# Why the distinction between murder and attempted murder? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 3, 2005, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480 "2005-08-03T21:21:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2005, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480/61 "2005-08-07T15:21:47Z")
Have been a foreman on a murder trial jury there is one very good reason to have an attempted murder charge. Some poeople on sitting in the jury box have a problem with a murder conviction even when the victim is dead. Trying to convict for murder when the victim is sitting in court watching the procedings would cause their heads to explode. > [@Absolute](#): > > What I’m saying is that punishments for crimes should take into account all the possible outcomes of that crime, regardless of which occurred in a specific situation. IMHO chargine someone with manslaughter for dropping a bananna peel on the sidewalk is just a bit extreme don’t ya think? Also that would lead to a littering charge and a littering / manslaughter charge depending on what was dropped. So you get 20 years for dropping a bananna peel, but a $50 fine for dropping a piece of paper. Now that makes no sense. Also wouldn’t that run afoul of the cruel and unusual punishment part of the constitution? If it is all the same to you, I will keep our current system imperfect as it may be. ---
**Author:** ![Gary\_Robson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gary_robson/32/3448_2.png) [@Gary\_Robson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_Robson)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2005, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480/62 "2005-08-07T16:33:46Z")
> [@Gfactor](#): > > …this theory proves too much… You used this phrase for several of the theories, and I don’t understand what it means. Theories don’t prove anything, but if they did, how could they prove too much? Would you define the term, please? > [@SenorBeef](#): > > So in other words, if you’re not legally drunk, and you’re not driving unsafely, they still need to bust you on something, because apparently some crime is being commited? Close, but not quite. Driving safely with a BAC of 0.03% while drinking a beer (or soda pop) is perfectly legal in Montana, _so they invented a brand-new law_ to give them an excuse for stopping you when you’re not doing anything wrong. In fact, a non-drinker with a 0% BAC could be busted for having an opened bottle of whiskey in the passenger’s seat even if the driver has never had a drink in his life and none of that whiskey was consumed in or around that vehicle. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2005, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480/63 "2005-08-07T17:27:23Z")
> [@InvisibleWombat](#): > > Close, but not quite. Driving safely with a BAC of 0.03% while drinking a beer (or soda pop) is perfectly legal in Montana, _so they invented a brand-new law_ to give them an excuse for stopping you when you’re not doing anything wrong. In fact, a non-drinker with a 0% BAC could be busted for having an opened bottle of whiskey in the passenger’s seat even if the driver has never had a drink in his life and none of that whiskey was consumed in or around that vehicle. Right, I get that. I’m irritated at what seemed like an apparent justification of a law that basically says “well, he’s not actually doing anything wrong, so we need to write a different law to bust him” ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2005, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480/64 "2005-08-07T18:04:59Z")
> [@InvisibleWombat](#): > > You used this phrase for several of the theories, and I don’t understand what it means. Theories don’t prove anything, but if they did, how could they prove too much? Would you define the term, please? Forgive me for speaking loosely. Allow me to clarify: 1. By theory, in this case, I was referring to the various theories used to justify punishing crime. While they don’t “prove” anything, they have logical implications, which is what I was referring to. 2. I thought it was clear from the context what I meant. _E.g._, “this theory proves too much. If we merely seek to deter others from committing crimes, why limit punishment to the guilty? And why limit it to punishment that is not cruel or unusual[?] Wouldn’t these be the best deterrents?” When I say that, I mean that the implications of the arument exceed the practices it seeks to justify and might actually contradict current practices. _Compare_, “But the argument proves too much. If it were sound, the legislature might validly command that the finding of an indictment, or mere proof of the identity of the accused, should create a presumption f the existence of all the facts essential to guilt. This is not permissible.” [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=319&invol=463](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=319&invol=463) (Justice Roberts) and > [@](#): > > respondent’s reliance upon the footnote both proves too little and too much. It proves too little, because the fact that the Board of Parole, not the sentencing judge, finally determines whether and when an offender should be released on parole does not undercut our conclusion that the district judge, at the time of sentencing, determines when the offender will become eligible for consideration for parole and the Board’s action simply implements that determination. 9 It proves too much, because, if - as the respondent would have it - the proper focus is upon the time at which release on parole is actually granted or denied, the parole decision, whether made under 18 U.S.C. 4208 (a) or 18 U.S.C. 4202, is made long after the “prosecution” terminates; for under both provisions, the Board of Parole ultimately decides whether and when the offender is to be released. But, as previously mentioned, we held in Bradley that the district judge’s decision to deny early parole under 4208 (a) was part of the sentence, and therefore part of the “prosecution.” [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=417&invol=653](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=417&invol=653) (Justice Brennan). ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2005, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480/65 "2005-08-16T17:50:23Z")
It occurred to me that the answers so far have missed a large portion of the issue here. What the OP was really asking about, IMO, is a concept called moral luck. > [@](#): > > Moral luck is the phenomenon whereby a moral agent is assigned moral blame or moral praise for an action or its consequences even when it is clear that the agent in question did not have full control over either the action or its consequences. This term was introduced by Bernard Williams, and the question of moral luck – including most notably its significance to a coherent moral theory – has been initially developed by Williams and Thomas Nagel in their essays on the topic. > **[Moral luck](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_luck)** > > Moral luck describes circumstances whereby a moral agent is assigned moral blame or praise for an action or its consequences even if it is clear that said agent did not have full control over either the action or its consequences. This term, introduced by Bernard Williams, has been developed, along with its significance to a coherent moral theory, by Williams and Thomas Nagel in their respective essays on the subject. > Broadly speaking, human beings tend to correlate, at least intuitively, respon... The philosphical question raised is whether a lucky (or unlucky) break requires us to view a volitional act differently. [This](http://www.princeton.edu/~jimpryor/courses/intro/notes/punishment.html) is a good article on moral luck and punishment. Here are some good general discussions of the concept of moral luck, its implications, and its interaction with various kinds of moral theory. [http://www.iep.utm.edu/m/moralluc.htm](http://www.iep.utm.edu/m/moralluc.htm) [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-luck/](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-luck/) [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN\_ID646744\_code49181.pdf?abstractid=475161&mirid=1](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID646744_code49181.pdf?abstractid=475161&mirid=1) pdf) [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN\_ID693621\_code459623.pdf?abstractid=693621&mirid=1](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID693621_code459623.pdf?abstractid=693621&mirid=1) [http://www.philosophy.pdx.edu/pdf/Philips\_Moral\_Luck.pdf](http://www.philosophy.pdx.edu/pdf/Philips_Moral_Luck.pdf) (pdf) [http://home.law.uiuc.edu/lrev/publications/2000s/2004/2004\_2/Morse.pdf](http://home.law.uiuc.edu/lrev/publications/2000s/2004/2004_2/Morse.pdf) (pdf) [http://www.unc.edu/~gsmunc/reparations/Legal\_Reparations.pdf](http://www.unc.edu/~gsmunc/reparations/Legal_Reparations.pdf) (pdf) Anyone care to discuss? ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2005, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480/66 "2005-08-17T19:25:24Z")
Guess not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-distinction-between-murder-and-attempted-murder/315480.md?page=3)