Lets switch "attempting to destroy" for "attenpting to murder". If an undercover cop sells you a gun knowing you want to use it to murder your spouse, you shou

Lets switch "attempting to destroy" for "attenpting to murder". If an undercover cop sells you a gun knowing you want to use it to murder your spouse, you should definetly be charged with both, illegal purchase of firearm and intent to murder, regardless whether you actually to managed to murder someone first. Does it matter that all someone (be it undercover cop or criminal) proved was you are able to be convinced to murder your spouse AND buy a gun? In my books you either charge the person at that point (for intent to murder), or it will be too late. Same applies to "suspectible to destroy". They proven their intent AND purchased C4... Shall we give them benefit of the doubt until it actually goes boom?