Poll: An unlocked car is stolen, who is to blame?

[Ryotknife]

Well, the thief will get charged with a crime (although the odds of him getting caught is almost zero), the owner will get ridiculed for being a colossal idiot.

 

[McElroy]

Isn't hotwiring a modern car almost impossible nowadays? If the owner leaves the door open AND the keys inside then that I'd call asking for it. Otherwise no, but it's an unnecessary risk they're taking.

Really? Asking for it?

Ok, let's take a small mom and pop store and this store doesn't have any fancy security tags and detection devices. Does that mean they are asking for shoplifting?

Let's say I leave my lawn mower in my yard, it's a push mower so no key but I do have a fence. That fence latches but there is no lock. I am asking for my lawn mower to be stolen?

How can people think like this?

Go to any person on this Earth and say: "I left my car without surveillance with its doors open and keys in the ignition and it got stolen!" They will respond with "Why did you leave it like that?" or equivalent.

Broadly speaking, there are always people who will blame victims of accidents or crimes or even cheer at their misfortune because they took a risk, which of course is kinda shitty as there are risks everywhere in everything we do. However, my example has an absurdly high risk that can be mitigated by following advice that literally everyone would share.

 

[somonels]

I bet he's the friend who likes the "Chicken or Egg" paradox.

Whose fault was it the car got stolen? The thief.
Whose fault was it the car got stolen? The thief.
Who is going to get BLAMED? The owner. Because of course someone is going to steal it. It's only natural. He must have not really cared enough about it or secretly wanted it stolen. Probably a scam for money or drama.

Find better friends or make sure you don't drink too much in public or dress provocatively.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Isn't hotwiring a modern car almost impossible nowadays? If the owner leaves the door open AND the keys inside then that I'd call asking for it. Otherwise no, but it's an unnecessary risk they're taking.

Really? Asking for it?

Ok, let's take a small mom and pop store and this store doesn't have any fancy security tags and detection devices. Does that mean they are asking for shoplifting?

Let's say I leave my lawn mower in my yard, it's a push mower so no key but I do have a fence. That fence latches but there is no lock. I am asking for my lawn mower to be stolen?

How can people think like this?

Go to any person on this Earth and say: "I left my car without surveillance with its doors open and keys in the ignition and it got stolen!" They will respond with "Why did you leave it like that?" or equivalent.

Broadly speaking, there are always people who will blame victims of accidents or crimes or even cheer at their misfortune because they took a risk, which of course is kinda shitty as there are risks everywhere in everything we do. However, my example has an absurdly high risk that can be mitigated by following advice that literally everyone would share.

Appeal to Popularity? Just ask anyone, they'll agree with me is your argument? Ok well whatever.

 

[McElroy]

Go to any person on this Earth and say: "I left my car without surveillance with its doors open and keys in the ignition and it got stolen!" They will respond with "Why did you leave it like that?" or equivalent.

Broadly speaking, there are always people who will blame victims of accidents or crimes or even cheer at their misfortune because they took a risk, which of course is kinda shitty as there are risks everywhere in everything we do. However, my example has an absurdly high risk that can be mitigated by following advice that literally everyone would share.

Appeal to Popularity? Just ask anyone, they'll agree with me is your argument? Ok well whatever.

How is "absurdly high risk that can be mitigated by following advice that literally everyone would share" in any way controversial? I don't even think any insurance plan would cover that.

"How can I prevent my car from getting stolen?"
- Well, it either gets stolen or it won't. Don't fret, for it's not your fault if that happens. <-- said no one ever for rather obvious reasons

 

[Catnip1024]

Isn't hotwiring a modern car almost impossible nowadays? If the owner leaves the door open AND the keys inside then that I'd call asking for it. Otherwise no, but it's an unnecessary risk they're taking.

Hotwiring may be, but some of the newer cars with their keyless entry / ignition systems have some crazy security vulnerabilities.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/aug/12/cars-risk-keyless-entry-system-hacked-volkswagen

Although admittedly that is not the same as leaving the door unlocked.

 

[Scarim Coral]

You had me at "purposely".

The driver is aware that he or she did not locked the car therefoe he or she shouldn't be fully suprised that it got stolen. Sure a locked car can be stolen but he or she did make it easier for the thief to get in the car.

 

[Story]

I bet he's the friend who likes the "Chicken or Egg" paradox.

Whose fault was it the car got stolen? The thief.
Whose fault was it the car got stolen? The thief.
Who is going to get BLAMED? The owner. Because of course someone is going to steal it. It's only natural. He must have not really cared enough about it or secretly wanted it stolen. Probably a scam for money or drama.

Find better friends or make sure you don't drink too much in public or dress provocatively.

Yikes. Sometimes I'm surprised how blunt the Internet can be. But you hit the nail on the head though. I wasn't looking to invalidate his or my position on this to be fair. I think I did surprise him when I said the thief is to blame.

 

[totheendofsin]

There are a few factors here that aren't brought up, is it a nicer car that's more likely to be stolen than a crappy car? Did the owner leave it unlocked in an area that often has cars stolen?

either way nothing completely absolves the thief of blame, in fact I'd say there are two separate instances of blame, the owner can be blamed for being careless, and the thief can be blamed for making the decision to steal the car

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

If theft is the normal state of affairs and the owner is aware of it, the owner. If theft is a bizarre accident which almost never happens, the thief.


The key question is "how likely is it for an unlocked car to be stolen". If, despite knowing the likelihood is very high, you allow your car to be unlocked out of some mistaken sense of arbitrary human morality of "stealing is wrong" then you are an idiot who doesn't realize the limited scope of social contract when in a world that doesn't have mind control.


It's kinda like why letting your kids walk to school by themselves in broad daylight is fine but letting them walk at night in the middle of a red light district would likely net you in jail for child abandonment/endangerment. The same laws apply in both stretches of road but it's not quiiiite that simple.

It's like when we blame parents for letting their daughters go to college knowing the high college rape numbers...oh wait

Unless the daughter is some kind of exception, she'd be an adult by the time she is in college so it'd be her choice, not the parent's. Not blaming them when their daughter is an adult who makes her own choices is obviously the normal reaction.

 

[Story]

There are a few factors here that aren't brought up, is it a nicer car that's more likely to be stolen than a crappy car? Did the owner leave it unlocked in an area that often has cars stolen?

It was made vague on purpose. Possibly my friend wanted to debate wether or not people would be willing to take in opportunity to better themselves even at the expense of others. Kinda falls apart when you consider factors like yours and the very fact that stealing is a crime or at least a more serious crime than negligence

 

[Saltyk]

I have to say that both are at fault. Now, I that doesn't mean the owner of the car (or whoever failed to lock the car) is criminally responsible. However, s/he is careless and the car likely wouldn't have been stolen if s/he had taken that very minor precaution. The thief is clearly criminally responsible and should be prosecuted.

I understand why many would say that the owner is not at fault, but that doesn't mean that we should ignore that they could have potentially prevented the crime, and then tell others how they can prevent themselves from being a victim of a similar crime. If you stand under a ladder and something falls on your head, you made a mistake that allowed that to happen. So it's only natural to warn others to avoid that and prevent the same thing from happening to them.

 

[WeepingAngels]

If theft is the normal state of affairs and the owner is aware of it, the owner. If theft is a bizarre accident which almost never happens, the thief.


The key question is "how likely is it for an unlocked car to be stolen". If, despite knowing the likelihood is very high, you allow your car to be unlocked out of some mistaken sense of arbitrary human morality of "stealing is wrong" then you are an idiot who doesn't realize the limited scope of social contract when in a world that doesn't have mind control.


It's kinda like why letting your kids walk to school by themselves in broad daylight is fine but letting them walk at night in the middle of a red light district would likely net you in jail for child abandonment/endangerment. The same laws apply in both stretches of road but it's not quiiiite that simple.

It's like when we blame parents for letting their daughters go to college knowing the high college rape numbers...oh wait

Unless the daughter is some kind of exception, she'd be an adult by the time she is in college so it'd be her choice, not the parent's. Not blaming them when their daughter is an adult who makes her own choices is obviously the normal reaction.

We don't blame the daughter either. Do you?

 

[zelda2fanboy]

Sure, someone might have a reason to break into or steal your car specifically, and if that happens you really can't prevent it, but most criminals don't specifically target a person. Most criminals are the kind of people who just go down a row of cars and try all the drivers' side doors until they find one that's unlocked. Very minor preventative measures can and do deter criminals if those criminals are lazy.

That holds true in a city, but if you live in a rural or even medium sized town, it's not as true. Car thefts out in the country probably consist of "hey, there's a car. I need one of those." And even then, that's pretty rare, seeing as how out in the open everything is, and given how many people have guns.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

If theft is the normal state of affairs and the owner is aware of it, the owner. If theft is a bizarre accident which almost never happens, the thief.


The key question is "how likely is it for an unlocked car to be stolen". If, despite knowing the likelihood is very high, you allow your car to be unlocked out of some mistaken sense of arbitrary human morality of "stealing is wrong" then you are an idiot who doesn't realize the limited scope of social contract when in a world that doesn't have mind control.


It's kinda like why letting your kids walk to school by themselves in broad daylight is fine but letting them walk at night in the middle of a red light district would likely net you in jail for child abandonment/endangerment. The same laws apply in both stretches of road but it's not quiiiite that simple.

It's like when we blame parents for letting their daughters go to college knowing the high college rape numbers...oh wait

Unless the daughter is some kind of exception, she'd be an adult by the time she is in college so it'd be her choice, not the parent's. Not blaming them when their daughter is an adult who makes her own choices is obviously the normal reaction.

We don't blame the daughter either. Do you?

No, since merely going to college isn't the same as being raped and if a woman knows the statistics and chooses to go then it is logical to assume she is ready to protect herself more so than someone who might be ignorant.

I in general wouldn't blame people for merely taking some risk in their life since almost nothing is safe and you can't spend your life inside a tank just to be safe. The issue is how big of a risk it is you're taking. Merely going to college isn't particularly risky. Doing things like college parties and drinking alcohol and stuff is where most of the rapes occur and you can go to college and do none of that stuff just fine.

 

[McElroy]

Doing things like college parties and drinking alcohol and stuff is where most of the rapes occur and you can go to college and do none of that stuff just fine.

How does the rest of the world manage without "I will be raped in college if I act like a normal person" being an option one should consider? Like, instead of a rare anomaly? Rhetorical question.

 

[WeepingAngels]

If theft is the normal state of affairs and the owner is aware of it, the owner. If theft is a bizarre accident which almost never happens, the thief.


The key question is "how likely is it for an unlocked car to be stolen". If, despite knowing the likelihood is very high, you allow your car to be unlocked out of some mistaken sense of arbitrary human morality of "stealing is wrong" then you are an idiot who doesn't realize the limited scope of social contract when in a world that doesn't have mind control.


It's kinda like why letting your kids walk to school by themselves in broad daylight is fine but letting them walk at night in the middle of a red light district would likely net you in jail for child abandonment/endangerment. The same laws apply in both stretches of road but it's not quiiiite that simple.

It's like when we blame parents for letting their daughters go to college knowing the high college rape numbers...oh wait

Unless the daughter is some kind of exception, she'd be an adult by the time she is in college so it'd be her choice, not the parent's. Not blaming them when their daughter is an adult who makes her own choices is obviously the normal reaction.

We don't blame the daughter either. Do you?

No, since merely going to college isn't the same as being raped and if a woman knows the statistics and chooses to go then it is logical to assume she is ready to protect herself more so than someone who might be ignorant.

I in general wouldn't blame people for merely taking some risk in their life since almost nothing is safe and you can't spend your life inside a tank just to be safe. The issue is how big of a risk it is you're taking. Merely going to college isn't particularly risky. Doing things like college parties and drinking alcohol and stuff is where most of the rapes occur and you can go to college and do none of that stuff just fine.

Ok, so you only victim blame if the girl willingly goes to a party?

 

[MeatMachine]

A person purposely leaves his car unlocked and it gets stolen, who is to blame?

One person is naive and feels very secure in his environment.
The other person is an opportunistic, criminal predator.

The victim was a poor judge of circumstance.
The perpetrator was willfully neglecting property rights.

The blame obviously goes to the criminal, not the victim; the victim made poor decisions, but he did not choose to have his car stolen. Call him an idiot if you want, but he is not culpable for the criminal behavior of others.

 

[kenu12345]

An unguarded person is murdered. Who's to blame.
Least that is bout the same argument in my own opinion. It's obviously the one doing the crime

 

[Smithnikov_v1legacy]

I said it was the person who stole it and he said it was the person who did not lock the car.

You should ask your friend then why the owner was not charged with grand theft auto? I'm sure he can come up with a good reason.

I ask the same of all who blame the owner; what should the minimal amount of blame be before we charge the target? Point system, perhaps?