[danielweber]

Almost all American laws are "thought" laws.

In the US, if I pick up your property and walk away, I need to have an intent to permanently deprive you of it for it to be theft. (Obviously state law has particulars here.)

Strict liability -- where it's illegal for me to do X no matter what I was thinking -- is the exception. It's a growing exception, and that is unfortunate, but that speaks to the opposite of your narrative.

The fact that the prosecution has to show state of mind, rather than that some serious of actions happened, is a good thing, not a bad thing.

EDIT I changed the example in the second graf away from talking about car theft to avoid weird exceptions

[AnthonyMouse]

There is a difference between the prosecution having to prove intent as an element of the crime and having the totality of the offense be intent on its own, or the offense being some collection of innocuous actions that cause no harm to anyone on their own but happen to be correlated with undesired activity.