In fairness doc, I think people are attacking Brian's argument, not Brian. And in debate, that is fair game.

Personally, I think Brian's argument is a bit of a red herring. That is not to say that the moral issue is not important--indeed it is. One's ability to look at oneself in the mirror each day truly is important.

However, I think the moral question is subsumed in this case by legal definitism.

I do not deny that morality can successfully challenge an unjust law. No amount of legal determinism can condemn those who disobey repressive or abusive law.

But theft is an act which is malum in se, that is to say, it is wrong, in and of itself. Regardless of the conduct of the person who is deprived of the property, I don't believe that the law against theft can ever be characterized as unjust--especially where the law provides for remedies against the wrongful acts of the other party.

Perhaps the punishment for theft can be described as unjust in some cases, but at root that's a different question.