I can tell you I‘ve been to societies which can be defined as "free" and I have been to societies that can be defined as "safe". There are no "free", "safe" societies. Having lived in Syria, I would define Syria as a very safe place in terms of law and order issues, wouldn‘t call it a very free place though.
As for the logic that those that aren‘t doing anything wrong have nothing to fear. I‘m sorry but people like Donald Marshall, Guy-Paul Morin and Stephen Truscott have shot that arguement to heck.
The reason law abiding citezens have concerns over increased police powers is for the simple fact that yes, the police do get it wrong, and yes the police have abused their authority, and yes the police even break the law from time to time. So when I hear the argument "We‘re the police trust us" I tend to get skeptical really quick
As far as I can see the police already have enough powers to do their job, perhaps it takes more time to get a warrant, to illustrate RPG‘s to a judge but those steps exist to protect you and me. Besides the police can tap your phone, raid your garbage and follow you around, they simply have to obtain a warrant in the first to instances to do it. Anyhow from what I read in the article the police acted within the letter of the law, so why are we debating extraordinary police powers anyways?