Well, I guess my point is that even if it's a "soft" theft (no actual "person" on the line), somebody is ALWAYS a victim when property is stolen.Even if it ends up being an insurance company that forks over for the theft, every shareholder in that insurance company (and with general insurance you are talking a lot of pensioners/retired people) gets nailed because that comes straight out of the bottom line which normally translates into a portion of that dividend cheque the grandma is using to buy groceries and pay electricity bills with.The only party I can actually see it being justified to steal from is the State itself. It is not a REAL entity (exists only on paper and because they have a shitload of guns they use to remind us they "exist"), it does NOT have shareholder representation, and all of its funds are obtained via theft upon the threat of violence in the first place. If someone steals from the state they aren't really stealing, they are just returning property back to private society and voluntary market participants rather than leaving it in the hands of a destructive, violent monopoly.If you could work something like THAT out, I would be down for sure ;)