It might be hear or there when it comes to suing them. They would need to show that the antitheft deficiencies caused more crime. Or did it shift it to different manufacturers cars.

From other comments I get the sense that yes they can show this, but defence can argue that the crime would happen anyway. A bit like the security system doesn’t stop a burglar it makes them walk to the next home.

I wouldn’t be so sure that more people don’t commit crimes if they’re just really easy. Imagine someone leaving their car unlocked with a sack of cash sitting on the driver’s seat. Isn’t it pretty easy to imagine someone taking that even if they’re not exactly committed enough to theft to smash cars’ windows and rifle through the gloveboxes?

Good point, and I imagine it is a bit of both. Probably need a crime stats and sociology expert to chip in.