[v7n]

The headline got me worried, but after reading the article it became clear that was purposeful with weasel words like "states can now collect". There seem to be no new databases or new actual mechanisms in place, it's just about the clarification of which kind of potential threats are encouraged to be entered into the already existent system.

The criteria seems reasonable enough. If there is objective, verifiable information that an individual, who has been sharing terrorist content online, will commit a violent extremist offense in the future and that offense would be serious enough... I would hope that this data is shared between the Union members now and in the future.

[generic92034]

> I would hope that this data is shared between the Union members now and in the future.

If parliaments had decided that, my objections would be much lower. But the institutions just deciding for themselves seems to be potentially abusive. It is not like there would be no examples.

[v7n]

My understanding is that this has always been the intended purpose of this system and these guidelines are just about agreeing on a mutual interpretation of some dense legalese. If that's correct then I'm not too upset about this being handled in the Commission, but the issue remains important to me so I will partake in the outrage if I hear compelling enough arguments to do so.