The Argument for Moral Luck in Poker

The idea of moral luck is that we tend to either punish or reward people on the basis of things that happen. Would you change aspects of our justice system when it comes to something like reckless driving versus reckless driving and hitting someone? Supposing the two situations are identical, barring one resulting and hitting someone. Is there really a principle justification for giving people different punishments if they drive drunk, if they do or do not hit someone?