For example… Speeding
Going down the highway doing 10 oven the limit and you get pulled over an dgive a hefty ticket… But Nothing bad happened.
Another example… Letting a Tesla do full self driving but you aren’t paying attention. The car is driving itself quite well but you are ticketed for undue care and attention… But there was no accident or anything… Nothing happened.
I understand what you are trying to get at but those 2 things are equivalent, that’s comparing apples to oranges. Also someone died in your example which anyone would believe to be “something bad” happening.
The real answer to OP’s question is because the laws that are in place are to be enforced regardless if anything bad happens so everyone is held to the same standard. On the other side of that all citizens are expected to follow the same rules/laws regardless of anyone being around to enforce them. These 2 things are the basis of any society to function in any meaningful way.
Almost there but not quite. I’m not a lawyer, but have friends who are. The two examples are actually equivalent. Because, by principle, laws evaluate actions. Not consequences or intentions, those can be qualifiers in criminal cases, or discussed in civil cases. But in general the law prefers to deal with things that happened, not risk or what could happen. As it is far less ambiguous to argue that someone did something, than arguing whether or not something could’ve happened.
That’s why pre-crime was such a big deal in the sci-fi movie Minority Report. Similar to thought crime, it is a tough ethical and legal discussion without a clear possible answer that doesn’t lead to violent authoritarianism.
“I was speeding but nothing bad happened” is equivalent “I was shooting in his general direction not at him, I missed every time”. That’s still attempted murder and the former is still speeding. The crime is the action, not the result.