> People like him and their mind viruses are destructive to proper civil society.
I don't think the "proper civil society" response is that they should be subject to criminal attacks.
I am considerably less certain given some of his Twitter postings.
“Police protection” tends to imply that you get treated as a special person, someone super important — like a head of state or a political dissident. It’s a bit like having Mark Zuckerberg’s security detail, but through the use of taxpayer funds. In a country where most people don’t have guns and don’t resolve problems through violence, the need for this sort of thing is extremely rare.
As someone who is clearly “not poor,” as he says repeatedly, he should be asked to source his own protection rather than being an undue burden on the South Korean taxpayer. The funds and resources earmarked for police protection would be better spent protecting women fighting for equal representation, against corruption, etc.
Of course, if the guy is actually poor, well, that’s another thing. I don’t think that is what we are dealing with here, however. Keep in mind that he dissolved the South Korean entity for Terra on April 30th…
Too many people being able to just disregard the law when they see fit is not an argument for either
* Letting them off
* Allowing more people to break the law as they see fit
Which are the alternatives.
> a strong and powerful position against illegal and unethical actions should be taken to return to a civil society.
This would, imo, be the "arrest them" part of the argument.