LogFAQs > #906585647

whitelytning posted...

The effect of the intended act is completely different when the intended result doesn't happen. IMO the effect of the intended action should be considered in determining the punishment because I believe in proportional punishment and the concept of retribution.

In the murder example, a person is still alive and able to see his family and continue to live his life. The intended act had less of a negative impact on society and should therefore be punished to a lesser amount if you care about proportional punishment. Additionally, if you take into account the concept of retribution the argument is the same. The person that pulled the trigger owes less to society or the family of the victim than he would if he had actually taken the life of that other person because the person is still alive.

A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer, and should be treated by society as such, and is just as morally blameworthy as someone with a good gun.

I don't see why luck should have any role in the criminal justice system. Both the attemptor and the actual murderer are equally as dangerous to society as well.