Wasn't Daniel Stern willing to stop robbing the house because there's a kid? I trust the guy who does property damage over the one who's dead set on terrorizing and torturing a kid.

It reminds me of that story where a robber steals a car, then when he notices there's a kid in it he turns the car around to chastise the parent for leaving the kid inside. Don't be a thief, but if you are don't torture kids.

https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/man-steals-car-in-beaverton-with-young-boy-inside-comes-back-to-scold-mother-and-return-child/283-f96adecc-e6ff-4856-b81b-a42b9169c10c

Yeah, Harry just wanted to steal everything and vanish. His primary concern was simply getting away without any witnesses, so they could ghost with the money they had stolen. He wasn’t going to bother with petty theft, and was content to stay on the down low if it meant they’d be safe from the law.

Marv was portrayed as being the dumb one, but he was outright sociopathic in his actions, and had zero qualms about blatantly harming others if it meant he’d get famous. His primary concern was with garnering infamy and making a name for themselves as thieves. He wanted everyone to know that the Wet Bandits had stolen from them. And that is diametrically opposed to Harry’s goal of ghosting after their big score.