wex@ittvax.UUCP (Alan Wexelblat) (08/01/83)
George Hess asked if there was something wrong with his train of thought, when he objected to the attitude of "you left your car unlocked, so you got what you deserved." Speaking from a philosophical standpoint, the answer is no, George is correct. You will find few philosophies where theft is condoned, and usually it is in t the name of a "greater good." That is clearly not the case here however. The problem, I beleive, is that George is taking people's cynicism too harshly. The attitude espoused is probably (and I admit I'm guessing, but living in an inner city does give me some insight) closer to "Well, you know that there's a risk involved, and you failed to take proper account of that risk, so you're irresponsible." Now, the question becomes: Is an irresponsible person deserving of blame? In some cases, this is true. For example, if I drive irresponsibly, then I am endangering ordinary drivers, and so can be held to blame if something happens. However, in the case of the theft, it is clear that leaving your car unlocked does not interfere with the 'normal' activities of others. Therefore, I would say that the person should not be held to blame if their car gets stolen. --Alan Wexelblat decvax!ittvax!wex