DS, we already have laws in place for intent and your analogy isn't what I am talking about. Under the current laws, B should or could be charged with "attempted murder" thus receiving a maximum of 25 years. We already have laws to cater for intent.
In case A, that is a classic case of manslaughter and has a maximum of 25 years.
If the laws worked correctly (how we would want it in this case), case B should receive a higher sentence than A.
My argument is: If person A lives or if person A dies.
If he lives, naturally the sentence should be lower. If he dies, he gets charged with manslaughter.
In case B, if he lives he gets "attempted murder". If he dies he gets murder.
As, i said, we have laws in place for all of this where intent can be punished heavily.
I think we are both on the same wave length but misunderstanding each other's arguments.
