<![CDATA[Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis unsur-unsur tindak pidana kepemilikan dan peredaran senjata api serta pertimbangan hukum majelis hakim dalam menjatuhkan putusan terhadap pelaku tindak pidana kepemilikan dan peredaran senjata api dalam Putusan Nomor 815/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Mks. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu normatif empiris, dengan menggabungkan kajian hukum dengan data dan fakta yang diperoleh dari lapangan studi terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan yang relevan dan analisis terhadap putusan pengadilan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Terdakwa WBJ, terbukti secara sah dan meyakinkan bersalah atas tindak pidana kepemilikan dan peredaran bahan peledak. Majelis Hakim mendasarkan putusan pada analisis komprehensif terhadap dakwaan, fakta persidangan, serta pembuktian unsur kesengajaan (mens rea) dan peran aktif terdakwa. Meski UU No. 12/Drt/1951 memuat ancaman pidana berat, hakim menjatuhkan vonis satu tahun penjara dengan mempertimbangkan keseimbangan antara aspek hukum dan kemanusiaan. Pertimbangan ini mencakup faktor memberatkan dan meringankan, seperti sikap kooperatif dan pengakuan terdakwa di persidangan. Putusan tersebut dinilai adil dan proporsional dalam mewujudkan penegakan hukum. Selain memberikan efek jera bagi terdakwa, vonis ini berfungsi sebagai pencegahan umum bagi masyarakat agar tidak melakukan perbuatan serupa. This study aims to analyze the elements of the criminal acts of possession and distribution of firearms, as well as the legal considerations of the panel of judges in passing verdicts against perpetrators of firearm possession and distribution in Case Number 815/Pid.Sus/2024/PN Mks. The research method used is empirical normative, combining legal studies with data and facts obtained from field studies of relevant legislation and analysis of court decisions. The study results show that the defendant, WBJ, was legally and convincingly proven guilty of the criminal act of possessing and distributing explosives. The panel of judges based their decision on a comprehensive analysis of the charges, trial facts, as well as the evidence of intent (mens rea) and the active role of the defendant. Although Law No. 12/Drt/1951 stipulates severe criminal penalties, the judge handed down a one-year prison sentence by considering a balance between legal and humanitarian aspects. This consideration includes both aggravating and mitigating factors, such as the defendant's cooperative attitude and confession during the trial. The verdict is considered fair and proportionate in upholding the law. In addition to providing a deterrent effect for the defendant, this sentence also serves as a general deterrent for the public to prevent similar actions.]]>
