What kind of sick people would herd a bunch of Jews into camps, steal their property, and execute them because "it was the law"?
What kind of depraved sociopaths would arrest someone for simply teaching a black person to read or write because "it was the law"?
What kind of perverse animals would arrest someone and lock them in a cage for helping a slave escape because "it was the law"?
What kind of misanthropic bullies would use force and violence against people for simply hiding a Jew (to protect them from unjust harm) because "it was the law"?
As a society, we often look back in hindsight and wonder how human beings were capable of such atrocities and outlandish immoral behavior. The reason these atrocities have been committed - and will continue to be committed against peaceful people - is pretty straight forward, however. The exact same kinds of people who were involved in such moral depravity in the past, can be found today in organizations like U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
In fact - these are the specific types of people that are targeted for hiring. All these people have to be told is that an action is "legal" - and they can turn their moral compass completely off and sleep soundly at night no matter what they do.
Take for instance the basic level of respect that the average human being has for others. A regular person would never try to hack into someone's phone and go through everything, because regular people know that morally, we should treat others the way we want to be treated.
If you don't want some creepy pervert faggot going through your stuff - you won't act like a peeping tom and go through their stuff, because you know how that would make them feel. This logical reciprocation is the basis for moral law. Do no harm. The use of force and violence against others is only morally justified in the imminent defense of life, liberty, rights, or property.
In US Customs and Border Protection, however - "peeping Toms" are the mainstay. Instead of having a victim with evidence of harm or injury, evidence that the suspects' actions are fairly traceable - and then petitioning an independent judge with that evidence for a warrant - The "peeping Toms" at U.S. Customs and Border Protection like to violate not only the person's privacy they are searching - but literally the privacy of EVERY SINGLE OTHER PERSON who made contact with that device.
Now, as the "peeping toms" will point out - this is entirely "legal". It's just like their pervert friends at the Faggotty Bitch Institute (FBI) who argue that trafficking in child pornography is "legal" for them as well. When you are a sociopath and have zero regard for others - saying something is "legal" completely justifies victimizing children, ethnic cleansing, or whatever moral crime a sociopath wants to commit.
But "legal" is not moral, and just like the monsters involved in violating everything good and decent about humanity in the past - relying upon written instruments (Constitutions, laws, codes, statutes, etc) to justify immoral action isn't rational or reasonable. In fact - unless someone has evidence that written instruments apply to people for simply being located somewhere the instrument says it applies - that is the hallmark of delusional and irrational thought.
Thankfully though, for everyone who's rights have been violated by "peeping toms" and other "it's the law" type sociopaths - there is definitely a higher court of justice waiting for them. I would certainly not want to stand before God with that level of harm and obstruction of justice hanging over my head. The Nuremberg Defense would certainly be useless. That verdict and sentence would need to be absolutely horrendous for it to be just and fair.
This leads to one important question that U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents should all answer for us all - When you stand before God in that day of judgment, and He looks right in your face and asks why you violated the rights of His children; what will you say to Him?
I reached out to US Customs and Border protection via email on December 11th, 2018 with a copy of this article and a request for comment. Apparently, they have nothing to say.
