I mean, they already did with this law, it’s just a “high” threshold of 10k. Get a few high profile instances of the law on the books “not being enough for curr

I mean, they already did with this law, it’s just a “high” threshold of 10k. Get a few high profile instances of the law on the books “not being enough for current law enforcement to be able to do its job” and public indifference might allow you to go whole hog (or at least such a low threshold as to cover 95%+ of transactions). Of course this is a slippery slope fallacy, but I have so little confidence in the surveillance state not to behave this way that thinking otherwise feels a bit pollyanna to me, but ymmv. (Edited for spelling)