Dangerous tool
The concept of hazardous tool is a technical term of the German criminal law .
use
Originally, the dangerous tool was only intended in connection with the crimes of bodily harm in the Criminal Code (StGB). The execution “using a dangerous tool” has qualified simple bodily harm as dangerous bodily harm since March 20, 1876, in accordance with the formerly newly created Section 223a of the Criminal Code (at that time of the German Reich) . According to current law, this increases the range of punishments from a maximum of 5 years' imprisonment or fine according to Section 223 (1) StGB to imprisonment between six months and ten years in accordance with Section 224 (1) No. 2 without the possibility of a fine. In less serious cases, the qualified penalty range is three months to five years.
With the entry into force of the aforementioned 6th Criminal Law Amendment Act, the legislature also reformed property crimes and introduced the concept of dangerous tools there, among other things. Since then, it is no longer just the carrying of firearms that qualifies theft ( Section 242 of the Criminal Code) as a specially punished ("weapons") theft according to Section 244, Paragraph 1, No. 1a of the Criminal Code, but any other dangerous tool in addition to (now everyone ) Weapon .
The same applies to a case of serious robbery under Section 250 (1) No. 1 a of the Criminal Code. In addition, the actual use of such a dangerous tool according to Section 250 (2) No. 1 of the Criminal Code leads to (in a very special way) serious robbery and an even higher level of punishment. A corresponding regulation was also introduced in Section 177 of the Criminal Code for sexual coercion (in 2016 for sexual assault).
Since 2017, simply carrying a dangerous tool with you, even in the event of resistance to and assault on law enforcement officers (Sections 113, 114) and for breaches of the peace (Section 125a), has generally led to a higher punishment.
The following applies in all cases: Even the subjective facts of the case must include the presence or use of the dangerous tool as such for a conviction, i.e. H. the offender's intent must extend to them. He does not have to understand the terms as such himself, but the intent must include the underlying circumstances.
definition
The StGB itself does not provide a legal definition of the term. As with other norms of the Criminal Code, the term is only to be understood in the context of the respective offense and therefore does not necessarily have a coherent meaning or definition due to the different protection directions of bodily harm and property offenses.
Dangerous bodily harm according to § 224 StGB
According to § 224 of the Criminal Code, jurisprudence and legal doctrine consistently understand any non-physical movable object that, according to its objective nature and the type of its specific use, is suitable for causing significant physical injuries as a dangerous tool. Since the terminology of criminal law is independent of civil law (in particular the BGB ), the prevailing opinion is that animals are treated as things even after Section 90a has come into force and can therefore also represent dangerous tools according to this definition. The term "tool" becomes widely concluded that it must be an object that is separate from the human body and that can be moved towards another under control of the will. Accordingly, the perpetrator's fist or foot is not a tool; but the shoe is likely, whereby footwear is regularly viewed as a dangerous tool if it is sturdy. Nor should a rock or a hot stove fall under it that the perpetrator hits the victim. A criminal liability according to § 224 Abs. 1 Nr. 1, Nr. 5 StGB remains unaffected. Surgical instruments used properly and as intended by a doctor should not be recorded, as they are not used for attack or defense purposes.
Resistance to and assault on enforcement officers according to Sections 113 and 114, breach of the peace according to Section 125a, sexual assault and sexual coercion according to Section 177 (7) no.1, armed theft according to Section 244 (1) no.1a, serious robbery according to 250 para. 1 no. 1 a of the Criminal Code
The term deviates from this definition here. Since these facts make mere carrying along with oneself sufficient as aggravating the penalty , the specific use cannot be used. In contrast to the other tool in Section 244, Paragraph 1, No. 1b of the Criminal Code, the starting point is solely based on the abstract danger, which justifies the proximity to the weapon as a special case. On the other hand, according to the case law of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), an otherwise harmless object can also be considered a dangerous tool if it is used in a dangerous manner and, if applicable, in addition to that in Section 177 (8) no.1 and 250 (2) no.1 the punishment provided for the use of a dangerous tool. He is therefore closed to a final, generally applicable definition. Ultimately, the term can only be circumscribed in individual cases, whereby on the one hand the legal valuation as a generic term for weapons and the fact that carrying various objects (pocket knife, ballpoint pen) with you are generally viewed as socially adequate and therefore taken in isolation do not yet lead to a particular danger and thus criminality.
Individual evidence
- ↑ a b Historical overview of the development of the law on dangerous bodily harm
- ↑ since the entry into force on April 1, 1998 of the Sixth Law for the Reform of Criminal Law (6th StrRG) of January 26, 1998, Federal Law Gazette I 1998, pp. 164–188, now Section 224
- ↑ Historical overview of the legal situation on special cases of theft according to § 244 StGB
- ↑ see BGHSt 14, 152.
- ↑ See BGH, judgment of September 15, 2010 - 2 StR 395/10 .
- ↑ BGH NStZ 1987, 174
- ↑ BGH NJW 1978, 1206; Rengier BT II § 14 Rn. 20th
- ↑ See BGH NStZ 1999, p. 135 f.
- ↑ See BGHSt 44, p. 103.
