I think the practical way to go about this is to distinguish between what's ACTUALLY dangerous, actually harming people (beyond the loss of their privacy), and

I think the practical way to go about this is to distinguish between what's ACTUALLY dangerous, actually harming people (beyond the loss of their privacy), and what's POTENTIALLY dangerous. Because I think it's easy for people to conflate the two. For instance, are people being rounded up and having bad things happen to them? Yes. People suspected of being illegal immigrants (or undocumented) and who are also suspected of being violent criminals are being rounded up. Also, there seems to be the odd case or 12 of someone who is undocumented, but is otherwise a thoroughly upstanding individual. The second thing I believe needs consideration is to determine exactly what line does the government need to cross for this POTENTIALLY dangerous privacy invasion to become ACTUAL, PRESENT dangers. The problem, of course, is getting consensus. Particularly when there's heavy foreign influence on the Internet & government. When so much of the news media promotes racism & nationalism. The possibility of the people being divided and conquered is a POSSIBILITY, given our acceptance of nationalism.