31 Aug crime of massacre

Whoever, outside the cases provided for by the article 285, in order to kill, carries out acts that endanger public safety and is punished, if the event results in the death of several people, with life imprisonment. If the death of only one person is caused, life imprisonment applies. In any other case, imprisonment of not less than fifteen years is applied, crimes against public safety are all characterized by the diffusiveness of the damage, such as to threaten an indeterminate number of people, not identifiable a priori. Therefore, a double level of indeterminacy is configured, concerning both the range of action of the effects of the conduct, be the offended people. The strong anticipation of the threshold of the criminal relevant is justified by the very nature of the crimes against public safety, able to hit both the community and the individual (Plurium offensive crimes), reason why the most advanced doctrine described the crimes in question such as the super -individual projection of individual goods. The rule in question punishes the conduct of whom, in order to kill, endanger the public safety. This conduct can be expressed both in commissioner and omissive behavior, given the extreme vagueness of the abstract case. Obviously, omissive behavior, To be criminally relevant, must be based on a guarantee position of the agent subject. It is therefore therefore a crime of event and free -form. The death of one or more people is not a constitutive element of the case, but simply an aggravating circumstance, As can be seen from the last part of the standard. The typed event is therefore the danger to public safety. We are faced with a hypothesis of a crime of concrete danger, therefore having to have actually endangered the legal good, and not just having offended the life of a single person. The attempt does not appear configurable, given the already early criminal relevance; The fact may eventually integrate the extremes of another crime (ad is. homocide). The rule requires specific malice, or the desire to endanger the public safety, In order to kill one or more people. According to some authors, the danger is a constitutive element of the case and must therefore be the subject of representation by the agent. As already anticipated, Furthermore, The taxable persons must not be determined in advance. As regards relations with art. 285, The difference is to be seen in the different psychological element, since in this article the further purpose is required to attack the state safety. Any murder will remain absorbed by the case, being expressly contemplated as an aggravating circumstance, while the personal injury caused in an attempt to murder, not being contemplated by the standard, they will participate in the crime of massacre.