Victim-blaming is about blaming the vulnerable and powerless. Union Pacific might be 'victims' of crime, but they are not vulnerable and powerless. As one dramatic example, we wouldn't be talking about this issue if it was a vulnerable, powerless individual; they have the power to get their point of view into the public eye.
Oh please. We're attempting to redefine victims based on power theory just like we tried to redefine racism based on power theory? Please don't do this.
It entirely isn't a factor whether you have power or not when determining a victim. (Or are we going to say men can't be raped because they could have resisted?)
There's no reason to think a sexually assaulted male is in a position of power.
A stirring description of this mythical group. If you pay Amazon for something and it's stolen in transit, Amazon still owes it to you. You don't lose anything.
> Insurance premiums will go up and guess who's footing the bill...
UP will foot the bill.
Regardless, we should work to reduce crime, including against UP. But jailing innocent people because they are poor or minorities is not a solution, and hasn't worked in the past. Do you want to return to that?