Man sentenced for 9 years after planning to assassinate the late queen in 2021

9 years seems very low to me.,

Nine years is pretty low in my opinion. If someone is seriously intending to commit murder then I think they should be treated as just as guilty as someone who actually succeeds in committing it.

How long do you think that sentence should have been?

15-20 years

man had an online robot as a girlfriend and no one wonders why he didn't plea insanity.

15-20 years

Nah I don't agree. while genuine intention or any attempt to implement should be punished society, simply isn't owed the same debt, you can't claim all the same aggravating factors like a family in loss, death being permanant, life being sacred, an eye for an eye and so on, and that's before considering the doubt that they simply might not have went through with it, it's a hell of a sentence to base on a 'might have'

I’ll somewhat revise my position. I agree that “planning murder” shouldn’t necessarily be punished as severely as murder, because there’s every chance the person may not have gone through with it.

But I still think a genuine attempt at murder (which only failed due to chance factors outside of the perpetrator’s control) should be punished just as severely as murder. I don’t believe that the purpose of punishment is to “compensate a family for loss”, I believe it is to keep society safe from people who are have shown that they are willing to go through with murder, and to deter others from trying to do the same. Whether the murder is successful or not is irrelevant to how guilty the perpetrator is, in my view.

I still don't think you can treat them the same as they have very different results. I'd argue that the purpose is at least both public safety and punishment, part of it is absolutely to appease the victims who obv have no other recourse and consider the crimes impact, and that changes a lot when the victim statement goes from 'We will never get our child back' to 'wow that was a close one!'. There is certainly shared legal guilt in terms of intent, going to the area armed etc but not anywhere near the same lifelong guilt of a life taken. If we just do it by public safety, does that mean those convicted should be released immediately if they are deemed to be rehabilitated? even if that takes 10 years or a week? as surely putting a specific time on it is closer to a punishment, also with the victim and public in mind?

Take 2 drink drivers, I'd say both are equally guilty of choosing to drive intoxicated, but one hits and kills someone and the other scuffs a post on the way home, I don't think it's appropriate to punish these peoples equally. By all means throw the book at them, but don't claim these two disparate things are equal. Also if we start declaring 'That could have killed someone!' is the same as 'That killed someone' then health and safety investigations are about to get a lot more dramatic.