Attempted Murder

[NedimNapoleon]

I've usually noticed, reading the news, that attempted murder convicts get a lower term or penalty than real murders. Even though in theory the maximum sentence is the same (UK - life), as I've noticed attempties get lower prison terms and better conditions. Are we basically rewarding people for sucking at killing? Am I wrong about my assumption that attempties get better terms? Please discuss, im sorry that I dont have time for a longer OP with sources and etc.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Giving people a reason to not try again when failed can be argued to be more valuable then consistency of revenge.

 

[JollyRoger]

Should drunk drivers that kill someone get the same punishment as drunk drivers that do not?

 

[Borachio]

The Anglo-Saxons maintained that killing someone by accident was worse than doing so deliberately, since you had demonstrated yourself as a liability. And the penalty was heavier. Something like two sacks of wheat instead of one.

Maybe on this basis an attempted murder should be more heavily penalized too.

 

[Borachio]

Well, I'd be grateful. Wouldn't you be?

 

[NedimNapoleon]

So if I chopped off your arm, then went "I was gonna chop off your dick as well, but I don't wanna look at it", would I have rewarded you with just chopping off your arm?

Well you choose not to do such, you didn't suck to the point you did not harm me.

 

[TheLastOne36]

The Anglo-Saxons maintained that killing someone by accident was worse than doing so deliberately, since you had demonstrated yourself as a liability. And the penalty was heavier. Something like two sacks of wheat instead of one.

Maybe on this basis an attempted murder should be more heavily penalized too.

Reminds me of the law in Venezuela where if you kill someone while driving under the influence, you get a significantly lower jail sentence (we are talking about months) then if you were not under the influence (where we can be talking about many years) because supposedly it is not your fault. You were drunk.

 

[Takhisis]

I've usually noticed, reading the news, that attempted murder convicts get a lower term or penalty than real murders. Even though in theory the maximum sentence is the same (UK - life), as I've noticed attempties get lower prison terms and better conditions. Are we basically rewarding people for sucking at killing? Am I wrong about my assumption that attempties get better terms? Please discuss, im sorry that I dont have time for a longer OP with sources and etc.

Objective conditions of punibility (if such a word exists in English, I'm reading off a German author). Consummation of the objective type needs to be achieved for the full crime's punishment to be meted out. Depends on whether the lawmakers are subjectivists or objectivists.

 

[Leoreth]

Reminds me of the law in Venezuela where if you kill someone while driving under the influence, you get a significantly lower jail sentence (we are talking about months) then if you were not under the influence (where we can be talking about many years) because supposedly it is not your fault. You were drunk.

I'd always keep a bottle of booze in my car just in case.

 

[TheLastOne36]

It's no laughing matter though. It is the most practical way to assassinate someone in that country. You only go to jail for a few months.

You could pay someone to do it too as a few months is nothing compared to the cash they'd be receiving.

 

[Takhisis]

And that's why Actio libera in causa exists.

 

[Goodfella]

It's no laughing matter though. It is the most practical way to assassinate someone in that country. You only go to jail for a few months.

You could pay someone to do it too as a few months is nothing compared to the cash they'd be receiving.

Yeah, I can just see the mob bosses drunkenly speeding down the sidewalk to make the rat "disappear".

 

[Terxpahseyton]

If it is any reconciliation: You get harder punishment when you accidentally killed someone as opposed to accidentally hurting them.

 

[holy king]

Reminds me of the law in Venezuela where if you kill someone while driving under the influence, you get a significantly lower jail sentence (we are talking about months) then if you were not under the influence (where we can be talking about many years) because supposedly it is not your fault. You were drunk.

i have to say there's kind of a logic to that...

 

[LegionSteve]

Reminds me of the law in Venezuela where if you kill someone while driving under the influence, you get a significantly lower jail sentence (we are talking about months) then if you were not under the influence (where we can be talking about many years) because supposedly it is not your fault. You were drunk.

Do they apply the same logic to other crimes?

"Man, I got so hammered last night, I thought it would be a good idea to kick my neighbour's front door in and steal his TV."

If not, why not?

 

[TheLastOne36]

Do they apply the same logic to other crimes?

"Man, I got so hammered last night, I thought it would be a good idea to kick my neighbour's front door in and steal his TV."

If not, why not?

Nope, and because the law about driving under the influence was written back in the 50's and hasn't changed since, whilst other laws have changed I suppose.

And you can do that anyway, just pay off the cops when they come investigating.