If One Doesn’t Want a Police State, How on Earth Could One Want a Homeland Security Bill?

 If One Doesn’t Want a Police State, How on Earth Could One Want a Homeland Security Bill?

United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)

March 22, 2017
 Translation of an Except

Hakka Affairs chairman Lee Yung-de, a Cabinet member, was stopped by the police for a spot ID check; this incident sharply polarized a dispute in society. Some believe that the police violated the Constitution by infringing on human rights; others believe that the police enforced the law on a firm basis, saying that officials cannot refuse to be stopped for a spot ID check. In fact, the font of the dispute is nothing but "law"; it has evolved into a shouting match of rivalry between a "super chairman" and "super police"; it didn’t help at all. Nevertheless, on the other hand, it is a timely reminder to the powers that be: laws restraining people’s freedoms, such as enacting a “Homeland Security Bill” or an “Anti-infiltration Bill” is rather a more terrible fountainhead than a "police state."

Lee Yung-de blasted harshly Taipei City’s becoming a "police state." In fact if Lee Yung-de, as a Cabinet member, had believed that a police officer had acted improperly in law enforcement, he could have requested, through executive channels, the Interior Minister or Taipei City Mayor to prod the police for improvement, in order to fight for freedom from unwarranted stops for spot ID checks for the vast masses. If using Facebook to post articles, as he did, to scold a police officer on the front line, leading to the latter’s investigation, it is not the proper way for a gentleman in government service. Not to mention that the DPP, during the Sunflower Student Movement, repeatedly denigrated the dignity of the police in law enforcement; now it added another blow; how on earth would the police be able to mind, at the same time, its proactive efforts in crime prevention?

Do not forget that Lee Yung-de’s dissatisfaction with the "police state" and the people’s negative reaction to the “Homeland Security Bill” and “Anti-infiltration Bill” in reality originated from the same font. Encountering a policeman or encountering a criminal at a street corner near a convenience stories is never a pleasant thing. For the people, they would rather want the police to maintain safety and prevent crimes and not want the government to reach its invisible hand into their own backyard. People do not want a police state, so why on earth would they want a “Homeland Security Bill” or an “Anti-infiltration Bill”?

Attachment : none