Practice question · Select all that apply
Which are true of offences of danger?
Hints
- Three describe the split and the objection; one confuses two different classifications.
- Whether an offence needs a result and whether it needs harm are separate questions.
Show the answer
- A. A concrete-danger offence requires proof that a specific object or person was actually put at risk
- B. Abstract-danger offences are criticised for punishing at a distance from any harm to a legal good
- D. An abstract-danger offence punishes conduct that is typically dangerous, without proof of danger in the particular case
Why
The fourth mixes two independent classifications. A concrete-danger offence does require a result, the state of danger, and an offence of injury also requires one. The axes cross rather than coincide, which is why an offence has to be located on both before anything follows about what must be proved.
Practise The Objective Side: Causation and Imputation
The app has 5 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Law I is free to start.
More questions on The Objective Side: Causation and Imputation
- A man is stabbed, survives the wound, and dies that night when the hospital burns down. The stabbing was a…
- Under the theory of the equivalence of conditions, only a condition that generally tends to produce results…
- Under Article 138 of the Criminal Code, what is the minimum term of imprisonment, in years, for homicide?
- A man is injured by the accused and dies in a hospital fire that night. Arrange the questions the court works…
- A result that materialises a risk different from the one the conduct created is not objectively imputable to…
- Sort each offence by the classification based on who can commit it.
- Match each situation to the objective-imputation criterion that resolves it.
- Mere-activity offences require no external result, whereas result offences do. What practical consequence…