Given that laws mean whatever those in power say they mean, the test is not whether you find the text reasonable, but rather whether they can find the text to mean something you would find unreasonable.
Yes, but we live with that all the time, don't we? At a certain point, we have to just trust that it will be used as intended, and then trust that we can improve the law later if it's abused.
So you are saying we should reject out of hand any and all bills that could possibly be interpreted to mean something we haven't thought of?
Sorry for the snark, but my point is laws are always like that, and there needs to be some trust somewhere. (The system is supposed to be structured that you may trust the system, if not the books- checks and balances and whatnot) If you have nothing you can trust, you're up a crick without a paddle.
Given that laws mean whatever those in power say they mean, the test is not whether you find the text reasonable, but rather whether they can find the text to mean something you would find unreasonable.