Crime is crime.
Crime is to do something against the law.
Law and reality are two very different things.
Law says one thing, but most people hardly believe it's the right thing.
However, laws were created to "balance" out people's opinions...
Let me put it this way, in a very simple way that most internet-goers would understand:
Why do GM's nerf certain GOOD attacks and powers? In all honesty, the attacks and powers had their ups and downs.
Well, simply, one big reason is because players who went against that attack/power in PVP were suddenly MUTILATED by it because they didn't know how to deal against it. Now, you get a bunch of people who haven't figured out a good countermeasure against that attack contacting GMs and telling them to nerf the power because they can't be bothered to handle it.
All the while, the GMs are waiting for positive responses from players about the goods and bads about it, saying that it's balanced. However, people who are satisfied with it won't send the GMs anything because they feel like it's perfectly fine as it is and doesn't need any comments.
So now the GMs have tons of complaints, and all their negotiations with complainers have been useless - as many complainers feel that the GMs must ATTEND TO THEIR NEEDS not try to convince them that it's for the better.
What are the GMs to do? They nerf the powers.
...there's praises and hurrahs all around, and all those who had the powers are suddenly sad and feel betrayed.
Do they complain? A good sum of them do. But a good sum of them keep their mouth shut because unlike the previous complainers: THEY CAN DEAL WITH IT. And that's why those powers are now bad in many players' eyes.
So what does have to do with this?
Replace "GMs" with "Government official", "senator", "mayor", "judge", or whatever.
Replace "players" with "people".
Replace "powers" with "rights".
Replace "attacks" with "actions".
Replace "PVP" with "life" or "business" or "work" or whatever.
Replace "nerf" with "remove".
Replace "MUTILATED" with... I dunno... mutilated.
And that's why laws are like that.
Those who commit crimes don't care for these laws, or feel like it's unfair, or perhaps believe what they're fighting for is worth being put in jail.
Who do I blame? Well, the ones who committed the crimes.
Criminals should take full responsibility no matter what.
It doesn't matter whether they "didn't know", felt the law was unjust, or didn't care.
If they commit the crime, they should know what happens.
They got a problem with the law? Pick up the fight with a "GM".
"GM" ain't listening? Well, that's what Thoreau was all about - instead of just voting, DO SOMETHING about it. It doesn't need violence, and picketing hardly does much, so do something that actually HALTS further normal existence for said law until something is changed - of course, you need people to stand with you otherwise your opinion is moot.
Crime, like any other action, should be taken responsibly.
If you did the act, no matter how unfair the law is, you take it and claim you did it no matter what they think you did it for (if you were framed THAT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT).
Now you go into courts and fight whether or not you should go to jail for it. That's how it goes.
How can crime NOT be the criminal's fault?
Only way it couldn't be is if the person was framed.
You can blame society, the law, or whatever. Fact is, we're in the present, and what a person does is their responsibility of the moment.
Laws are only unfair because someone made it unfair. And usually, the "bad and unfair" laws were created by people who thought other people's rights were taking away from their rights.
Blame those people for laws.
Blame those who commit crimes, for the crime.