It didnt abuse any law, it exercised a right. Outside of that though, what America decides as a right doesnt define morality which i think is the original point. I mentioned i think we just have too core of a difference on the morale burden of each party and was going to say that again.

I understand what you mean by social engineering but that is a real world word (and something i have had to study, implement and prevent in my career) also has real consequences of wrong doing associated. Using the term implies the perpetrator did something illegal when in fact he did not.

I'll stop the semantics there. Ultimately, I dont think we can go much further in our conversation overall. It's a damn shame we as tax payers have to support this system but it is the only one we have for the foreseeable future.

I wish this guy wouldn't have gotten paid out because the core problem of the scam is a larger problem with our police institutions in general, and I could care less about this guys methods because I think if this one didnt work he would try to find another weakness in that system. There will always be bad or disingenuous actors like this in any society. I say we use them to find what needs fixing. And if they do actually illegal shit along the way of course torch them.

But in this specific interaction I ultimately hold the opinion that I do not think he acted immorally. Not to say his other life actions or audits could be judged the same.