Tbf, it's not the case that they are more worried about wrongthink because they're just not worried at all by petty theft - or almost any other instance of micro-criminality.
Would you believe me if I said the police aren't worried about it because even if they put in the effort and catch thieves, they won't be prosecuted very hard. Since 2014, "low-value shoplifting" (under £200) in England and Wales can only be tried in the Magistrate's court and have a maximum sentence of 6 months (now ~1 year since 2024), no matter how many summary offenses you're convicted of. So if you steal under £200 of stuff, hundreds of times over, it's the same outcome. You'll be back on the street very soon.
The government is currently seeking to amend that:
> The bill will remove the perceived immunity granted to shop theft of goods to the value of £200 or less, by repealing Section 22A of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 and the legislation that inserted it (section 176 of Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014).
> This will ensure that all offences are tried as ‘general theft’ (an either way offence with a maximum custodial sentence of seven years), instead of summarily in the magistrates’ court, unless the defendant elects for jury trial
"Either-way" here means that the offence can be tried either as a summary or indictable offence; an indictable offence can carry much more serious penalties.
There's a recent video of a woman getting arrested, not for the first time, for admitting that she might be praying to herself inside her head, silently.
Because there is a law against people impeding or trying to influence people within 150 meters of an abortion clinic. Her admitted goal was trying to influence people entering. Will her defense be that she does not believe prayer has an influence on the world?
Most would agree that 150 people standing in front of the abortion clinic would obviously an attempt to impede or influence people. What if someone stands there "praying" but really noting faces and license plates for future harassment? Where does the law draw that line?
The ADF is a discriminatory, corrosive organization that has done real harm to millions by rolling back civil rights in the US, and now they have taken their agenda internationally.
The hypocrisy of calling this a "thought crime" is stunning. ADF is the same organization that brought a case against a Colorado law that banned discrimination against LGBTQ businesses, because a baker was worried she may have to bake a cake for a gay wedding - which she was never asked to do. So some thoughts are legally protected (prayer) while others (concern) are justifications to roll back civil rights. But the thoughts of others (terror and shame while entering an abortion clinic, feelings when discriminated against, love for a same sex partner) are irrelevant and not worthy of protection.
Their stated purpose is "advancing every person’s God-given right to live and speak the truth" - but only "live" and speak the "truth" that they deem to be correct, based on their evangelical and politically-charged interpretation of Christianity. And they want that legislated.
It is the case in reality. We are talking about an objectively measurable outcome, and delusional thinking from the propaganda victims does not change it.
Oh for gods sake, can we stop this nonsense mad twitter trope spreading through HN. Having been a cop in the UK, we will happily got nick a robber if they're on the move and tell us where they are, and we don't arrest people for "wrong thought" on twitter unless that happens to be repeatedly messaging your ex and telling her about how you're going to do murder them.
yes, some of my stupid colleagues will once in a blue moon arrest people for twitter nonsense, but that barely ever happens which is why it makes the news and they pretty much never get convicted.
In Canada the police are pretty lazy and it's mostly due to who they hire, and also a LOT of political garbage as it's a federal police force throughout the country in most cases -- run from Ottawa.
Not much real police work happening any more unless you criticize the government or do something they can use as a reason to grow their budgets or otherwise further political agendas.
If there is a video of a crime they do like that...easy! Also they can show it to media for props.
Lazy cops just love centralized 'social' media and the fools who post their lives on it for them to snoop through.
Absolutely not the case. This is just what overly online people think.
Tbf, it's not the case that they are more worried about wrongthink because they're just not worried at all by petty theft - or almost any other instance of micro-criminality.
Would you believe me if I said the police aren't worried about it because even if they put in the effort and catch thieves, they won't be prosecuted very hard. Since 2014, "low-value shoplifting" (under £200) in England and Wales can only be tried in the Magistrate's court and have a maximum sentence of 6 months (now ~1 year since 2024), no matter how many summary offenses you're convicted of. So if you steal under £200 of stuff, hundreds of times over, it's the same outcome. You'll be back on the street very soon.
The government is currently seeking to amend that:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/crime-and-policin...
> The bill will remove the perceived immunity granted to shop theft of goods to the value of £200 or less, by repealing Section 22A of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 and the legislation that inserted it (section 176 of Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014).
> This will ensure that all offences are tried as ‘general theft’ (an either way offence with a maximum custodial sentence of seven years), instead of summarily in the magistrates’ court, unless the defendant elects for jury trial
"Either-way" here means that the offence can be tried either as a summary or indictable offence; an indictable offence can carry much more serious penalties.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/12/section/176
> 22A (1) Low-value shoplifting is triable only summarily.
1 reply →
There's a recent video of a woman getting arrested, not for the first time, for admitting that she might be praying to herself inside her head, silently.
Here's an article I searched up about it: https://adfinternational.org/news/uk-christian-woman-crimina...
Because there is a law against people impeding or trying to influence people within 150 meters of an abortion clinic. Her admitted goal was trying to influence people entering. Will her defense be that she does not believe prayer has an influence on the world?
Most would agree that 150 people standing in front of the abortion clinic would obviously an attempt to impede or influence people. What if someone stands there "praying" but really noting faces and license plates for future harassment? Where does the law draw that line?
The ADF is a discriminatory, corrosive organization that has done real harm to millions by rolling back civil rights in the US, and now they have taken their agenda internationally.
The hypocrisy of calling this a "thought crime" is stunning. ADF is the same organization that brought a case against a Colorado law that banned discrimination against LGBTQ businesses, because a baker was worried she may have to bake a cake for a gay wedding - which she was never asked to do. So some thoughts are legally protected (prayer) while others (concern) are justifications to roll back civil rights. But the thoughts of others (terror and shame while entering an abortion clinic, feelings when discriminated against, love for a same sex partner) are irrelevant and not worthy of protection.
Their stated purpose is "advancing every person’s God-given right to live and speak the truth" - but only "live" and speak the "truth" that they deem to be correct, based on their evangelical and politically-charged interpretation of Christianity. And they want that legislated.
(outside an abortion facility)
4 replies →
It is the case in reality. We are talking about an objectively measurable outcome, and delusional thinking from the propaganda victims does not change it.
Oh for gods sake, can we stop this nonsense mad twitter trope spreading through HN. Having been a cop in the UK, we will happily got nick a robber if they're on the move and tell us where they are, and we don't arrest people for "wrong thought" on twitter unless that happens to be repeatedly messaging your ex and telling her about how you're going to do murder them.
yes, some of my stupid colleagues will once in a blue moon arrest people for twitter nonsense, but that barely ever happens which is why it makes the news and they pretty much never get convicted.
>once in a blue moon
>look inside
>12000 arrests a year
https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2025/09/09/people-a...
[dead]
In Canada the police are pretty lazy and it's mostly due to who they hire, and also a LOT of political garbage as it's a federal police force throughout the country in most cases -- run from Ottawa.
Not much real police work happening any more unless you criticize the government or do something they can use as a reason to grow their budgets or otherwise further political agendas.
If there is a video of a crime they do like that...easy! Also they can show it to media for props.
Lazy cops just love centralized 'social' media and the fools who post their lives on it for them to snoop through.