This kind of crime is subjectively manifested as the act of artificially seeking stimulation, venting emotions, wantonly playing tricks, doing nothing wrong, and undermining public order.
Do as you please, that is, the behavior has the non-specific nature of the object. Immediacy of time. The cause is counterintuitive. Motives are counterintuitive. The illegality of the motive. The venue is non-public and public. In judicial practice, how to determine arbitrariness?
1. Examine subjective motivations. The perpetrator attacks the inner cause or inner impulse of others in order to play with power and take pleasure in venting. fill a vacancy. The pursuit of unhealthy purposes such as stimulation, or other reasons.
2. Whether it is a temporary intention. In a fight, the perpetrator beats others, not because of the development of the situation, but because of his will. From the perspective of mood and temperament, its consideration is not to be able to fight, but whether you want to fight or not, and often get started. On a whim. Hit.
3, whether there is a result. In fact, it is rare to beat others arbitrarily in the form of a hooligan, and the perpetrators often have "reasons", but their content is either trivial in social life, or out of fiction or fiction. Suspicion or logical confusion, not accepted by the mainstream concept of society. The "reasons" that violate common sense and social order and good customs can only be unreasonable and can be regarded as unreasonable troubles, and the justification of the cause of the incident at this time is not objective, and we cannot blindly emphasize its "reason".
Its heinous circumstances generally include: repeated beatings of others, repeated beatings of others, beatings of others, beatings of others with murder weapons, beatings of others with murder weapons, causing minor injuries, beating others and causing serious consequences such as being injured; and causing serious disorder in social order. The masses are seriously disturbed psychologically and so on. At present, how to determine the aggravating circumstances in judicial practice is still inconclusive.
Annex: The relevant contents of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles in the Guiding Opinions on sentencing common crimes (trial implementation):
1. Where the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble is constituted, the starting point for sentencing is to be determined within the corresponding scope on the basis of the following circumstances:
(1) Whoever provokes trouble once shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a maximum of three years. Within the range of detention.
(2) Those who gather others to pick quarrels and provoke trouble three times (each time is a crime) and seriously disrupt social order, within the range of five to seven years of imprisonment, determine the starting point of sentencing.
2. According to the starting point of sentencing, according to the number of times of picking quarrels and provoking troubles. Consequences of injury. Forcibly taking other people's belongings or vandalizing them at will. The amount of occupation of public or private property and other criminal facts that affect the composition of the crime is increased, and the base sentence is determined.
3. The crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles shall be punished by five to ten years' imprisonment and a fine, depending on the number of times of picking quarrels and provoking troubles. Harmful consequences. The circumstances of the crime, such as the degree of disruption of social order, are to be determined in consideration of the defendant's ability to pay the fine.
4. Where the crime of picking quarrels and provoking trouble is constituted, the specific acts shall be comprehensively considered. Harmful consequences. The degree of damage to the social order and other criminal facts. Sentencing circumstances and subjective malignancy of the defendant. Personal danger. Factors such as confession and repentance determine the application of probation.