Stealing to meet abstract secondary needs is criminal for a reason. People don’t sympathize with it because everyone has needs, and if everyone stole to meet them instead of find something more productive to do, society would collapse into anarchy.

So yes, I am refuting what you are saying.

> So yes, I am refuting what you are saying.

You're not. You acknowledge my point

> Stealing to meet abstract secondary needs

But do not refute that this is the reason for the theft, only argue that it is wrong regardless. My only point is that the theft is "a matter of meeting peoples needs".