Research On The Judicial Application Of Drunk Driving

The crime of Dangerous driving was included into our criminal law, which isundoubtedly a strong response for the rampant drunk driving behaviors. But due to theimmaturity of judicial interpretation, so in the judicial practice, we still have a seriesof problems to be solved. The writing, assisted empirical analysis and comparativeanalysis primarily through the use of, I aim to combine with the related cases, and onthe basis of it point out some problems in judicial practice of drunk driving, and thenexplain my positions and views, finally, form the countermeasures to the problems. Inthese questions, explored the most intense is whether the drunk driving standards candiffer from man to man’s questions. To solve this dispute, I introduce the related caseof drunk driving type of dangerous driving crime, secondly, point out the presentsituation of drunk driving standard, then combined with indicating my reasons andaccording to the driving standards should not differ from man to man, finally, pointsout that the “drink” the feasibility of different people in the judicial practice ofprocessing method. But for the boundaries between drunken driving type ofdangerous driving crime and other crimes, I think drunken driving type of dangerousdriving crime should be negligent crime, in the drunken driving premise, foundedDangerous driving crime or Traffic accident crime, the key is to see whether thebehavior has caused serious harm as a result, if the perpetrator caused one or moreserious injuries, and was responsible for the accident of full or main, then theperpetrator would be considered Traffic accident crime, otherwise would be thoughtof Dangerous driving crime conviction and sentencing. As for the distinction with thecrime of endangering public security with dangerous method, because drunk drivingis negligent crime in my point, but as we know, the other crime is intentional crime,so I think this can be the difference between them. As long as drunken driving extentof injury was match with the crime of endangering public security with dangerousmethod, and the perpetrator was intentional, then the perpetrator set up the crime of endangering public security with dangerous method. Certainly, how to grasp judicialpractice of sentencing is still a intense point. The same the case as a guide, it comeswith the judicial practice of this crime for sentencing plots should be considered,divided into three aspects---alcohol related factors, the driving factors as well as theperpetrators’ own factors. Faced with the reform of sentencing, and coupled with theimmaturity judicial interpretation, so I think it is necessary to put forward some ideasrelated to sentencing aspects. As a conclusion, is mainly to solve some little questionsfor this crime---does the garage in the community belong to “road” in criminal law? Ithink it depends; which one should be believed in alcohol detection data conflict? Ithink the blood alcohol detection data shall be prevailed. As for the driving industry, Ithink our government should support its development.