Try love and empathy

THE EDITOR: I listened with interest to the Prime Minister, the National Security Minister, a commissioner of police (CoP) in respect of the recent brazen killings at Gonzales and the Port of Spain General Hospital.

The general view expressed by the PM and echoed by the National Security Minister was that the perpetrators have no respect for the law or fear of being apprehended to face the consequences of their actions.

The Leader of the Opposition chimed in with a recommendation urging the police to use “full force” in their encounter with perpetrators. The former CoP added his voice. We all know of the current CoP’s “one shot, one kill policy,” so it appears that all the commentators are endorsing a greater focus on the use of force and the “fighting fire with fire” approach.

There are those who will say that these miscreants or cockroaches need to be treated without mercy or empathy and the country will be a better place without them, since they contribute nothing except murder, mayhem and distress.

There is not a thought that these men are underprivileged, misguided products of an indifferent, lopsided, former slave society where certain sections have been disadvantaged, abused and significantly mistreated and traumatised. The scars of such treatment, when added to the breakdown of the nuclear family structure, run deep with negative connotations.

Also, the impact of the boom-and-bust characteristic of our economy, the reporting of large profits by big business establishments, the widening of income distribution, the impact of the drug trade, as well as opportunistic political propaganda only feed and strengthen the negative narrative feeling of injustice towards the poor and downtrodden, pushing such people into the arms of the gangs.

I know that there are many people who will point to individuals who have become successful law-abiding citizens despite earlier experiences of poverty and hardship, but they are few.

However, we must remember that in years past social and economic conditions were vastly different. The district or community raised children. Even without a resident father or mother, other family members dwelled together or lived in close proximity and parented the children. In addition, mothers hardly worked outside the home and so there was always an adult at home to supervise the child.

Economic conditions, too, were very different. Prior to the 1970s, government revenues were not substantial, salaries were small, leisure travel to advanced countries was reserved for the very rich.

The opportunity for comparison of living standards between advanced and developing countries were severely restricted, as were expectations. Oil booms were just appearing with economic downturns still to be manifested, pushing young people to migrate in an effort to maintain living standards when such downturns appeared. This resulted in the new phenomenon of “barrel children” – children who receive economic goods at times but not the love and attention of their immediate parents.

Many of these children grew up and had seriously dysfunctional families. These are the misguided youths who are targeted by gang leaders, many of whom were deported, having learnt their criminal activity in advanced countries. Youths see the glamour of the fast life and quick monetary rewards and so are easily entrapped.

What they do not quite understand is that once recruited by a gang, they have to carry out instructions without question. Failure to successfully fulfil the mission assigned generally results in death. Therefore, the issue of “fear of the law or its consequence if one is apprehended” takes second place to the young man’s own knowledge and survival instinct.

Those in authority and those proposing approaches to the crime solution may have missed the mark, even if there appears to be plenty of popular support for the “fighting fire with fire” approach. What may be required is a softer, more loving empathetic approach.

D THOMAS

Port of Spain