The disastrous overseas stuff is distracting our minds from the increasing loss of freedom at home. The libbers and elites never let an opportunity to apply the fetters or take away our freedoms go to waste. Domestically, many of the measures being bandied about involve avoiding feelings from being hurt and stopping any violent outbursts resulting therefrom, or nipping any proscribed nastiness in the bud. “Disinformation” classifications and actions to muzzle the appearance of disinformation are popping up all over the place to prevent any actions or thoughts that might not be in strict accordance with the regime’s regulations or rigid thought patterns from emerging.

In finance, a whole infrastructure of surveillance, tracking, and monitoring has been constructed. This makes splitting one’s cash deposit into several transactions, none exceeding $10,000 to avoid reporting them, a federal crime in and of itself.
<...>
Then again, you can be considered a criminal if your social media or other post is considered inflammatory to the sensitive, so that their feelings can remain unscathed and dad’s rifle will stay safely locked away. Speaking of which, regulations are pushed ad nauseum when it comes to guns. If one can’t legally buy so-called assault rifles, the shootings will be less “assault-y”, disturbing, or something.
<...>
Preventive laws violate the presumption of innocence. They, in effect, presume the guilt of those engaging in some potentially harm-adjacent act, and place the burden on the actor to prove their innocence
<...>
The goal of the lawgivers or enforcers is to make responsibility irrelevant. It won’t matter if people act responsibly or not. Their irresponsible intentions will be rendered impotent and irrelevant. How do criminals, or anyone for that matter, learn that they are responsible for their actions, if the law is engaged in a mighty project to render it irrelevant whether one does or does not want to act responsibly?