There's a bunch of sci-fi movies with that as a plot. I'm not a fan of a future like that.

Since we are unable (at this time) to read another person's thoughts, the question is moot and there's not much reason to answer it except whatever you (or I) think and want to put into words.

I'll give my thoughts to your question:   people's thoughts are their business, not ours. If they think terrible thoughts and don't act on them, then there's no harm done. If they think terrible thoughts are do act on them, then the act would be punishable, not necessarily the thought.

Big difference between thinking what you think, and saying what you think.

And a HUGE difference between saying what you think in public, and posting what you think on a privately owned forum.

No analogy is perfect, but consider the difference between dancing on the public sidewalk, and dancing on some neighbor's flower bed, when they've specifically said you MAY come onto their property, but ONLY if you AGREE that you will NOT dance on their flower bed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by mike gregory

Big difference between thinking what you think, and saying what you think.

And a HUGE difference between saying what you think in public, and posting what you think on a privately owned forum.

No analogy is perfect, but consider the difference between dancing on the public sidewalk, and dancing on some neighbor's flower bed, when they've specifically said you MAY come onto their property, but ONLY if you AGREE that you will NOT dance on their flower bed.

---

On the other hand, should there be a penalty (or whatever ..... not necessarily from government but public opinion) for saying something that you don't really think.  People do that all the time ...... maybe just to get a reaction from another person.  People are chastised all the time for words that come out of their mouth without proper context being added.

what you propose is straight out of Orwell. a " thought crime ". never could happen ? sound far fetched ? here is another term coined by Orwell in 1984. " hate crime ". there are now special punishments reserved for this " offence " as predicted by George Orwell in a book written many years ago. thought crime is coming, if indeed, not already here, as people are being arrested and charged with things they have said via social media. which is why it exists in the first place. smile ! big brother is watching you

We dance a little too close to that already, but when framed in the idea of an entity having access to your thoughts, there can be no restriction as science has proven rather effectively that we are no necessarily in charge of our thoughts - that's why they are called "intrusive thoughts" and "Unconscious Bias".

That said, even intentional thoughts are still just thoughts. Literally every time I am on a train platform I look around for buildings that might be advantageous to snipe from and then determine what my exit route would be - do I own a weapon for such? Nah. Would I ever do such? Nah. But does the mental exercise entertain me? Yup.

quote:

---

Originally posted by anonymonachos

what you propose is straight out of Orwell. a " thought crime ". never could happen ? sound far fetched ? here is another term coined by Orwell in 1984. " hate crime ". there are now special punishments reserved for this " offence " as predicted by George Orwell in a book written many years ago. thought crime is coming, if indeed, not already here, as people are being arrested and charged with things they have said via social media. which is why it exists in the first place. smile ! big brother is watching you

---

Hate Crime was a not a term coined by Orwell. Also, putting offense in quotes is peculiar. Hate crimes are action related, and they are prosecuted as such. They are also clearly defined and born out of necessity, a murder can be a murder (with or without hate) but it can also be a terrorist act designed to instill fear into a larger group of people. 

Is it a crime to be racist? No. Is it a crime to ask other people to be racist? No. Is it a crime to vandalize something? Yes. Is it a different type of crime to vandalize something in order to intimidate or spread fear into a group of people? Yes. 

Now, it would be up to a jury to decide whether a person drew a swastika on a synagogue just to be a vandal or if it had deeper intentions and in that instance, thought is on trial, but it is based in actions.

My ex once asked,”Do you think this dress makes me look fat?” My thoughts at that point were kept to myself lest they were to incriminate me.

Your thoughts should be yours..
N..one should be able to express them..

No matter who disagrees with them..

That said..
Some folks minds..are pretty ..mucked up... :0/

There was a song, years and DECADES ago, originally in German.
Dirty Old Commie and (GASP!!) banjo picker Pete Seeger did a good English version of it
"My Thoughts They Are Free"

It’s a good thing minds can not be read at this point and time. No telling how many face slappings I would have received. And a boat load of how dare you's. WACK!! And I might be one of the FBI’s most wanted.

thought crime as a concept has many offspring. there is an agenda. anyone who opposes the agenda is a target. since 2021, we have all witnessed large scale, coordinated riots and protests targeting specific groups. A primary reason is to intimidate and to instill fear. which by the definition given above , should be classified as a particular type of offence. why has it not been ? I for one, feel threatened. where is my protection ?

words betray what one thinks. now people face trouble over what they say in opposition to the agenda. it has always been this way. if speech is not free, than neither are the thoughts that give rise to them.

Don't see this one lasting long. But how do you propose to include the concept of intent in your proposed new crime ?

First, I am not proposing any new crimes or concerned about any new thought-detection technology (yet!), I am just running a little thought experiment for the purpose of discussion. So, talking about thoughts, how do we think? What are "thoughts?" It seems to me that we think in words and images. If you would allow any private thoughts then you would allow any---private---words and images. Are you still on board with allowing any thoughts, or are some words and images not allowable? In other words, if thoughts COULD be detected, would you be onboard with punishing people for their thoughts? Should people be required to think the right things?

I think Chuckv97...

Made a fine example..
In his post..
Some things might be better..
Left to ones own crainium...

I would propose..
That thoughts would be governed..
In another relm..

I suppose one's thoughts should not be subject to any control by another. At the same time if one's thoughts became known to another, there should be no rules saying you can't try to get a person to change their way of thinking-if that person chooses to listen.

BTW: I have never like the use of the designation of a crime being a "hate" crime. the penalty of a crime should be the same whether done in hate (according to definitions) or not committed in hate. IMHO.
Brad

I restrict myself on what I'm allowed to think.

Some topics I just don't want to have in my head.

Where's a "Thought Cop" when you need one?

If anyone is plagued by awful thoughts a visit to a psychologist might help.

I spend my thinking time on choosing new banjo pieces,better consistency in my 9 ball game,wanting to know if any of my friends want to pick,play Scrabble or need my help in any way and keeping my car running good.

Right now I'm thinking of traveling to The Solon Hotel this Sunday to join in a big celebration of the life of our dear friend who passed away,unexpectedly.

3 items come to mind here
One is the TwightLight Zone episode where the spoiled brat type--had mental powers to change people into any thing he could imagine -- the victims became things such as animals or plants or inanimate objects---also he could read minds and if you got around him thinking downer thoughts-(in his opinion)--he would let you have it

another item is the two wolves adage -- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Wolv...andfather
%20answers%20%22whichever%20one%20you%20feed%22.


third is from a Dylan song"--"if my thought dreams could be seen,they would probably put my head in a guillotine''

If any thoughts are allowed in the privacy of one's own mind, should the words or images of those thoughts be allowed in the privacy of one's own home? Should there be any *outside* restraints on what we are allowed to write, or paint, for our own use?

We have a First Amendment that prohibits infringement of our speech by our government, but there's not much in the law that prohibits infringement of our speech by private actors. If what you think leads you to say things that some people don’t want you to say, they will do anything within their power to stop you from saying it. If they have the power to harm you because you said or want to say something they don’t want you to say, they will do so. If what we say is a manifestation of what we think, the potential for being penalized for what we think already exists.

The old, Southern humorist, Dave Gardner said that when people asked him, “Brother Dave, don’t you have to watch what you say?”, his response was “no, I just watch what I think”.

Whenever someone says something I don't like my reaction is never to harm them.
Just because someone doesn't like what someone says that doesn't give them the right to do something about it.Certainly not to harm them.
Just because someone says something you don't like doesn't mean they can't defend themselves.
A lot of times people that go looking for a fight get their @ss kicked.

Just don't go around saying
"People should be nicer to each other"
There are examples, throughout history, of people who said that, and got killed.
There are others, not as well known outside of the Irish community.
But here's a starter set, in reverse order of the dates of their demise:

Marty King
Jack Kennedy
Matt McGhandi
Jesus O'Nazareth
 

I am not a number!
I am not a number!
I am a free man!

You are Number Six.