True, but a home is not even remotely similar to a bank or Sony in this case. A home is a place where a single person or family is responsible for securing their own stuff. A bank (and sony) is a place where money was paid with the understanding of safekeeping. Not just by one person but by many. Since many people are concentrating stuff worth safekeeping in a single place, it stands to reason that that single place now needs to be as secure as many homes -- the payout is bigger therefore the burglar investment is bigger. A place that doesn't account for this but claims security should be held accountable, as that makes perfect sense.

Further I never claimed that the bank robber shouldn't be held accountable, in fact, if you read closely you see I explicitly claimed the opposite. I only added to it by stating that the bank should also be held accountable for not doing what they said they would (securing stuff without properly analyzing what securing means).

Tangent: it is questionable that a glass window offers less security than a piece of cardboard. At least a glass window, upon breaking, makes quite a bit of noise drawing attention (usually a security asset). The cardboard can be removed in a much quieter fashion. Neither withstands a minimal effort at getting past them. I would say both offer the same level of security.