Dear Editor,
WITHIN the last several months, the already sky-high crime rate has jumped by more than ten percent, sparking serious concerns about our safety in this country.

Like most Guyanese, I, too, am a victim of brutal robbery umpteen times, despite being poor and hardworking.

Similarly, within this past week, Omar Esau, a hardworking fisherman, was robbed of his earnings, and his co-worker was shot. Who can argue that these hardworking people do not deserve better? Fishermen risk their lives at sea to provide for their families, and it is one of the least desired professions in our society, yet we steal from them.

This story spotlights the daily plight of the working poor, and how criminals take advantage of us. This, then, directly debunks inequality as being responsible for crime. Often times, criminals indulge in luxuries that victims could never afford in a life time. They bluntly refuse to take up low-end jobs that victims take to make ends meet. Inequality is nothing but a hoax and a convenient excuse to justify crime in this country.

This dynamic has got to be unhealthy for social cohesion, and in places like the USA, this is never tolerated. Often times, crime victims are murdered, leaving behind grieving families whose lives are forever shattered. Our society offers them nothing than a life of heartache, grief and temptations of suicide.
Criminal activities are inexcusable, and should never be tolerated.

Editor, this letter echoes the voices of tens of thousands of horrified Guyanese who are forced to ride the crime wave with no relief in sight. Human beings should never be subjected to such a horrifying life; we deserve better. Humanitarianism in our society cannot be described as laudable. I have theorized that the rhetoric and actions of our society are critically driving crime. Take for example, as a member of society, we unfairly offer mothers of criminals solace, but ignore the heart-wrenching pains of crime victims. These sentiments psychologically fuel crime and saddle the country with heartaches.

To criminals, those of us who embrace their actions are seen as God. The sad reality is that we are not. We hypocritically steer their lives on a path to destruction. We even release them from prisons, assuring the public that their incarceration was only for “small crimes”, and their release will be a comfort to their mothers. Additionally, we blame inequality for their actions. In fact, we blame everything under the sun except the criminals themselves.

If we genuinely care for criminals, we will discipline them and encourage them to take responsibility for their actions, bringing them in line with the norms of society, so that they live their lives to their fullest potential. It is no secret that discipline can accomplish this. It is famously known that learning theorists also subscribe to this idea, including Skinner et al. Our actions can be interpreted as exploiting criminals to get what we want, be it votes. We also stand accused of not caring a hoot for their welfare.
Who can argue that our actions do not instigate criminal activities? Criminals take cues from society. Our actions are such that we give criminals free passes when they do “small crimes”. We inaccurately consider the stealing of a cell phone as a “small crime”. I wonder if our society understands that “small crimes” often lead to big crimes.

In Criminology, the Broken Window Theory arises out of this idea. As a member of society, I wonder what kinds of interventions, including educational, are in place to help criminals after their release from prisons? How can we assure the public that criminals released from prisons will not commit future crimes? Surely we will have trouble answering these questions. Our actions are downright irresponsible and are an endangerment to the lives of our fellow citizens.

To navigate them away from crime, criminals need a slew of interventions, which includes: stiff penalties, education, counselling, role models, and taking responsibility for their own actions. This will ensure a healthy reduction of the prison population.

Our reckoning that releasing prisoners will reduce the prison population is dead wrong. In fact, it will cause the prison population to swell. Even in developed countries, there is no reliable way to predict that prison inmates released for small crimes will not commit crimes in the future. For example, in Texas, a routine risk assessment used on sex offenders when they are released from prison classified convicted rapist Darren Vann to be a low-risk to re-offend. Vann later confessed to police that he killed seven women. Is this what we want for our society?

Editor, we even fail to see those in possession of pot as a threat to our society. If we were to repeal the psychotropic substance act on pot, it would be a fatal blow to our society, since there is a colossal lack of knowledge. Do we understand enough the harmful effects of pot and its use in conjunction with other illicit substances or prescription drugs to let users off the hook? Sure, pot is not cocaine, but pot has a wide range of undesired behavioral effects, and this substance is still actively being researched. Some of its known undesired effects range from sensory motor deficits to mood alterations and memory impairments which can play into road accidents, lapses in judgment, robberies, rapes and murders, to cite a few. We all know that a young man of Tiger Bay allegedly killed a fellow resident of his town because of mental instability. Pot can disrupt the homeostatic control of brain circuits by altering its chemistry and its hard wiring (neuronal connections), short-circuiting it, thereby evoking a similar kind of murder.

Even in affluent countries, the decriminalization of pot and its link to crime is still being hotly debated. Mulling the idea of repealing such an act should be out of the question, given that we are a poor country with very little crime-fighting resources.

Our actions are undoubtedly destructive, and can be likened to pouring gasoline on a fire that is already raging out of control.

As members of society, it is our moral obligation to recoil from such a lax stance on crime, so as to save lives. We need to genuinely ferret out crime by dropping our rhetoric and dishing out stiffer penalties so as to send a tough message, as is similarly done in the USA. This will be good for society. The current crime-fighting strategy in place needs to be replaced. It boils down to the fact that we arrest criminals and then later release them without proper interventions, leaving society in danger. This cannot be good.

One of the biggest lies that I have heard surfaced recently is that the PPP/C is pushing the crime wave. No one should ever believe an iota of this. This is pure dysfunction. Social cohesion cannot be achieved under an atmosphere of dysfunction.

As members of society, we need to look into the mirror if we are confused about who is to blame for the high crime. We also need to ask ourselves why crime has gained momentum recently.

Editor, we show compassion to mothers of criminals, but fail to even register the pains of mothers whose children are murdered daily at the hands of brutal criminals in this society. What else can be more heartbreaking for a mother than losing a child? No mother should have to experience this in a lifetime.

It is our moral obligation, as members of society, to see that mothers do not suffer like this anymore by taking a zero tolerance stance on crime.

Stanley Dhalkumarsingh
(Distressed and horrified crime victim)