I understand and sort of agree but this could spiral into some deontological debate. I don’t see “boys will be boys” as relevant because, well, boys will in fac

I understand and sort of agree but this could spiral into some deontological debate. I don’t see “boys will be boys” as relevant because, well, boys will in fact be boys and do stupid stuff. You’re imo rightly pointing out that there’s a certain strain of moralism today that, mostly as a political project, excuses certain behavior - like theft. I don’t think the people you’re concerned about are actually saying “boys will be boys”, and far from it. They actually want these kinds of thefts to happen, and that’s not the same as “Johnny 16 year old crashed the car racing his friend”. My point about scarcity and material abundance isn’t that harsher penalties weren’t morally or philosophically justified. Just that it was much easier to do so when things were scarce.