Trinopus: The general point you’re raising, I think, is, “Why be moral, aside from the law?” If I’m correct, there’s no good answer to this, except that amorality has a slippery slope. [1]
Once you admit the possibility that morality exists, then all the philosophical structures can be introduced.
[1] Actually, there are probably plenty of snappy answers, all of them insults in one way or another. Because that’s all you have when you’re dealing with a _________ [insult!]. To be clear though, I’ve wondered about your question as well, assuming I haven’t misunderstood. I suspect that the topic is part of what Doestyesky had in mind when he wrote Crime and Punishment: if so, methinks he veered off topic.
I haven’t encountered anybody here who is wholly equanimous and detached in the face of a hard pitting. Which is sort of odd when you think about it. Apparently we are social creatures and have buttons that can be engaged with sufficient effort.