On guard

Not Today
By SUJESH PAVITHRAN

Sometimes, we need to do what we have to do.

SOME years ago, after we had installed an alarm system at home, it went off for the first time, just after midnight. Understandably, we panicked and called the police station.

“We’ll try to send someone over,” a polite, if disinterested, policeman told me.

“We’re short on manpower, you know,” he added helpfully.

No patrol vehicle paid us a visit that night.

A couple of weeks ago, a resident in my neighbourhood heard a noise in his kitchen around 6am and went to investigate. When he saw a man knocking on the window grilles from outside, possibly testing if the house had an alarm, he immediately called a neighbour, a committee member of our newly-formed residents’ association.

The neighbour quickly summoned the security guards that the association had hired, and they arrived within a few minutes. The would-be thief had scooted by then, scared off by the noise, ostensibly.

Of course, the police were also informed, but according to the resident, they never came. It’s not that the police haven’t been helpful at all; they do the occasional night patrols, and I once saw them rush to my neighbour’s house one night, when he called to report he had seen some men hiding in a drain behind his house.

Last month, when our security guards nabbed some bloke who was loitering suspiciously in the wee hours (he tried to attack the guards when they queried him), a patrol car did turn up to take the suspect to the station. He was released because his urine test came out negative and as the cops said: “He hadn’t done anything.” I’m hoping he doesn’t return!

My point is, short of manpower or not, there will be many occasions when the police can’t be there for us on time, or at all. So we’ve reach a point where we need to help ourselves first.

This is what our residents’ association did this year, after petty crime incidents became too regular in our neighbourhood. We hired a security firm to keep us safe.

It hasn’t been all smooth sailing so far, especially during the initial stage; three months and we’re now into the third company, which has looked the most promising of the lot because they’ve kept up to their end of the bargain. Sure, residents have had to put up some minor conveniences, like slowing down at the road entrances to our neighbourhood, while cars are occasionally stopped by alert guards and their drivers questioned.

Still, the short of it is that, in the past three months, the crime rate has been almost nil; the guards have certainly been an effective deterrent to opportunistic robbers.

Yet, there are residents – those not contributing and yet who benefit from others’ contributions – who feel all these are infringements on their rights and privacy.

Of course, there are always two sides to the tale and I will give that such measures as employing private guards must also take into consideration the convenience of all residents, whether or not they’re paying for the service. Residents, on the other hand, must surely realise that the guards are there to ensure the safety of their neighbourhood.

Yes, I know, there’s no 100% deterrent against crime short of having armed guards at your gate, but since this is not possible, we need to start somewhere. The police can’t fight crime on their own.

Importantly, the steps we have taken have shown results.

As one neighbour remarked to me a few days ago: “I see many more ladies talking their morning and evening walks the past couple of months than previously.”

This, surely, proves that we can take back our streets and parks ... even if at a price.

Note: This article appeared on Friday, 7th August 2009 in the Star