A man in Yibin was fined 500 yuan for electric fish in his own fish pond, and the result was unexpected
Liao, a farmer in Yibin, Sichuan Province, was fined 500 yuan for using electric fish from the grid in his fish pond. However, the local government later admitted that the punishment was improperly applied and eventually revoked the punishment against Liao.
This seemingly ordinary case has exposed the ambiguity and inadequacy of the current laws in the mainland under some special circumstances, and has triggered extensive discussions in society on the boundaries of relevant laws.
Liao is an ordinary farmer living in Yibin, Sichuan, and unlike other farmers, he saw the business opportunities of the Internet early on. In order to get more income, in addition to farming, Liao also contracted a 1.5-acre fish pond at home, specializing in fish farming and sales.
One day, Liao saw some videos of electric fish on the Internet, so he had an idea: If he also shoots some videos like this, can he also attract the attention of many fans?
In this way, Liao used his old battery to modify a set of electric fish equipment and installed it in his own fish pond. At the same time as Electric Fish, he also recorded a video while explaining, and posted it on his social account after editing.
Sure enough, the video attracted a lot of attention as soon as it was released, and everyone expressed envy and jealousy without exception.
However, the good times did not last long, and someone quickly reported Liao's behavior to the local police. After receiving the report, the police immediately came to the door and took Liao back for investigation.
At first, Liao was very confused, and he insisted that he was just electrocuting fish in his own fish pond and did not break the law. But to his surprise, in the police's statement, even if it is an electric fish in his own fish pond, it is an illegal act. In the end, Liao was fined 500 yuan.
This result undoubtedly disappointed Liao. He believes that since he is electrocuting fish in his own fish pond, it should not constitute a violation of the law, because it does not destroy public resources.
The police punished him for violating the Public Security Administration Punishment Law, arguing that any use of electric fish on the grid was illegal.
After the case was exposed, it immediately sparked a heated discussion in society. Proponents of Liao argue that as the owner of the fish pond, he has every right to do whatever he wants with his private property, such as fishing, selling or processing, and that the police are suspected of exceeding his authority.
Opponents insist that even in private fish ponds, electric fish is ecologically damaging and should be regulated by law.
Experts and scholars in the legal field also expressed their views on the case. They generally believe that the current Fisheries Law on the mainland is mainly aimed at protecting fishery resources in natural waters, while there is no clear provision for private fish ponds.
At the same time, however, the Public Security Administration Penalty Law prohibits the use of power grids in a blanket manner, and there may be ambiguity in the application process.
Under the widespread attention and pressure of public opinion from all walks of life, the local government finally admitted that the punishment in this case was improper.
After review, although Liao's behavior was improper, it did not violate the relevant provisions of the Fisheries Law. The police finally had to apologize to Liao and revoke the previous punishment decision.
Although this case has a happy ending, it also highlights the inadequacies and ambiguities of the relevant laws in the mainland in some special circumstances. In the face of the development of the Internet and the rise of new industries, the lag and lag of the law have been exposed.
How to protect the public interest to the greatest extent while also taking into account the reasonable demands of individuals and new industries obviously requires the continuous improvement of the law.
：
Regarding Liao's case, from a legal point of view, there are indeed some controversies and shortcomings. Let's start with the relevant provisions of the Public Security Administration Punishment Law: Article 37 of the law prohibits the unauthorized use of the power grid, which can be punished by detention or fines.
But if you look at the full text, this article is mainly for safety reasons, aiming to prevent casualties and property damage caused by the use of the power grid.
In Liao's case, his use of the power grid was carried out in his own fish pond, and the only property involved was his own, which did not seem to violate the legislative intent of the law.
Second, let's look at the Fisheries Law. The main purpose of the law is to protect fishery resources in natural waters, and to prohibit electric fishing.
However, Liao's actions occurred in a private fish pond and did not endanger the country's fishery resources, so it does not fall within the scope of the law.
Some netizens think that even if
It is a private fish pond, and the electric fish may also cause some damage to the ecological environment and have potential harm, so it should be completely banned.
However, some netizens have a different view, arguing that the damage to the ecological environment mainly comes from public waters, and the owners of individual fish ponds should have full rights to dispose of their own property, and the practice of prohibiting them from using electric fish is itself a suspicion of excessive protectionism.
Some netizens believe that whether it is for safety or environmental protection reasons, the government can set some moderate restrictions on electric fishing and other behaviors, rather than banning individual fish ponds altogether.
So, what is your point of view, and do we have any good solutions to this problem? Feel free to comment in the comments section