Sentences for "attempted" murder vs. "actual" murder can vary significantly in many states. Same for "attempted" robbery vs "actual" robbery, etc. It seems as if one is legally rewarded for attempting but not successfully completing a crime. For instance, if a man tries to kill a man by stabbing him but nearby there is a hospital and the man is saved he will get a lesser sentence than if he committed the crime elsewhere and the victim did not get to the hospital in time. Do you believe we should get rid of the distinctions of sentencing based on whether you actually succeeded in your crime?
sort by best latest