“Ritter was found guilty of ‘criminal attempt to corrupt a minor’ and that was far more than just a thought.”
I can understand something like attempted murder where the guy shot you or shot at you but didn’t quite finish you off. Even then most prosecutors don’t go after someone with those charges because it is almost impossible to prove what someone was thinking. Conspiracy and solicitation are again criminalizing the attempt or thought of doing a crime and not any actual crime. Also most of the people charged with this were caught in stings where really no actual crime would have been committed since it was a cop and not someone who would have actually done anything with the guy/gal.
So Ritter talked dirty to a cop on line, big deal and even if it had been a 15 year old I would say that if she was doing this on line that she was already pretty much corrupted before Ritter got to her so again no harm no foul.
If the CIA were to uncover a plot to blow up a bridge and did so by pretending to be a fellow terrorist, would those involved not be guilty simply because they didn't actually blow up the bridge? Using your logic, they would not.
Criminal attempt is a crime whether you agree with such laws or not and it most certainly should be.