A Study Of Difficult Issues In The Determination Of The Crime Of Impairing Safe Driving

The addition of the offence of obstructing safe driving to the Criminal Law Amendment(Ⅺ)Act is both a practical need to regulate the field of public transport safety and a reflection of a positive view of criminal law legislation.An analysis of a sample of judicial decisions reveals that the determination of the elements of the offence of obstructing safe driving is controversial,which not only directly affects the effect of the application of the offence of obstructing safe driving,but also the determination of this offence in relation to the other offence.Apart from the introduction and conclusion,it consists of the following five main parts.The first part focuses on the problems that have existed in the judicial determination of the offence of impaired safe driving in practice since its creation.The main problems are: firstly,in the determination of "moving public transport",the time point of "moving" is inaccurately controlled,and there is a divergence of understanding of the definition of "public transport".There were differences in the definition of "public transport".Secondly,in determining "obstructing safe driving",the criteria for determining the limit of "violence" were vague,and the meaning of "seizing control of a driving device" was unclear,as well as the fact that the driver The first of these is the "unlawful" act of the driver.Thirdly,many judicial decisions do not provide detailed evidence of the elements of this crime,the biggest problem being that the judiciary often passes over the key element of "endangering public safety" when arguing for it,lacking specific arguments for it,leading to inappropriate expansion of judicial determinations.The second part focuses on the determination of "public transport in motion".The second part focuses on the determination of "moving public transport",mainly from two aspects: firstly,when determining "moving",on the one hand,"moving" cannot be equated with "operating";on the other hand,"moving" should be understood in the light of On the other hand,the term "in motion" should be interpreted in the light of the body of the vehicle.Secondly,when determining "public transport",the characteristics of "public transport" should be grasped,i.e.not limited to legal operation and the public nature of its environment,while recognising that ships fall within the scope of public transport for this offence,while trains,subways,light railways and aircraft do not.They are not.The third part focuses on the determination of "driving in a manner that is prejudicial to safety".The "violence" in this offence does not require physical contact,as long as the "violence" committed by the perpetrator against the driver constitutes a real danger of infringement of safety.The "grab and control" refers to both grabbing and controlling behavior,while the "steering wheel" cannot only refer to the steering wheel.The second is that the driver’s impairment of safe driving behavior,which "unauthorized absence" and "mutual assault or assault with others" is included in the relationship,and "unauthorized absence" of the wrong The lawfulness of "unauthorized absence" does not require the prior conduct of others.The right to self-defense is a right that is limited by the special nature of the driver’s profession in the face of physical aggression.In other words,drivers should be tolerant of unlawful attacks up to and including serious injury.The fourth part focuses on the determination of "endangering public security".There are two main areas: firstly,an analysis of the meaning of "endangering public safety".On the one hand,"public safety" means "the safety of an unspecified or majority group of people";on the other hand,compared with the danger of "endangering public safety","endangering public safety" is a more serious offence than "endangering public safety".On the other hand,"endangering public safety" is a general public danger.Secondly,"endangering public safety" is an external manifestation of the resultant danger of the offence and is expressly provided for in the legislation,making the offence a specific danger.The fifth section analyses the boundaries between the offence of impaired driving and the offence of endangering public safety by dangerous means.There are three main aspects: firstly,the two offences are a relationship of minor and major importance.Secondly,the distinction between the two offences at the theoretical level,the accuracy of the characterisation should be tested by the principle of the statutory nature of the offence and the principle of the compatibility of crime and punishment.Thirdly,the practical distinction between the two offences should be determined on the basis of the actual harm caused by the act of obstructing safe driving and the state of the vehicle,taking into account the specific circumstances of the case.