Closer to the opposite, it happens more when we do care about the distinction.
[Edit: Just realised the "you" in your comment can either be the poster or the police, with very different consequences.]
The rules are something that looks like a credible threat.
Both these, at the time of the conviction, did look credible.
The second was only overturned because enough people argued well enough that it wasn't credible and shouldn't have ever been seen as credible. The rules were then changed to emphasise the arguments people had made so this didn't happen again.
[Edit: Just realised the "you" in your comment can either be the poster or the police, with very different consequences.]
The rules are something that looks like a credible threat.
Both these, at the time of the conviction, did look credible.
The second was only overturned because enough people argued well enough that it wasn't credible and shouldn't have ever been seen as credible. The rules were then changed to emphasise the arguments people had made so this didn't happen again.