Berdasarkan Undang Undang Darurat Nomor 12 tahun 1951 siapapun tidak boleh membawa senjata tajam tanpa adanya hak. Namun, tindak pidana membawa senjata tajam tanpa hak terjadi di beberapa tempat di Indonesia termasuk di Kabupaten Kuningan dan Kota Cirebon. Kedua peristiwa tersebut telah diputus oleh Pengadilan Negeri Kuningan serta oleh Pengadilan Negeri Cirebon. Rumusan masalah, bagaimana pengaturan tindak pidana membawa senjata tajam tanpa hak serta perbandingan pertimbangan hakim antara Putusan nomor 57/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Kng dengan Putusan nomor 128/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Cbn. Tujuan penelitian, untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis bagaimana pengaturan tindak pidana membawa senjata tajam tanpa hak di Indonesia, serta perbandingan pertimbangan hakim antara Putusan Nomor 57/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Kng dengan Putusan Nomor 128/Pid.Sus/2023/PN Cbn. Metode penelitian menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif, alat pengumpulan data dengan studi kepustakaan serta analisis data secara kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa tindak pidana membawa senjata tajam diatur dalam Pasal 2 ayat (1) dan (2) Undang-Undang Darurat Republik Indonesia Nomor 12 Tahun 1951, Pasal 307 ayat (1) dan (2) Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, serta Pasal 15 ayat (2) huruf e Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 2 Tahun 2002 tentang Kepolisian Negara Republik Indonesia. Berdasarkan pertimbangan hakim baik secara yuridis, filosofis maupun sosiologis, vonis hukuman dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Kuningan adalah 8 (delapan) bulan penjara sedangkan dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Cirebon lebih tinggi yaitu 1 (satu) tahun. Pertimbangan secara sosiologis paling mempengaruhi dalam menentukan masa pidana penjara bagi Terdakwa. Simpulan penelitian, pengaturan tindak pidana membawa senjata tajam telah diatur dalam peraturan perundang-undangan secara umum maupun khusus dan hasil perbandingan pertimbangan hakim menunjukan bahwa perbedaan masa pidana antara kedua putusan disebabkan karena adanya perbedaan dalam niat, keadaan yang meringankan dan memberatkan terdakwa antara kedua putusan tersebut. Saran penelitian, pemerintah hendaknya melakukan rekonstruksi terhadap Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2023 Tentang Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, dan menciptakan peraturan terkait mekanisme perizinan senjata tajam. Selanjutnya, hakim perlu memperhatikan hukum yang berlaku saat ini serta dinamika sosial yang terjadi di masyarakat sebagai landasan dalam membuat pertimbangan pada putusan, sehingga dalam setiap putusan yang dijatuhkan, hukum tetap relevan, adil, dan sesuai dengan kebutuhan masyarakat.
Kata Kunci : Pertimbangan hakim, Tindak Pidana, Membawa Senjata Tajam.

Based on Emergency Law Number 12 of 1951, no one is allowed to carry sharp weapons without permission. However, the crime of carrying sharp weapons without permission occurred in several places in Indonesia, including in Kuningan Regency and Cirebon City. The second incident was decided by the Kuningan District Court and by the Cirebon District Court. The formulation of the problem is how to regulate the crime of carrying sharp weapons without right and the judge's considerations between Decision Number 57 / Pid.Sus / 2023 / PN Kng and Decision Number 128 / Pid.Sus / 2023 / PN Cbn. The purposes of this study are to determine and to analyze how to regulate the crime of carrying sharp weapons without right in Indonesia, as well as the judge's considerations between Decision Number 57 / Pid.Sus / 2023 / PN Kng and Decision Number 128 / Pid.Sus / 2023 / PN Cbn. The research method uses a normative legal approach, data collection tools with literature studies, and qualitative data analysis. The results of the study indicate that the crime of carrying sharp weapons is regulated in Article 2, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Emergency Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 12 of 1951, Article 307, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Republic of Indonesia Law Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code, and Article 15, paragraph (2), letter e of the Republic of Indonesia Law Number 2 of 2002 concerning the Indonesian National Police. The judge's considerations, both legally, philosophically, and sociologically, the sentence in the Kuningan District Court Decision is 8 (eight) months in prison, while in the Cirebon District Court Decision it is higher, namely 1 (one) year. Sociological considerations are the most influential in determining the prison term for the defendant. The conclusion of the study, the regulation of the crime of carrying sharp weapons, has been regulated in general and specific laws and regulations, and the results of the comparison of judges' considerations show that the difference in the sentence between the two decisions is due to differences in intention, mitigating and aggravating circumstances of the defendant between the two decisions. The research suggestion is that the government should reconstruct Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 2023 concerning the Criminal Code and create regulations related to the licensing mechanism for sharp weapons. Furthermore, judges should continue to pay attention to the current legal provisions and the social dynamics occurring in society as a basis for making considerations in decisions so that in each judgment delivered, the law remains relevant, equitable, and responsive to societal needs.
Keywords: Judge's considerations, Criminal Act, Carrying Sharp Weapons.