The argument I'm addressing here is that "kids" can't be blamed for poking around a computer system that is poorly secured, and comparing that to a locked door.

The argument I'm addressing here is that "kids" can't be blamed for poking around a computer system that is poorly secured, and comparing that to a locked door. My counterargument is that a poorly secured system is exactly what most locks are. It's not actually a different thing despite what the argument was implying. So yes, people shouldn't go to a neighbours house just because it's unlocked or has an easy-to-pick lock. And they shouldn't breaking into a poorly secured computer system, either. But that's a tangential argument to what I am trying to say.