No, this is matter-of-fact anti-terrorism.
The problem is that government us terrorism scaremongering to justify erasing citizens rights. It's completely valid to be anti-terrorist and prefer alternative choices to fight it.
For example, in my country, both polices and tribunals are severely under provisioned. I'd start with imroofijg those budgets before passing surveillance laws.
What alternative choices? France suffered multiple highly deadly attacks on it's soil, including two with 100+ graphic and violent dead. What alternative choices are there to prevent them outside of mass surveillance, infiltrating potentially radicalising religious institutions and shutting them down, arresting members of outwardly radical groups stockpiling weapons and materials for explosives (all things the French government is doing).
"We gotta auth because there are no alternatives" has been used time and again in history to commit atrocities.
---
Like it or not, People don't just go around committing terrorist attacks everyday. I, for example, and many people I know, have plenty of equipment to do so if I wanted to (multiple firearms, potential explosives etc), but why would I?
