Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with this type of regulation is that you need to add huge amount of vagueness in the law to be future proof. Leading to huge amounts of uncertainty for companies, unnecessary red tape and higher legal fees. As well as giving the power to a judge to punish companies if the public sentiment goes negative.
Laws can be iterated on. Uncertainty, red tape and legal fees all seem like worth-while brakes on a potentially dangerous industry. Better to be safe than sorry.
For Americans, this concept seems to be almost alien given the (at least from an European POV) more or less constant gridlock between House, Senate, Presidency and whatever the 50 states make out of that regarding enforcement.
Or, to put it differently, they prefer the Wild West and barely self-regulated markets because they have completely lost any trust in government to create and modernize laws - a viewpoint that does make sense given the ridiculous age of key players in Congress. Feinstein is 90 years old, both likely Presidential candidates are over 75, Senators' median age is 65. How can anyone expect these people to even understand modern issues?!
I think this is also the cause why so many American companies failed or have massive difficulties entering the European market. They simply cannot think that other countries have governments that actually govern and regulatory agencies that don't take it well if foreign companies try to buy their way out of trouble.