Blaming the victim is bad only if you believe that blame is a zero sum game. Unfortunately, it is not. If you walk down a dark alleyway in New York at night alone and get mugged, the mugger is guilty of mugging you, but you're also guilty of being a silly goose. You don't gain immunity to blame simply because you were the victim.
In other words, since blame is not zero-sum, placing some blame on the victim is not a defense of the perpetrator.
Not literally, no. But most Internet scams can actually be avoided using common sense, which dictates that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
http://p3n1zp1llz.48djkhcd.com.shadyurl.info/freemoneyz.exe
;)
Edit: Forgot about this site, but perhaps it could be used as a training tool for family members you feel are not quite as savy as they should be: http://www.shadyurl.com/
Make a page that just says "Grandma, don't click links like that!", convert it to a "shady" url with shadyurl.com, then email it to your grandmother.
But [urls are disguised so easily](http://horribleurl.example.com). The A element has split the real URL from the text description since forever.
Victim blaming is wrong, period. If you get mugged, you're not guilty of anything. Stop making excuses for people behaving shitty.
If I replace my bicycle u-lock with a nice hefty rope and start lashing my bike to whatever object seems solid at the time (this is a concept that actually appeals to me), then I should receive some blame when my bike gets inevitably stolen. However the bicycle thief is no more nor less a thief.
The important thing to remember is that the blame of the victim, while present, has no relation to the blame of the criminal and should never be relevant in, for example, a criminal trial for the criminal. I really feel like I can't emphasis that enough.
You are making your life less convenient for yourself by letting your bike get stolen but you're not doing anything wrong.