A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
If they’re petty criminals, what does that say about Louvre security?
Yeah, exactly. This article seems to be trying to insult the criminals, but it just makes the Louvre look even worse.
That’s what I thought at first but the headline leaves out “from the world of organized crime.”
It sounds like they are making the distinction between organized crime and thieves operating on their own aka “petty criminals.” The word “petty” has many pejorative connotations but it can also just mean small in scale or scope, and that appears to be the meaning here.
You’re over analyzing this. They’re very likely was a “original headline“ written by the author of the article, then some copywriter or copy editor gotten involved, whose job is to increase clicks and engagement, and so the headline got walked into something more salacious.
You just added more analysis :D
I’m just pointing out the words actually used in the article and what they mean. I’m sure you’re right about how it got this way.
The Louvre employees raised warnings for years about the lack of funds leading to poor security for the employees, the visitors and the collections. https://globalnation.inquirer.net/295647/louvre-heist-lays-bare-museum-security-complaints
They were petty officers.
Maybe if they weren’t so petty they would have done their jobs ;)
I think it's petty to call them petty criminals when they stole from the Louvre! No honor among journalists. At the bare minimum, you gotta give them cred for showing initiative and go outside their comfort zone. In any workplace these guys would be promotion material. They're branching out, aiming higher.
Respect the ambition.
edit: would love to sit in on their meetings
Turns out hard work CAN get you recognized
The world has been BEGGING for a new class of criminal.
if this was their first job, then boy I can't wait to see where their new art thief careers take them
Maybe they were petty criminals... Seems like they got organized now haha
Imagine the street cred!
This is pretty much always the case with high profile heists like this. Organized criminals are usually smart enough to realize that selling incredibly famous stolen objects is basically impossible, and the people who steal them are too stupid to realize that.
I mean there is an entire black market of stolen paintings in private collections, so clearly not impossible.
Those thefts are rarely random, though
So if this wasn't organized crime, how they hell did they think they would fence priceless treasures?! Maybe they were cold-blooded enough to chop it all up into bits, get what they could, but FFS, no fence would touch that shit for years, if not a decade+.
You would have to have billionaire buyers lined up, kinda people who have the money to stash such goods in a private collection, and I doubt even the wealthiest would risk it. Who could they show it to?! I wouldn't let my own wife know I had such a thing under our roof.
To paraphrase: If you're going to steal the king's shit, you better not fail selling it.
Melt it down for raw value, I assume.
You can melt down jewels now?
A jeweler who won't ask questions will cut them into smaller stones. Nobody's checking their origins.
Yeah but it's devastating to resale value. A gem twice the size can be worth orders of magnitude more than the other. Talking about reducing something worth probably a third or half billion dollars to maybe a few million in scrap value.
$5M > $0
"Bro toss some more diamonds and emeralds in the crucible"
Who could they show it to?!
Their rich amoral friends on their private islands that don't have law enforcement. But how random poor's would ever get in touch with a billionaire to sell the jewels I don't know.
So the Louvre is staffed exclusively by clowns.
Idk... I mean how many robberies have you stopped in your life? Are you a clown? 🤷
You mean - How many times have I been employed as a security guard? A security guard for some of the world's most valuable art, in the world's most famous art museum? Is that what you mean? "How many robberies have you stopped where it was specifically your job to prevent such an occurrence?"
I'm a bit of a clown, ~~but your question is beyond even my ability~~.
Edit: I misunderstood your comment, and you graciously pointed out my error. I apologize for my disrespectful tone.
Seems like maybe if you meant "security guards" that's what you would have written in your original comment. But that is not what you wrote. We are working off of what you give us here.
Even if you HAD written that, who pays security guards enough to give a crap and how many of them ever have the chance to stop a heist in progress?
Seems like there's a head of security feeling pretty stupid for not having better protocols, but your blanket statement is pretty 🤡 to me.
Fair enough, that's a good point. My blanket statement would've included general staff & so on, and I certainly only intended to have a go at the security staff. As far as "who pays enough", I'd certainly hope the highest-profile art museum would.
I appreciate you. I do hope the head of security feels like as much of a clown as I am.
It would not surprise me to find out that the louvre doesn't pay much for security.
The few times I've been to the pyramid the guards have been less than unhelpful. They seem more decorative than anything. I left my phone once and someone took it to the security office there and I tried to ask a guard where that office was and he just kept saying "give up your phone is gone".
I have no idea what their upper level security is like though.
"Decorative guards" could explain quite a bit about the heist.
What's really odd is that France already pays Gendarmerie to stand around in public places, protect cultural assets etc.
If even one dude was standing in the corner of the gallery with a rifle slung up that day, that would likely have deterred the entire theft.
Museum protocol during active robbery is to escort visitors to the nearest exit first and only after take care of the criminals
Sure, but in my view a bunch of dudes standing around with rifles is enough of a visual deterrent that it should never escalate to the point of "active robbery".
We need more guards with MP5s?
They're French so I would think P90s instead of MP5s.
Famas, last time I was there
We need more French?
That's just sad then, the fact that petty criminals can pull this off and it doesn't even require professionals.
I will say, I'm glad I got to see the crown jewels when I visited the Louvre in April, they were incredible. Although they weren't even my favourite part of the Louvre, my favourite part was the Mona Lisa. I literally went around 3 times to see the Mona Lisa lol
Mega-Cyber-Hackers too! They cracked the hyper-secure password for the video system. The password was LOUVRE.
How do they know?