Current Events > Should there be a lesser penalty for attempted crimes?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
KhanJohnny 08/08/18 5:58:09 PM #1:	Continuing with my legal topics, here is a question: Why should a person who attempts a crime, and fails or is otherwise prevented from doing so, be given a lesser penalty? Consider a classic scenario: A man points a gun at the head of a fellow and pulls the trigger. The gun jams and he is tackled and beaten to a pulp by a righteous bystander. Why should he not face a charge of murder merely because of a fluke? <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906517273] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>Continuing with my legal topics, here is a question: Why should a person who attempts a crime, and fails or is otherwise prevented from doing so, be given a lesser penalty? Consider a classic scenario: A man points a gun at the head of a fellow and pulls the trigger. The gun jams and he is tackled and beaten to a pulp by a righteous bystander. Why should he not face a charge of murder merely because of a fluke?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Megaman50100 08/08/18 6:00:15 PM #2:	Only if the attempt is stopped prematurely by the perpetrator. --- move all remaining groundhog mercenaries to the front lines. Have sheep troopers squadrons A and B flank the cows. They're using DC-17 hoof blasters. <cite>Megaman50100 posted [p:906517420] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>Only if the attempt is stopped prematurely by the perpetrator.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/08/18 6:01:45 PM #3:	Megaman50100 posted... Only if the attempt is stopped prematurely by the perpetrator. Why should gang bangers in the street shooting at each other with intent to kill, not face murder charges merely because both parties finally fled before any mortal damage was done? <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906517513] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Megaman50100 posted...</cite> <quote>Only if the attempt is stopped prematurely by the perpetrator.</quote> Why should gang bangers in the street shooting at each other with intent to kill, not face murder charges merely because both parties finally fled before any mortal damage was done?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/08/18 7:05:44 PM #4:	Bump <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906521368] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>Bump</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/08/18 11:34:44 PM #5:	second bump <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906537382] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>second bump</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkTransient 08/08/18 11:38:45 PM #6:	If they try and fail, no. If they try, realise half way through that what they're doing is wrong, and try to do whatever they can to prevent further damage / make up for what they've already done, then a little bit more lenient. But not much. --- http://www.facebook.com/loaocos/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAfJB3KYYDg <cite>DarkTransient posted [p:906537608] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>If they try and fail, no. If they try, realise half way through that what they're doing is wrong, and try to do whatever they can to prevent further damage / make up for what they've already done, then a little bit more lenient. But not much.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 1:30:38 PM #7:	DarkTransient posted... If they try and fail, no. If they try, realise half way through that what they're doing is wrong, and try to do whatever they can to prevent further damage / make up for what they've already done, then a little bit more lenient. But not much. Under current law, a person who repents before completing the attempted crime faces no criminal liability whatsoever, assuming none of their preparation broke the law. I think that's fair. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906568307] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkTransient posted...</cite> <quote>If they try and fail, no. If they try, realise half way through that what they're doing is wrong, and try to do whatever they can to prevent further damage / make up for what they've already done, then a little bit more lenient. But not much.</quote> Under current law, a person who repents before completing the attempted crime faces no criminal liability whatsoever, assuming none of their preparation broke the law. I think that's fair.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#8	Post #8 was unavailable or deleted.
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 1:41:07 PM #9:	16-BITTER posted... KhanJohnny posted... Under current law, a person who repents before completing the attempted crime faces no criminal liability whatsoever, assuming none of their preparation broke the law. Planning to commit a crime is itself a crime, so I'm not sure where you're getting this idea. That isn't true unless the steps in the planning are illegal in themselves, or perhaps if a statute prohibits a certain form of planning. But in general, since this varies by state, it is not illegal to plan a crime. That would essentially amount to criminalizing thoughts. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906568971] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>16-BITTER posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>Under current law, a person who repents before completing the attempted crime faces no criminal liability whatsoever, assuming none of their preparation broke the law.</quote> Planning to commit a crime is itself a crime, so I'm not sure where you're getting this idea.</quote> That isn't true unless the steps in the planning are illegal in themselves, or perhaps if a statute prohibits a certain form of planning. But in general, since this varies by state, it is not illegal to plan a crime. That would essentially amount to criminalizing thoughts.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Colorahdo 08/09/18 1:43:30 PM #10:	I never understood this either You shot a dude in the head and walked away, thinking you killed him. You get 10 years instead of life because he happened to live. How is the act of committing that crime any different from murder? --- But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them - bring them here and kill them in front of me ~Jesus Christ <cite>Colorahdo posted [p:906569142] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>I never understood this either You shot a dude in the head and walked away, thinking you killed him. You get 10 years instead of life because he happened to live. How is the act of committing that crime any different from murder?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#11	Post #11 was unavailable or deleted.
DarkTransient 08/09/18 4:57:11 PM #12:	16-BITTER posted... You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause. IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two. --- http://www.facebook.com/loaocos/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAfJB3KYYDg <cite>DarkTransient posted [p:906581168] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>16-BITTER posted...</cite> <quote>You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause.</quote> IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 5:45:31 PM #13:	16-BITTER posted... KhanJohnny posted... That would essentially amount to criminalizing thoughts. Not really, they'd still have to produce proof that you were planning the crime, which is probably more difficult and not as worth the time to the prosecution, especially if you were planning to do something minor like vandalism. But planning something like murder and backing out is still "conspiracy to commit murder", like when those guys get caught hiring hitmen. Should they just be left uncharged if they just so happened to be hiring an undercover cop? That's a different scenario than merely planning a crime. It's a "substantial step" towards the completion of the crime and is therefore an attempt. The hitman is almost analogous to loading a gun. Once he's hired, it's lile pulling the trigger. Planning itself can be purely mental, and it is not considered illegal even if it's more than that afaik, so long as it's not a conspiracy. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906583950] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>16-BITTER posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>That would essentially amount to criminalizing thoughts.</quote> Not really, they'd still have to produce proof that you were planning the crime, which is probably more difficult and not as worth the time to the prosecution, especially if you were planning to do something minor like vandalism. But planning something like murder and backing out is still "conspiracy to commit murder", like when those guys get caught hiring hitmen. Should they just be left uncharged if they just so happened to be hiring an undercover cop? </quote> That's a different scenario than merely planning a crime. It's a "substantial step" towards the completion of the crime and is therefore an attempt. The hitman is almost analogous to loading a gun. Once he's hired, it's lile pulling the trigger. Planning itself can be purely mental, and it is not considered illegal even if it's more than that afaik, so long as it's not a conspiracy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MAGA2020 08/09/18 5:46:08 PM #14:	Nah. --- https://youtu.be/yZNtYmdZ-4c <cite>MAGA2020 posted [p:906583998] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>Nah.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 5:46:45 PM #15:	DarkTransient posted... 16-BITTER posted... You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause. IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two. You should be punished for intent. A person who pulls a trigger and misses or it misfires is just as morally blameworthy as a person with good aim or a good gun. Luck shouldn't play a role. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906584030] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkTransient posted...</cite> <quote><cite>16-BITTER posted...</cite> <quote>You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause.</quote> IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two.</quote> You should be punished for intent. A person who pulls a trigger and misses or it misfires is just as morally blameworthy as a person with good aim or a good gun. Luck shouldn't play a role.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkTransient 08/09/18 5:49:58 PM #16:	KhanJohnny posted... DarkTransient posted... 16-BITTER posted... You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause. IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two. You should be punished for intent. A person who pulls a trigger and misses or it misfires is just as morally blameworthy as a person with good aim or a good gun. Luck shouldn't play a role. Yes, I agree. But in the reverse case - suppose you intended a near miss (maybe to scare the person, or to just lightly graze them), but actually hit the person and killed them. In this case, I see no reason why the lesser intent should matter. Hence, "the greater of the two". --- http://www.facebook.com/loaocos/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAfJB3KYYDg <cite>DarkTransient posted [p:906584216] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkTransient posted...</cite> <quote><cite>16-BITTER posted...</cite> <quote>You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause.</quote> IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two.</quote> You should be punished for intent. A person who pulls a trigger and misses or it misfires is just as morally blameworthy as a person with good aim or a good gun. Luck shouldn't play a role.</quote> Yes, I agree. But in the reverse case - suppose you intended a near miss (maybe to scare the person, or to just lightly graze them), but actually hit the person and killed them. In this case, I see no reason why the lesser intent should matter. Hence, "the greater of the two".</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 5:53:46 PM #17:	DarkTransient posted... KhanJohnny posted... DarkTransient posted... 16-BITTER posted... You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause. IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two. You should be punished for intent. A person who pulls a trigger and misses or it misfires is just as morally blameworthy as a person with good aim or a good gun. Luck shouldn't play a role. Yes, I agree. But in the reverse case - suppose you intended a near miss (maybe to scare the person, or to just lightly graze them), but actually hit the person and killed them. In this case, I see no reason why the lesser intent should matter. Hence, "the greater of the two". I would still punish them because they knew or should have known that a gun is uncontrollable. So they should have murder, in a lesser degree, if theres proof they intended a near miss or maybe manslaughter. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906584443] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkTransient posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DarkTransient posted...</cite> <quote><cite>16-BITTER posted...</cite> <quote>You're punished for the degree of damage you caused, not the amount of damage you intended to cause.</quote> IMO, you should be punished for whichever is greater of the two.</quote> You should be punished for intent. A person who pulls a trigger and misses or it misfires is just as morally blameworthy as a person with good aim or a good gun. Luck shouldn't play a role.</quote> Yes, I agree. But in the reverse case - suppose you intended a near miss (maybe to scare the person, or to just lightly graze them), but actually hit the person and killed them. In this case, I see no reason why the lesser intent should matter. Hence, "the greater of the two".</quote> I would still punish them because they knew or should have known that a gun is uncontrollable. So they should have murder, in a lesser degree, if theres proof they intended a near miss or maybe manslaughter.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MedeaLysistrata 08/09/18 5:54:00 PM #18:	This is basic consequentialist ethics, but it does get more complicated I guess. Sometimes the result of a situation is what matters, not the intent. --- let's positive thinking [you simply say it, because you like the way that it sounds] <cite>MedeaLysistrata posted [p:906584455] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>This is basic consequentialist ethics, but it does get more complicated I guess. Sometimes the result of a situation is what matters, not the intent.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
whitelytning 08/09/18 6:08:04 PM #19:	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. --- ************************************************ https://imgur.com/iZdWIKJ <cite>whitelytning posted [p:906585290] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>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.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dash_Harber 08/09/18 6:09:51 PM #20:	No. You aren't being punished for committing the crime or not, you are being punished for trying to commit the crime. <cite>Dash_Harber posted [p:906585379] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>No. You aren't being punished for committing the crime or not, you are being punished for trying to commit the crime.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 6:14:37 PM #21:	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. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906585647] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>whitelytning posted...</cite> <quote>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.</quote> 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.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 6:17:22 PM #22:	MedeaLysistrata posted... This is basic consequentialist ethics, but it does get more complicated I guess. Sometimes the result of a situation is what matters, not the intent. I think the result is really unimportant. I think the law of attempt should be pretty much entirely discarded. Should the underwear bomber be treated less harshly merely because he seriously attempted to blow up a planeful of people than if he actually did so (assuming a slightly different scenario where he didn't blow himself up as well)? <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906585797] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>MedeaLysistrata posted...</cite> <quote>This is basic consequentialist ethics, but it does get more complicated I guess. Sometimes the result of a situation is what matters, not the intent.</quote> I think the result is really unimportant. I think the law of attempt should be pretty much entirely discarded. Should the underwear bomber be treated less harshly merely because he seriously attempted to blow up a planeful of people than if he actually did so (assuming a slightly different scenario where he didn't blow himself up as well)?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
whitelytning 08/09/18 6:17:36 PM #23:	KhanJohnny posted... 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. No they aren't. To commit a murder, a human must die. They are less blameworthy because the person is still alive for all the reasons I mentioned above. --- ************************************************ https://imgur.com/iZdWIKJ <cite>whitelytning posted [p:906585810] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>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. </quote> No they aren't. To commit a murder, a human must die. They are less blameworthy because the person is still alive for all the reasons I mentioned above.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#24	Post #24 was unavailable or deleted.
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 6:22:46 PM #25:	whitelytning posted... KhanJohnny posted... 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. No they aren't. To commit a murder, a human must die. They are less blameworthy because the person is still alive for all the reasons I mentioned above. That is allowing luck into a system which purports to be fair. A person who attempts murder is not norally distinguishable from someone who effects a murder. They both have broken society's rules, have exhibited an evil intent, and an evil action, and are equally dangerous. That society was able to avoid the damage or harm seems irrelevant to me. It was a fortunate windfall for the community, not a lessening of guilt for the criminal. The attempted murderer needs just as much rehabilitation, deterrence, and punishment as the successful one <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906586117] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>whitelytning posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>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. </quote> No they aren't. To commit a murder, a human must die. They are less blameworthy because the person is still alive for all the reasons I mentioned above.</quote> That is allowing luck into a system which purports to be fair. A person who attempts murder is not norally distinguishable from someone who effects a murder. They both have broken society's rules, have exhibited an evil intent, and an evil action, and are equally dangerous. That society was able to avoid the damage or harm seems irrelevant to me. It was a fortunate windfall for the community, not a lessening of guilt for the criminal. The attempted murderer needs just as much rehabilitation, deterrence, and punishment as the successful one</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 6:24:32 PM #26:	fenderbender321 posted... No. And in the spirit of that logic, it would then make sense to not punish people more severely for the same crime just because something they didn't intend to happen might happen. For example, if a liquor store sells a 20 year old a bottle of alcohol, and then he gets drunk and goes driving and kills somebody, then the liquor store should have the same punishment they would have for just selling alcohol to somebody under 21 who didn't kill somebody. You know? That doesn't follow at all. The liquor store wouldn't face criminal liability for the criminal actions of the 20 year old because it did not attempt to bring those about. Its sole criminal action was illegal selling of alcohol, not any additional results of that initial act. Maybe there are civil penalties they would face, but I don't think they would face criminal liability for drunk driving of a minor. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906586237] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>fenderbender321 posted...</cite> <quote>No. And in the spirit of that logic, it would then make sense to not punish people more severely for the same crime just because something they didn't intend to happen might happen. For example, if a liquor store sells a 20 year old a bottle of alcohol, and then he gets drunk and goes driving and kills somebody, then the liquor store should have the same punishment they would have for just selling alcohol to somebody under 21 who didn't kill somebody. You know?</quote> That doesn't follow at all. The liquor store wouldn't face criminal liability for the criminal actions of the 20 year old because it did not attempt to bring those about. Its sole criminal action was illegal selling of alcohol, not any additional results of that initial act. Maybe there are civil penalties they would face, but I don't think they would face criminal liability for drunk driving of a minor.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 08/09/18 6:28:45 PM #27:	KhanJohnny posted... A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:906586491] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer</quote> Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 6:32:50 PM #28:	Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit. The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906586739] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer</quote> Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit.</quote> The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TheCyborgNinja 08/09/18 6:35:44 PM #29:	No. Intention was there. --- "message parlor" ? do you mean the post office ? - SlayerX888 <cite>TheCyborgNinja posted [p:906586913] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>No. Intention was there.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 08/09/18 7:17:03 PM #30:	KhanJohnny posted... Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit. The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue. No shit, I know how to read. That doesn't change what I said. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:906589261] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer</quote> Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit.</quote> The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue.</quote> No shit, I know how to read. That doesn't change what I said.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 7:40:03 PM #31:	Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit. The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue. No shit, I know how to read. That doesn't change what I said. Yes it does because your post makes literally no sense otherwise. But Kineth--so what did I expect? <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906590628] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer</quote> Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit.</quote> The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue.</quote> No shit, I know how to read. That doesn't change what I said.</quote> Yes it does because your post makes literally no sense otherwise. But Kineth--so what did I expect?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DarkTransient 08/09/18 7:42:20 PM #32:	KhanJohnny posted... Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit. The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue. No shit, I know how to read. That doesn't change what I said. Yes it does because you're post makes literally no sense oyherwise. But Kineth--so what did I expect? Next he'll accuse you of being racist, then disappear when you ask him to provide even one example to back it up. --- http://www.facebook.com/loaocos/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAfJB3KYYDg <cite>DarkTransient posted [p:906590751] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>A person who pulled a trigger and had a misfire is still, in essence, a murderer</quote> Ok, so you're advocating for thought policing. No fucking way should anyone support this shit.</quote> The scenario as stated establishes as a fact that the gunholder had intent to kill and pulled the trigger only for a misfire to occur. We are discussing with those facts at issue.</quote> No shit, I know how to read. That doesn't change what I said.</quote> Yes it does because you're post makes literally no sense oyherwise. But Kineth--so what did I expect?</quote> Next he'll accuse you of being racist, then disappear when you ask him to provide even one example to back it up.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 08/09/18 9:02:14 PM #33:	KhanJohnny posted... Yes it does because your post makes literally no sense otherwise. But Kineth--so what did I expect? What did you expect? --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:906595079] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>Yes it does because your post makes literally no sense otherwise. But Kineth--so what did I expect?</quote> What did you expect?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 9:14:56 PM #34:	Murder and attempted murder are obviously not the same crime. But they should be penalized in the same way. As for what I expected, it's exactly what I got. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906595802] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>Murder and attempted murder are obviously not the same crime. But they should be penalized in the same way. As for what I expected, it's exactly what I got.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 08/09/18 9:17:20 PM #35:	So someone should face the death penalty for attempted murder? Anyway, how about you be a man and say what you mean. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:906595937] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>So someone should face the death penalty for attempted murder? Anyway, how about you be a man and say what you mean.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 9:24:46 PM #36:	Kineth posted... So someone should face the death penalty for attempted murder? Anyway, how about you be a man and say what you mean. I dont support the death penalty except in certain extreme cases, so most likely no. But in principle, I have no problem with a person facing execution in such an extreme case even if it was merely an attempt. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906596406] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>So someone should face the death penalty for attempted murder? Anyway, how about you be a man and say what you mean.</quote> I dont support the death penalty except in certain extreme cases, so most likely no. But in principle, I have no problem with a person facing execution in such an extreme case even if it was merely an attempt.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dash_Harber 08/09/18 9:27:38 PM #37:	So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes? <cite>Dash_Harber posted [p:906596575] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 9:31:45 PM #38:	Dash_Harber posted... So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes? Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906596828] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote>So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes?</quote> Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dash_Harber 08/09/18 9:32:29 PM #39:	KhanJohnny posted... Dash_Harber posted... So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes? Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous. So ... what is the point of this topic, then? <cite>Dash_Harber posted [p:906596864] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote>So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes?</quote> Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous.</quote> So ... what is the point of this topic, then?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 9:34:12 PM #40:	Dash_Harber posted... KhanJohnny posted... Dash_Harber posted... So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes? Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous. So ... what is the point of this topic, then? Did you read anything discussed so far lol <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906596972] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote>So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes?</quote> Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous.</quote> So ... what is the point of this topic, then?</quote> Did you read anything discussed so far lol</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Dash_Harber 08/09/18 9:36:46 PM #41:	KhanJohnny posted... Dash_Harber posted... KhanJohnny posted... Dash_Harber posted... So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes? Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous. So ... what is the point of this topic, then? Did you read anything discussed so far lol Honestly, I skimmed it. <cite>Dash_Harber posted [p:906597114] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Dash_Harber posted...</cite> <quote>So in your view, the law should exist only to punish people who are actually good at committing crimes?</quote> Is this directed towards me? No, I believe the opposite. A person who shoots a gun and misses is just as bad as someone who gets a headshot. The attempted murderer with bad aim should be punished as harshly because he is just as culpable and just as dangerous.</quote> So ... what is the point of this topic, then?</quote> Did you read anything discussed so far lol</quote> Honestly, I skimmed it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 08/09/18 9:41:58 PM #42:	KhanJohnny posted... I dont support the death penalty except in certain extreme cases, so most likely no. But in principle, I have no problem with a person facing execution in such an extreme case even if it was merely an attempt. Ok, so you didn't want to be a man, I can understand that. As for what you're saying here, I think it's absolutely ridiculous to have someone face the death penalty for attempted murder, regardless of however "extreme" it could be. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:906597426] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>I dont support the death penalty except in certain extreme cases, so most likely no. But in principle, I have no problem with a person facing execution in such an extreme case even if it was merely an attempt.</quote> Ok, so you didn't want to be a man, I can understand that. As for what you're saying here, I think it's absolutely ridiculous to have someone face the death penalty for attempted murder, regardless of however "extreme" it could be.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 9:43:20 PM #43:	Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... I dont support the death penalty except in certain extreme cases, so most likely no. But in principle, I have no problem with a person facing execution in such an extreme case even if it was merely an attempt. Ok, so you didn't want to be a man, I can understand that. As for what you're saying here, I think it's absolutely ridiculous to have someone face the death penalty for attempted murder, regardless of however "extreme" it could be. Good for you doing all that thinking <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906597504] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote>I dont support the death penalty except in certain extreme cases, so most likely no. But in principle, I have no problem with a person facing execution in such an extreme case even if it was merely an attempt.</quote> Ok, so you didn't want to be a man, I can understand that. As for what you're saying here, I think it's absolutely ridiculous to have someone face the death penalty for attempted murder, regardless of however "extreme" it could be.</quote> Good for you doing all that thinking</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 08/09/18 9:44:02 PM #44:	You got any reason for your condescension, little one? --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:906597551] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>You got any reason for your condescension, little one?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 9:45:06 PM #45:	Kineth posted... You got any reason for your condescension, little one? Kinething it up I see lmao <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906597632] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>You got any reason for your condescension, little one?</quote> Kinething it up I see lmao</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
lilORANG 08/09/18 9:45:47 PM #46:	Why reward incompetence? --- Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids. <cite>lilORANG posted [p:906597669] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>Why reward incompetence?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kineth 08/09/18 9:47:08 PM #47:	KhanJohnny posted... Kineth posted... You got any reason for your condescension, little one? Kinething it up I see lmao Ah, so you mean, being right? I don't know what you're so reluctant to say that, lad. --- If you're not looking for any honest discussion, agreement, meeting halfway or middle ground, don't bother arguing with me. Selfish narcissists need not apply. <cite>Kineth posted [p:906597754] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>You got any reason for your condescension, little one?</quote> Kinething it up I see lmao</quote> Ah, so you mean, being right? I don't know what you're so reluctant to say that, lad.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/09/18 9:51:43 PM #48:	Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... Kineth posted... You got any reason for your condescension, little one? Kinething it up I see lmao Ah, so you mean, being right? I don't know what you're so reluctant to say that, lad. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906598018] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>You got any reason for your condescension, little one?</quote> Kinething it up I see lmao</quote> Ah, so you mean, being right? I don't know what you're so reluctant to say that, lad.</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KhanJohnny 08/10/18 12:21:26 AM #49:	Kineth posted... KhanJohnny posted... Kineth posted... You got any reason for your condescension, little one? Kinething it up I see lmao Ah, so you mean, being right? I don't know what you're so reluctant to say that, lad. <cite>KhanJohnny posted [p:906606267] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote><cite>KhanJohnny posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Kineth posted...</cite> <quote>You got any reason for your condescension, little one?</quote> Kinething it up I see lmao</quote> Ah, so you mean, being right? I don't know what you're so reluctant to say that, lad.</quote> </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Rika_Furude 08/10/18 12:23:04 AM #50:	No, why should there be? Planning a crime, attempting to commit a crime, committing a crime but failing, and successfully committing a crime should all have the same level of punishment. On that note, pinning the crime on someone else should impose a double penalty (for example fake rape claims) --- Posted with GameRaven 3.5.1 <cite>Rika_Furude posted [p:906606347] in Should the... [t:76884128]...</cite> <quote>No, why should there be? Planning a crime, attempting to commit a crime, committing a crime but failing, and successfully committing a crime should all have the same level of punishment. On that note, pinning the crime on someone else should impose a double penalty (for example fake rape claims)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Current Events > Should there be a lesser penalty for attempted crimes? (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Should there be a lesser penalty for attempted crimes?