and don't get me started on the whole BS about not guilty by reason of insanity.
Regardless of abuses in these verdicts that may occur, the idea is sound. Punishment should be based on level of fault.
Two extreme opposite examples of this are: 1) Max "Mean Man" Jenkins walked over to the man who bought his gal a drink in a bar and said, "This is to teach you never to disrespect me again," and then proceeded to pluck out his eye with his thumb. 2) John "Saintly" Smith unexpectedly went into a epileptic seizure, and while someone approached him intending to help, John's arms flailed uncontrollably, causing his thumb to drive into the face of the helper, blinding him in one eye.
Insanity,
when it's for real, would be a lot closer to 2 than to 1, agreed? The point is, it subtracts to some degree from guilt. We don't punish people for the degree of harm that they caused, but rather for the degree to which they are guilty of intentionally, recklessly, or negligently, causing it.
