Sentences on crimes and crimes planned

[Deleted]

Why are there lesser court sentences for crimes if the crime did not happen but evidence clearly shows that there was a real attempt at doing the crime?

From criminal justice standpoint, it should be viewed as if the crime happened if it was attempted.

[Darsithis]

It's a good thing. They attempted to commit a crime. They had intent. They should face the consequences.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Why are there lesser court sentences for crimes if the crime did not happen but evidence clearly shows that there was a real attempt at doing the crime?

From criminal justice standpoint, it should be viewed as if the crime happened if it was attempted.

Physically carrying out a plan takes more than planning it. Simply planning it is different than attempting it as well. You should clarify on whether you mean attempting or planning.

[Callous1970]

You've had a bad day. You're driving home with your windows rolled down. There's a cop car in the lane next to you, and suddenly a guy cuts you off. You yell "I'm going to kill you!". Should you be charged with attempted murder or conspiracy to commit murder or something like that?

[Calfredd]

You've had a bad day. You're driving home with your windows rolled down. There's a cop car in the lane next to you, and suddenly a guy cuts you off. You yell "I'm going to kill you!". Should you be charged with attempted murder or conspiracy to commit murder or something like that?

You probably won't be charged with anything but you and that cop are gonna have a nice little chat.

[Deleted]

Planning and preparing or finally attempting crime should be considered as if the intended crime happened. Just threatening someones life out of rage is not the same.

[v2prwsmb45yhuq3wj23vpjk]

Planning and preparing or finally attempting crime should be considered as if the intended crime happened. Just threatening someones life out of rage is not the same.

I can understand finally attempting being considered the same but how do you get the planning and preparing part? Plans are one thing, the will to act is another. Many people, criminal situations and otherwise plan to do something but falter when the time comes, for many different reasons. Sometimes their task requires more bravery than they contain, sometimes they second guess their course of action, question whether it is the right one to take.

[Deleted]

Planning is something entirly different then attempting.
An attempt that failed shouldn't be punished the same way then when the attempt succeeded, it should be punished, just less.

[NPEC]

Planning is something entirly different then attempting.
An attempt that failed shouldn't be punished the same way then when the attempt succeeded, it should be punished, just less.

Just a question.

Lets say that if you kill someone you get a 25 years sentence.

Now you, for some reason, decided to kill someone, you plan to shot him at some given day. At that day you go to him you shot him but he survives.

Do this count as a morder, atempt morder and if it is only atempt morder, and assuming that a morder sentence is 25 years, should he get the 25 years or less?

[Deleted]

Tossing around idea of crime in head should not be criminally punished yet, but if person actually draws plans and makes concrete preparations for the crime which is actually a crime itself already, the punishment should be as severe as if the crime happened.

- - - Updated - - -

I can understand finally attempting being considered the same but how do you get the planning and preparing part? Plans are one thing, the will to act is another. Many people, criminal situations and otherwise plan to do something but falter when the time comes, for many different reasons. Sometimes their task requires more bravery than they contain, sometimes they second guess their course of action, question whether it is the right one to take.

If the evidence support that person had strong intent of executing the crime and had all the preparations, it should be as severe.

Sure, we cant know for sure would the person have actually commited the crime at the end, but if evidence can show us the persons strong intents its irrelevant. Person has already shown us that he is every bit as dangerous for the society and especially for the target of the crime and should be locked down in jail with same standards.

[Bdatik]

Just a question.

Lets say that if you kill someone you get a 25 years sentence.

Now you, for some reason, decided to kill someone, you plan to shot him at some given day. At that day you go to him you shot him but he survives.

Do this count as a morder, atempt morder and if it is only atempt morder, and assuming that a morder sentence is 25 years, should he get the 25 years or less?

In California, First Degree Attempted Murder carries similar weight as First Degree Murder. First Degree (Attempted) Murder both carry up to a life sentence, only difference is First Degree Murder can also include LWOP or the death penalty.

If the evidence support that person had strong intent of executing the crime and had all the preparations, it should be as severe.

Not sure where you're from, but maybe this will help:

CAL. PEN. CODE § 182
:
When they conspire to commit any other felony, they shall be punishable in the same manner and to the same extent as is provided for the punishment of that felony.

[anyaka21]

Why are there lesser court sentences for crimes if the crime did not happen but evidence clearly shows that there was a real attempt at doing the crime?

From criminal justice standpoint, it should be viewed as if the crime happened if it was attempted.

There is a huge difference from planning a crime to actually going through with it. Just as there is a big difference between someone saying they want to commit suicide and then going through with it.

Besides, just planning something puts very very dangerous precedents in play in terms of the court of law. Basically it becomes more of a thought police action, and basically becomes another Minority Report. Do we really want that?

And if by attempt, you mean tried and failed, the reason typically is more about loss. A failed robbery basically mean no loss of goods, thus lesser of a sentence. Or a failed attempt at murder is less because the target is still alive.

[Puri]

Why are there lesser court sentences for crimes if the crime did not happen but evidence clearly shows that there was a real attempt at doing the crime?

From criminal justice standpoint, it should be viewed as if the crime happened if it was attempted.

First, you have to make a distinction between planning and attempting.

In Germany, attempted murder has the same maximum sentence (jail for life) as successful murder, but a lower minimum sentence. Planned murder is much more complicated, and usually is subsumpted onto other crimes.

[anyaka21]

To go to the point of ridiculousness, let's try this on as an example

I thought this thread was so ludicrous that I planned on writing something incredibly mean spirited that was so bad that it would've gotten me banned. In fact, I actually wrote it out, typed it up, and almost hit send.

Then I changed my mind and wrote what I have written instead.

Thus there is a difference between planning something and actually carrying it out.

[Deleted]

In California, First Degree Attempted Murder carries similar weight as First Degree Murder. First Degree (Attempted) Murder both carry up to a life sentence, only difference is First Degree Murder can also include LWOP or the death penalty.



Not sure where you're from, but maybe this will help:

Atleast in California people have enough brains to develop good laws.

Planning and preparing for the crime is entirely different thing than just thinking about doing crime.

If someone goes through trouble getting a weapon, makes detailed plans on how to murder someone, and makes every needed precautions but gets caught before attempting, this person is beyond reasonable doubt as dangerous as murderer.

Sure its not as simple when there is no evidence of actual preparations or it cannot be shown with great certainty that person actually had strong intent of committing the crime and it would have been likely that crime would have happened if person would not have been caught by police.

[Deleted]

If crime did not happen because the person dropped the idea it would be reliefing case, but if the crime did not happen because of police detective work, it should be considered as equally serious offense.

Its irrelevant did the planned victim die or not, essential part is that the crime was seriously intended to happen and this person is as great danger to the society as murderer. Lesser penalty makes no sense.

For an example, if terrorist cell is captured with the help of CIA intelligence and there are evidence for a planned attack, it is definitely not a lesser crime than if the attack was succesful. In both cases, terrorists would be jailed for life.

[Deleted]

Planning something and attempting something are totally different things, I often do thought exercises about how I would commit various unpleasant acts including terrorism, in fact these games and theories are encouraged. It would be a bit shitty to spend a decade or more just for making a plan, if I had acted on it and started assembling the ingredients for a bomb then that would be a different story.

[Ebildays]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/12/justic...children-case/

This is a fairly recent case and while he did not harm any children they are taking in account his planning.

[Catta]

Pfah, have you ever seen anyone receive the nobel prize for Attempted Chemistry!?

[Bdatik]

Pfah, have you ever seen anyone receive the nobel prize for Attempted Chemistry!?

I've heard of people getting jail time for attempted chemistry!