with dangerous methods is in danger of becoming a crime of mouth again.The main problem of this crime in judicial practice is different sentence for the same case.For the same case with different sentences,such as the same drunk driving accident,some courts set the crime of dangerous driving and dangerous methods to endanger public safety crime and punishment,some set the crime of traffic accident,some set the crime of dangerous methods to endanger public safety;For the purpose of hunting wild animals to set up the power grid without killing people,some of them are convicted of endangering public security by dangerous means,and some of them are convicted of illegal hunting;Under the circumstances of private power grid causing death,the court has as high as three qualitative methods,which are the crime of endangering public security with dangerous methods,the crime of endangering public security with dangerous methods and the crime of causing death with negligence.For ACTS of self-immolation and self-explosion in public places or threatening others with inflammable and explosive materials such as gas and gasoline,some courts define the crime of arson and explosion,and some define the crime of endangering public security by dangerous means.There are two reasons why a crime is so prominent in judicial practice: one is the abstractness and vagueness of the legislative provisions;Second,in judicial application,the applicator of arbitrary distortion.There are three main reasons why the crime of endangering public security by dangerous means is prominent in judicial practice.One is the defects of the law itself,that is,the legislative provisions are more general,vague.Second,the provisions of judicial interpretation and guidance are improper,that is,these two are not good for the judicial practice with the correct guidance;Third,the specific standards of "public safety" and "other dangerous methods" in judicial practice are different.Therefore,the scope of "public safety" and "other dangerous methods" should be correctly defined in judicial practice.The so-called public safety refers to the personal safety of the unspecified majority or the life and health safety of the unspecified majority."Public" refers to the "non-specific majority",that is,the target of the actor's behavior may be more than three people,and the target can neither be specifically predicted nor actually controlled,and it may be expanded or increased at any time."Safety" does not include simple damage to property,since the act of simple damage to property should constitute the crime of intentional destruction of property."Other dangerous methods" means dangerous methods other than those prescribed in the chapter on crimes against public security of the criminal law,and must be as dangerous as the four ACTS of arson,water bursting,explosion and release of dangerous substances.In addition,since the establishment of the case guidance system in China,the application of law and the standard of judgment have been unified,effectively solving the problem of "different judgments for the same case" in judicial practice.However,there is no relevant case of this crime and the essence of judgment in the currently released guiding cases,so the supreme people's court and supreme people's procuratorate should formulate guiding cases for this crime and determine the judgment rules for typical complicated cases,so as to guide the correct application of judicial practice and reduce the problems of different judgments for the same case.