No, the scenarios in which someone is a victim of theft are largely irrelevant, you're still attempting to justify it as the victims fault because they aren't overly protective of a device that's largely not important to them as it is to you. When in all reality history has shown that my phone is recoverable regardless of some douchebag on reddit victim blaming opinion may be which was completely unwarranted and a personal attack regardless of whatever you want to call it to justify someone going out of their way to also victim blame.

If you had any semblance of reading comprehension, you would understand that what I am saying is not victim blaming. That said, I may also need to improve my reading comprehension, because just now you technically only wrote two sentences, and yet I am thoroughly confused by whatever the fuck you're saying.

You simply being personally dismissive of your material goods is a subjective argument that is apparently hinging in you having to make unfounded presumptions about the lifestyles or beliefs of your interlocutors. Possessive security of my cellphone has much, much less to do with "being absorbed in it" than it does with me understanding that replacing it multiple times has a significantly relevant financial impact on my life, completely apart from "oh no, I can't Facebook at the red light now!" If replacing expensive items in your life over and over again isn't a problem for you, then that's a pretty sweet gig you have, and your dismissiveness of the problem is at least kept in perspective. That, however, wouldn't change the fact that you could probably adjust some lifestyle habits to effectively mitigate the recurring problem, which is the stance that I have in this discussion. You appear to be arguing an entirely different point.