>"Swartz may have had a "legitimate political cause" but he sullied it (in my opinion) with illegal activities."
In this case, the law was part of the problem. Aaron broke the law, but that doesn't necessarily mean his actions weren't for a legitimate cause, nor does it mean that they weren't justified.
> "It is wrong to act as if you somehow should be looked at differently by the law because you had a "legitimate political cause."
And what if you think the law is wrong? What about civil disobedience? Sometimes it's right to break the law, and sometimes it's worth the risk of punishment to break the law. Whether it was wise is another question entirely.
In my personal view, what Aaron did was unwise, but not wrong; and what Hammond and his associates did were both unwise and wrong.
>"Swartz may have had a "legitimate political cause" but he sullied it (in my opinion) with illegal activities."
In this case, the law was part of the problem. Aaron broke the law, but that doesn't necessarily mean his actions weren't for a legitimate cause, nor does it mean that they weren't justified.
> "It is wrong to act as if you somehow should be looked at differently by the law because you had a "legitimate political cause."
And what if you think the law is wrong? What about civil disobedience? Sometimes it's right to break the law, and sometimes it's worth the risk of punishment to break the law. Whether it was wise is another question entirely.
In my personal view, what Aaron did was unwise, but not wrong; and what Hammond and his associates did were both unwise and wrong.