Yeah, tracking bad, I get it, but are whatever damages that kind of legislation would prevent (probably nothing measurable) really more important than fixing the easy, in our face social problems that politicians could instead be focusing on?
If you did it in just your store, that wouldn't be a problem. The correct analogy, however, is "why should it be illegal for me to attach a perfectly traceable and invisible air-tag to you when you enter my store, without your explicit consent, and subsequently follow and document your every movement no matter where you go, as long as that location has a business relationship with my store, and also my store is the most popular chain on the planet that has business relationships with basically any relevant business that exists." And I don't think the answer to this one shouldn't be particularly difficult to arrive at.
That's just a description of you that I share with my other stores. Casinos, Target, Burger King, etc all do this when you get 86'd, for example.
It's passive surveillance on the order of billions of people. It's not a mom-and-pop shop.
If you have that right, the public should have the right to know you're doing this before they enter your store, so they can avoid it.
Same with the websites, they should, legally, have to say they're about to fingerprint you so that you can close your browser tab and never come back.
(I have no idea, I don't know too much about this)
If you want to make it harder to guess whether you're human or a malicious bot, you're going to find yourself clicking on more than just traffic lights and bicycles in the near future.