Case in point. A couple of teens stole a car, smashed it into another car, killed a 6mo old and put his mother in the hospital. The charges? Trespassing.
You may not be able to stop desparate people from stealing, but if kids are repeatedly stealing cars for entertainment, then problem isn't the security of the cars.
The United States is an exception to the rule being the only first world country that I know of to not mandate engine immobilizers (I'm sure someone will be able to point an exception, but overall these are mandatory in a lot of countries for decades already).
You need to access the vehicle (if you are good by opening the door with a lockpick or with some other non-damaging trick, otherwise breaking a window), then you force the ignition block, removing the lock cylinder, then you use something to turn the ignition on.
In the '80's you would have probably used a screwdriver, as what remained below the removed lock cylinder would have been a slot, on these particular models you could use a pair of thin nosed pliers but a USB A connector is coincidentally just the right size for the "tab" that has to be turned.
And P.S. the police in the city have been handing out steering wheel locks and educating affected owners, so I believe you are misinformed.
When you see an Asian granny being beaten up you don't sue her for being so easy to beat up.
"You dressed like that? It's your fault"
But if someone breaks into my house--regardless of whether it was unlocked, the lock was defective, or they broke a window--and the police are negligent or incompetent in investigating or prosecuting the perpetrators, in what world is that a) not the police's fault? and b) an opportunity for the _police_ to sue the _manufacturer_?
If I start a cultural movement to get rid of front door locks and it gains traction, and then B&Es spike, can the police sue _me_ too?
I don't know why you want to try and link the idea of a cultural movement? There's very clearly a difference between a defective product and a deliberate decision.