As there's no indication in the article that Moyer or his team were threatened with violence, I'm reading and responding to your post as a theory ("People's eth

As there's no indication in the article that Moyer or his team were threatened with violence, I'm reading and responding to your post as a theory ("People's ethics are often overridden under the weight of authority.") vs advice for the future ("When a person with a gun says do something, you should do it"). Let me know if I'm mistaken. Your question is difficult to answer, but I ask in return: Is a general propensity to engage in an act sufficient to excuse it? I will concede that "every person has their price". At some point we cross the line from "asking for a bribe" to "engaging in extortion" to "direct threats of violence". Moyer ran the ethics and business conduct programs. Is there an expectation that someone in that position does have a durable set of principles, and a price higher than a CCW permit? The appropriate consequences for the involved parties are, of course, along completely different ethical lines.