So what exactly are we supposed to do with these "known wolves?"

Conservative writers are quick to point out occasions in which these "lone wolf" terrorists turned out to be "known wolves." Cue the outrage.

But what exactly are we supposed to do with these "known wolves?" Thought crimes are not illegal -- that's a fundamental concept of American jurisprudence.

Criminal conspiracies don't always require the actual commission of a crime, merely the planning process. But the acts of people like that Ahmad Khan Rahami guy may not have involved any conspiracies that law enforcement agencies could prove or were even aware of. So there was nothing anyone could have done until he actually started building his bombs. Even then, if he had a plausible explanation for his pressure cooker devices then a conviction is unlikely, e.g., see the Dallas clock boy who is now suing his old school. And are we really capable of surveillance of every individual in the country who hates America?

While it's fun to knock Obama, et al, for coddling terrorists, we have to be realistic about what the police can do without obliterating our constitutional safeguards. Heaven knows some of our presidential candidates would like to whittle down citizens' rights. But it doesn't serve the public by carving up the Bill of Rights permanently to satisfy immediate concerns.

Footnote: Mr. Rahami was said to be a "naturalized citizen." If treason could be proved his citizenship status could be revoked. But it would seem that treason would be harder to prove than criminal conspiracy. So we're back where we started.