I do not understand why seemingly intelligent people see the need for writing such bullshit. If you do not have anything interesting to say, silence is gold.
I am sure you understand the concept of risk taking - although you may act is if you do not for dubious rhetorical purposes on this list - but let me lay it plain and bare for you anyway.
The law says what is says and should be obeyed because it is the law of the land - not some fair weather wishy-washy provisions subject to small print clauses and bullshit excuses. Dura lex sed lex - as the ancients used to say. I (or anyone for that matter) may chose to take the risk and break the law - if I see that risk worth taking - and hope to get away with it. It may be moral or immoral but it does not really matter because law is not concerned with morality - it does not sanction morality and it does not need morality to be binding. If I do get away with it, good for me, but if I do not - I knew (or should have known) the risk I was taking and I should not be bitching that it ain't fair, I should be excused, and the law should not apply to me. This is a very simple logic that does not require a PhD to understand. Those who claim that they do not to get it are either disingenuous or have hidden agendas e.g. to whitewash slackers or to get a free ride and avid responsibility for their actions - which is not that much different from the corporate sleaze types.
Wojtek