We’re in agreement on the relative privacy, too. My point was just to challenge this “protection” / “prevention” framing. If somebody regularly mugs you then announces they’re going to start taking half as much when they mug you, and that only in response to people increasingly fighting back, framing that as “mugging protection” or “mugging prevention” is not just inaccurate, but pushes an assumption that this person is actually helping us and that demands of no mugging at all are unreasonable.