3 ms·

Which makes your statement (that you have sufficient control to prevent the possibility of theft of your property) completely invalid. You can do everything ri

• zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
  > Which makes your statement (that you have sufficient control to prevent the possibility of theft of your property) completely invalid. Luckily, I didn't say that.
  • g051051 9y ago
    > I have control over how I secure my car from being stolen. Really? Those were your exact words, in the context of claiming that your ability to secure your car made the comparison to identity theft invalid.
    • zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
      Yes, really. Having control over how I secure my car does not in any way imply that I can guarantee success. However, as a matter of fact, you can essentially get arbitrarily close to that, it's just a matter of your effort. Which is in contrast to banks being defrauded and blaming me for it, where I can not do anything about how the bank protects itself against the fraud. The problem is that the power to do anything about the problem and the blame is not aligned, which leads to a situation that is equivalent to the bank leaving the key in the ignition of the unlocked car, not allowing you to change anything about that setup, and then expecting you to foot the bill when the car inevitably does get stolen.
    • benchaney 9y ago
      Do you really not understand the difference between having control over something and being able to guarantee it?