Threatening effect
A threatening effect is the impression that a real or virtual object makes on a person or animal. In contrast to the threat, the threatening effect is independent of an announcement or an actual expected application. The threatening effect is difficult to quantify and depends largely on the subjective perception of the individual who feels exposed to the threatening effect. A threatening effect can result from a norm (cf. death penalty on ...; threatening effect of tax law on white-collar crime), a behavior (e.g. impressive behavior , emphatically aggressive demeanor), an animal (e.g. attack dog ) or a specific object (e.g. B. openly displayed weapon ) go out. The type of effect can hardly be predicted and lies in the perception of the observer. The threatening effect of the death penalty does not seem to have any influence on the actual number of crimes, behaviors strongly depend on the environment and context, the use of animals has social and religious influences and the threatening effect of a weapon depends on context and personal expectations and social environment to hang out.
In the case of weapons, one can make some basic statements about this.
- The threat effect depends on the type of weapon, the design of the weapon and, in the case of firearms, also on the caliber, the manner in which the weapon is used (facial expression, posture, clothing) and the number of weapons used.
- Police special forces not only act martial for reasons of self-protection, the clothing is also intended to intimidate. It is the same with weapons. If a small pistol in a large hand may not look so scary at all, several people dressed in black with submachine guns and shotguns will be more likely to get the person opposite to give up.
- A high level of threat is desirable for both illegal (criminal) and legal (police) use of weapons, as this means that in many cases there is no need to fire a shot.
- However, the actual direction of a threat from weapons is controversial, as it can have both a deterrent and escalating effect.
The assumption of a threatening effect also has an influence on the evaluation of offenses in the case law and on the extent of the sentence:
“For the coherent threat of using the baseball bat as a striking tool, it was sufficient to present this extremely dangerous object in the established manner [holding it in front of the body]. Contrary to the assumption of the regional court, further actions, such as threatening movements or threatening statements, were not required. […] Particularly dangerous tools […] […] can have a sufficient threatening effect if they are hidden but recognized by the victim of the threat . This must apply even more to an open presentation of such tools that the person to be threatened can clearly perceive. "
See also
Individual evidence
- ↑ Anja Nöckel: Reason and limits of a market economy criminal law ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (queried on January 6, 2010)
- ↑ Implied threat ( page can no longer be accessed , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (accessed on January 6, 2010; PDF; 271 kB)
- ↑ See: Ban on pump guns (queried on January 6, 2010)
- ↑ Federal Law Gazette 2004 Part I No. 33, issued in Bonn on July 9, 2004, ( Memento of the original from April 24, 2009 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (accessed on January 6, 2010; PDF; 18 kB)
- ↑ cf. BGH, decision of June 17, 1998, Az. 1 StR 270/98 ( Memento of the original of July 18, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , Full text; NStZ-RR 1999, 7.
- ↑ cf. BGH, judgment of October 9, 2003 , Az. 4 StR 127/03, full text; NStZ-RR 2004, 108.
- ^ Tonio Walter: Current Criminal Law ; University of Regensburg, 06/2009, page 7. ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (accessed on January 6, 2010; PDF; 271 kB)
