[_heimdall]

How is this a straw mab argument? I'm not saying poll any random 10 people on what they currently know of laws already on the book, I'd expect that to end poorly.

With regards to this specific law being clear and understandable by those who must follow it, I'm proposing that asking 10 of those people to read it and they wouldn't agree what the law means and when it will be enforced. I don't see that being a straw man, though I could very well be missing something there.

[BoredPositron]

Because if you give traffic laws to 10 random people on the street to read they might understand the gist of it but not every detail.

[_heimdall]

Okay we may be getting to the cote of where we disagree, regardless of free speech issues.

Do you not see it as a problem for the average person to be unable to understand the laws they are meant to follow?

For me, that's a real problem. In the example of traffic laws, either the laws are important to keep us safe on the road and the fact that people can't understand the laws as written puts us all at risk. Alternatively, if we're happy enough with road safety despite the fact that people can't understand traffic laws then the laws aren't serving a purpose and aren't needed. On top of that, people will be at risk of being fined or imprisoned for breaking laws that they didn't realize they broke, even when they took the time to read and try to understand the laws.