Porte de arma de fuego no inscrita en casos de suicidio tentado: exención y responsabilidad penal

The perspective from which jurisprudence and doctrine traditionally face the limits of criminal law is in a tension that, around the differences presented by a paternalistic and liberal model, leads us to study three fundamental points in cases of failed suicide. The first focused on the natural penalty as a reason for suspension of the penalty in the case of the use of unregistered firearms. Those that entail subsistence with a physical deterioration of greater intensity than the penalty that the convicted person would suffer. Second, in relation to the need to punish suicidal behavior involving the use of unregistered firearms, in view of the notion of a dangerous crime. The third focused on the philosophical-political considerations between liberalism and paternalism that can be made regarding the concept of vis compulsiva to exempt from liability suicidal behavior involving the use of unregistered firearms. The study of these three dogmatic questions allows us to reinterpret the evaluation of suicidal behaviors in criminal matters cases in which the interest responds to an open text according to the notion of freedom. On the differentiation of these three subjects, a dogmatic reconstruction of the limits of liberalism as opposed to the contributions of the harm principle is proposed.