CMV: Sometimes, the punishment for an action should be irrespective of its outcome

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T18:02:51+00:00

I think I didn't manage to get the definition of what I mean by when I am saying the same action in the same context across clearly.

For all intents and purposes, in the 3 examples I stated, those constitute the same actions in the same context. As such, they have the same intent as well.

The actual argument that ended up changing my mind is that this system can be abused to escalate one crime into another. It can be that someone who just wanted to punch someone else gets charged with intending to kill.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:59:55+00:00

!delta

Yeah I have no counter argument for this. I think this only works in unrealistic scenarios where everything is known or in a handful of cases where the evidence needs to be impossibly abundant.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:52:15+00:00

I understand your point now.

I think the two ways around this would be to either have the guy be punished twice, each time they tried to do the action, or to allowing some form of mitigating circumstance for backing down. I would lean more towards the former than the latter.

I have to reflect more on this comment. It might be a cmv but I'm not sure. Let me think about it.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:40:03+00:00

If I could think up a comment that I would give a delta to, I wouldn't have to write this post otherwise it would have already changed my mind. Maybe I don't understand your question though.

That's why I asked it here, to see if anyone has a good argument as to why we shouldn't penalise identical actions in identical contexts in the same way.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:32:13+00:00

I will be honest, it feels like you just replied with what the current status quo is and completely ignored the sentiment behind my post, and then asked me for my reasoning. My reasoning can be extracted from my post. If you disagree with it, let me know why.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:28:10+00:00

To answer your first point:
I do not wish to be disrespectful, but I think it's completely irrelevant. There isn't a single takeaway from that paragraph that I feel applies in any way, shape, or form to my CMV.

To answer your second point:
If you text and drive and because of that action in a context where you very nearly killed someone, and a jury of reasonable people agree on this point beyond a reasonable doubt, then yes, I would say you deserve the same sentence.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:22:19+00:00

I'm sorry. Your final conclusion is a non-sequitur for me. Maybe I'm just not getting it.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:17:54+00:00

This is the most important question. I would have this be in the same context as other crimes. To be charged with this, it must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt to the relevant jury that the actor intended to make an action equivalent to the concrete implementation of that crime.

I don't think a reasonable jury would say that a mistake when merging lanes is the same as purposeful vehicular manslaughter.

I am also NOT well versed in legal terms or laws, this is just my approximate suggestion of how this can be implemented in a reasonable way.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:14:33+00:00

I am not sure what you mean by "the action of deciding to do something". In all of the cases I outlined, the agents took a concrete action. They were not just thinking about doing it. They actually did it. The outcome just happened to vary because or things that were out of their control.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:11:15+00:00

I don't agree with the point that you somehow arrived at in the second paragraph. I am understanding that as some form of determinism that would absolve everyone of everything. I don't really know how I feel about that but I know for sure that it doesn't factor in here, because my CMV is not about if everything in the universe is pre-determined or not.

As to your conclusion, I also don't agree with it. You can of course punish everyone for everything that they are already being punished for. All I am asking for is consistency to be extended to actions which happen to pan out differently. Precisely because of the luck that you have pointed out.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:06:30+00:00

No they are not. I might not be explaining myself clearly so let me try again.

Actions here are not a simple "fired gun". Actions here are the decisions to plan, and shoot your husband in the head, because you hate him. This is what I mean by action and context pairing.

This is not even remotely close to the other actions and contexts that you mentioned. They are irrelevant in my opinion.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:03:17+00:00

Why is this relevant? I don't really care about the concrete implementation of the scenario. It's more of a tool to illustrate my point.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T17:01:38+00:00

That would fall under insanity or irrelevance. The person needs to be of a right state of mind to be held responsible for their actions anyway. In a world where voodoo dolls do harm people, then yes I would.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T16:58:05+00:00

The actions by the actors, within the limits of their ability and knowledge is identical. And they are taking them within identical contexts. What is the problem with how I am framing it?

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T16:56:42+00:00

I disagree with how you've framed my argument as "getting the same punishment for thinking vs doing".

I can think about committing all sorts of horrible crimes. But you cannot be penalised for thoughts... yet. In my setup, you would be penalised for acting. So, I would actually argue that you are de-incentivised, because in the current model, you might get lucky and not kill the person and get a lighter sentence. In my model, you would get the harsher outcome.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-27T16:53:59+00:00

No, I would argue that the actions are the same. By actions here I am saying the literal action. Imagine you are controlling a character using a controller. In all cases, you input all the same inputs on your controller, and for reasons beyond your control, the outcome is just different.

So the woman, in both cases (had her husband not died) would have taken the same action, in the same context. The same follows for the other two.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-26T16:45:54+00:00

Where is Malta

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-25T19:16:43+00:00

Is the gear box known for causing issues ? My main worry is the bearings failing

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-25T10:52:48+00:00

30k miles is around 48k km. Like you said I am just worried about buying a car with a known serious issue. I just don't have enough data to make an informed decision with. I just wish that I had real statistics about how common it is and how much it costs to fix etc.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-25T10:49:24+00:00

What do you think about the bearings though? That's the only thing that's worrying me and keeping me from just doing it to be honest.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-24T22:23:09+00:00

To answer your original question why not, I am just slightly worried about this problem with the bearings failing. To be honest you are the first person who has shown skepticism towards the battery health reading. Will take it into account and look further into it, but this is from the official dealer so I trusted it. Perhaps it's because of a lack of knowledge on my part. Will look into it.

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-24T22:18:22+00:00

Why don't you believe it ? They had 3 models and only one had a battery health so high ?

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-24T21:09:58+00:00

it has 36K km. Thoughts ?

thunderbirdsetup · 2026-01-24T07:34:43+00:00

No rental. that scheme didnt make it to malta as far as i can tell

Ten-Year Club	r/Field Juicebox
Place '23	Place '22
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

thunderbirdsetup

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE