This is interesting. It shows an attitude about laws as being just suggestions that you can also compare against your morality. I certainly agree on many points, for example people who do things on a small scale that are technically illegal (e.g. sodomy where it was illegal, etc). The context and morality does matter.
But in this particular case, the laws exist for quite an important and good reason. Do you know why? It seems to be for the exact case that's happening here. Ignoring the laws shielding the public, because you don't see anything unethical in it, seems, well, akin to ignoring fraud laws because you don't see anything wrong with committing fraud.
For example, why shouldn't I be able to print money (on an inkjet printer) - it might be technically illegal, but is it immoral? It's immoral because you make money from people accepting something that is worthless, and devalues people's faith in the real thing.
Pump and dump schemes have a similar effect on real investment markets, and are illegal for this reason.
No comments yet.
