On the other hand I’m horrified, that you seem to equate a quick insult with Deepfake-Porn of Minors.

I don’t. Maybe a language issue.

Arguably the unrestricted access of government entities to this kind of data is higher in the US then the EU.

Yes. The GDPR in particular means that service providers may not be allowed to collect the data you want to use for prosecution. Which is one reason I brought this up.

It is refreshing to see someone who is not at all concerned about privacy. I usually feel that people are far too concerned about surveillance. I don’t remember the last time that I felt that a bit more concern would be good.

For purposes of enforcement, the degree of surveillance allowed/mandated is important. The copyright industry has a large financial interest in tracking data on the net. I’m pretty sure that German High Schoolers don’t have too much trouble pirating media. This shows that there are practical limits to enforcing bans on internet services and data sharing. Technologically, a lot more surveillance would be possible. It would cost money that would have to be paid with the internet bill and through higher costs of various services. It would also have a chilling effect on various aspects of civil society.

Discussing the pros and cons of total surveillance goes too far from the topic, I think.

The question is simply: How well do you want this to be enforced and are you willing to pay the price (not only in money)?

Insults? No, those are mostly a civil matter not a criminal one

No, insults are firstly a criminal matter.