To survive war, become war

RULES OF UNREALITY: BY DAVIN ARUL

John Rambo's observation has never been so timely or applicable in Malaysia as it is now, during our war on crime.

ACOUPLE of months ago, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi told the law enforcement agencies of the country to declare war on crime.

Now that the declaration has been made, we should look at ways of securing victory; and as always, in times of war we need to ensure the safety and survival of civilians.

That’s where a certain Vietnam War veteran from popular fiction comes in; I’m not just suggesting that we “go Rambo” on criminals – that should be a given – but maybe we should consider his sage advice on survival in wartime.

In recent weeks, while we have seen great successes by the police – drug rings smashed, gangsters rounded up, rob-and-rape suspects hauled in – there is no denying that crime and its effect on the general well-being of our society are still very much in the forefront of the average citizen's thoughts.

Just a week ago, an auxiliary force was deployed in Johor Baru to combat crime there.

But as some readers have pointed out in our letters pages and Citizen’s Blog, there are other places in the country facing problems too. For example, right here in Bangsar where I live, gangs of Mat Rempit wantonly terrorise hapless motorists after midnight.

Self-serving concerns aside, the worst thing that could happen is when these criminals, after being caught and processed, get off too lightly; or sometimes, are not even prosecuted for various reasons, such as lack of evidence and (as has been alleged a lot lately) influence from high up.

I've heard suggestions ranging from life imprisonment for repeat offenders and rapists to the death sentence for the more heinous crimes.

Recently, in the blog of this column, I wondered about the possibility of bringing back the ancient practice of sula (impaling the wrongdoers from anus to mouth with a bamboo pole) as a special treat for gang rapists. Some readers concurred that mercy should not be shown to the merciless.

And maybe that's the key to winning the war on crime. We have to throw away our rulebook and send clear signals to these criminal elements that they will be shown no mercy. We can't be soft on crime.

Compassion is for better times. Look around you at the number of victims of so-called petty yet violent crime, or gang rape, or ram-and-rob (or slash-and-rob, or bludgeon-androb) and tell me that those times are here, and I'll strongly suggest that you suspend your medication for a while.

John Rambo was not known for philosophising, but his occasional pearls of wisdom – delivered by way of Sylvester Stallone and his screenplay collaborator James Cameron (yes, that James Cameron) in 1985’s Rambo, First Blood: Part II – should be heeded when the occasion demands it: To survive a war, you have to become war.

The first rule is: they start it, we as a society have to finish it. Or finish them.

Hardcore criminals who show no mercy to their victims should be put down like the rabid animals they are, and let the bleeding hearts or human rights advocates voice their concerns all they want. Save it for people who can be saved.

I don't presume to judge the circumstances of others, of what drove them to crime, or even the violence done to them by others; but there is always an alternative to going out and hurting a fellow human being, to dragging a victim to her death, to severing a victim's arm, to violating a victim and destroying her future.

There are many people who have been dealt cruel hands who make the choice every day to live decent lives. So it's really quite simple: any criminal who wilfully causes hurt to another human being should receive a highly disproportionate response.

Some argue that deterrent sentences serve little purpose, because those who have it in them to commit such heinous crimes will do so anyway.

But, people, you're looking at it from the wrong perspective. We don't need it to be a deterrent. It's a punishment first and foremost.

And it’s one that has to be meted out, whether it means impalation (as if that would ever happen), or execution by hanging, or simply locking them up for life and throwing away the key. That would mean society would have to house, clothe and feed them for good. No ... execution is preferable.

Pardon me if I sound glib when talking about human life, but that's only because these animals don't seem to hold it in high regard either.

No regard for the life, well being or dignity of others.

The moment a criminal stops seeing his victim as a human being with a family and a future, that's when he too has made a choice that effectively removes him from being a part of society.

We execute drug traffickers. We execute murderers sometimes. We even execute armed robbers.

Time to extend the death penalty to those who destroy lives in other ways, too. Yes, they will receive the due process – and they should know what's waiting for them at the end of that process.

And this brings me to the next point about war on crime. In a war, you need to mobilise all your resources. This means getting priorities right, too.

I don't want to tell people how to spend their money, but I believe I have the right to suggest how they spend my money. We the people know that the majority of those who read books and periodicals are not the ones who go out and commit crime or rape and kill.

Yet the Government dedicates a huge amount of manpower to the practice of censoring thousands upon thousands of books and periodicals, day in and day out, on “moral” grounds.

Dear reader, you and I know this to be a colossal waste of time and resources. It's not effective, as there are big chain stores where you can easily get “unfiltered” stuff, and the Internet offers millions of avenues for any undesirable material to enter our borders – in colour, in fullmotion video, and probably in 5.1 Surround Sound, too.

In an hour of war, like the war which the prime minister has asked to be declared on crime, shouldn't we mobilise all our human resources and put their time to more effective use? I don't mean that they should be placed in harm's way, out on the mean streets, pursuing gangsters and robbers. Certainly not.

Perhaps, though, with a bit of additional training, they could man the front desks of police stations and beat bases, taking down reports; they certainly have keen perception and an eye for detail that they could bring to this job, too.

The more athletic ones could be deployed to patrol school grounds or tourist spots to keep a protective eye on our children and our guests.

This would free up the police officers who are trained to fight crime, to actually go out on the streets and fight crime.

And by being right there as the interface with the public, maybe the redeployed censors will be able to get a better reading of the pulse of the real world, too.

One can always dream.

Davin Arul, vice president of the I.Star division, is not so spiritually enlightened as to be able to advocate forgiveness for heartless perpetrators of violent crime.

He won’t try harder for the moment. Visit the blog of this column with new and (almost) daily postings at http://blog.thestar.com.my/unreal.

Finally, something with sense. I wonder if this would send some realization to the public?.