Another example: a person who commits a murder may be able to point to a troubled past - for example, an abusive parent. The implication is that responsibility is a conserved quantity (like probability mass), so if the parent is guilty, then the murderer must be LESS guilty - that's what the 'Officer Kripke' defense wants us to conclude, and that is the (characteristically leftist) misunderstanding of responsibility.

The symmetrical (characteristically conservative) mistake is to imagine that any discourse about exogenous factors contributing to a willful bad act (bad education etc.) is 'letting the criminals off the hook.'

Broadly speaking, we want to increase the prevalence of moral luck (perhaps by some manner of social engineering) while still holding individuals as morally responsible as before.