Despite the crippling crime situation in Jamaica which is affecting every strata of the tiny society, how many of you have ever seen a contribution in any of the Nation’s silly little newspapers with a column from a Police Officer on the subject? I haven’t but some of you may have, so I stand to be corrected.…..
One of the things you who care about what I have to say on the subject of crime may have read or heard me say is that crime is not being tackled by people who know what to do about it.
I may take a lot of flack for saying this but who cares. There are signs everywhere that crime is something which politicians pay lip-service to but there is demonstrable no will or intent to once and for all get serious about it.
The appointment of Robert Montague as Minister of National Security may probably be seen in that very light.
Now for the hyper partisans who are unable to see the forest for the trees , it has precious little to do with Robert Montague’s ability to get things done, but everything to do with knowing what needs to be done crafting the necessary policy and getting the support for legislation which will ensure that that policy become law. Even then it requires much more for it’s execution by the security forces.
Having a nuclear scientist perform trauma surgery is a recipe for disaster. Though supremely educated, a nuclear scientists is not a trauma surgeon.
It follows therefore that in order to have the most effective performance the person doing the administering should and must have some training in the area he is being tasked with offering administration.
The National security portfolio has being an unwanted step-child within the Jamaican political space for a long time. There has been rumblings of sorts that some of the men who served as ministers of national security have actually seen the assignment as a kind of punishment of sorts.
These men were certainly not fools, irrespective of their political party they knew there was no real plan of action to eliminate crime within the context of the Island’s garrison culture. Simply put they were being asked to take on a job in which they were guaranteed to fail.
Who wants that kind of a failure on their resume’ ?
It has to be within that context that the previous minister of national security Peter Bunting called for divine intervention a call the present Minister Robert Montague seem to endorse.
Over the years this portfolio has been occupied by people of all different discipline except Security . Which begs the question why? I have my own opinions which will come as no surprise to anyone.
Logically speaking, it appears there were direct plans afoot to destroy the JCF when they placed retired military to head the police department. That worked out quite well for ruining the morale of the police. Despite the abundance of quality people who came up through the ranks of the JCF and exemplified themselves whenever they participate in training with officers from other countries , even when they are held in high esteem across the region they are never given the responsibility to develop policy as minister with security responsibility.
This cannot be consumed within the context of politics or even coincidence. The stark reality is that they do not want the perspective of law enforcement in drafting laws.
The INDECOM Act is a classic example of an Ill-conceived reactionary bit of legislation that lacks balance and as such is costing countless lives.
Unfortunately for the shrinking minority of innocents on the Island the political class is beside themselves with glee at this idiotic Law . Police shootings have gone down.
What they will never talk about when they talk about their ideas of success of that law is that more people are getting murdered while they crow about INDECOM.
Why ?
They take you for total fools.
Which brings me to my point.
The deniability, rationalizing and nonsensical brain-dead arguments we have heard about crime in Jamaica.
Of all of the arguments I have heard regarding crime on the Island this bunch of gibberish from the JAMAICA OBSERVER has got to take the cake.
Much of what we have heard over the years has largely been a bunch of hogwash by wannabe security experts who position themselves as authority on security even though they know nothing of which they speak.
Nevertheless none is more grotesque than the following bunch of horse manure which totally throws out proven established standards while asking us to consider a new mode of measurement which defies all logic yet embraces a mirage which enforces a false sense of security.
The very foundation of this guys arguments are flawed , it does not warrant a point by point de-construct save and except to disprove this bit of nonsense.
Quote : When you look at cities’ violent crime rates per 100,000 people, the five cities with the highest totals (New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) disappear from the top of the list. They have the highest crime rates, yet, considering their populations, have a lower number of violent crime occurrences than the cities with the highest violent crime rates (just because of the flawed use of rating crime rates per 100,000 people).
New York City the world’s largest city has over 8 million citizens, not to mention those who are undocumented. The city’s homicide rate stands at around 300 annually>
Jamaica a tiny pin-prick of a country of 2.8 million which can fit twice into Connecticut one of the tiniest states in the United States, in 2005 recorded over 1600 homicides alone.
Why would we even consider anything this guy has to say. It’s totally okay to make mistakes, it is never too late to make a fresh start. But when the narrative is framed on Orwellian logic as the following is, there will surely be extreme consequences for that stupidity.
Surely what we need are chartered accountants informing us on how we should not worry about the murder statistics but settle into a sense of “it’s not so bad”.
FROM THE JAMAICA OBSERVER
I will not, in any way whatsoever, discount Jamaica’s crime problem. However, it appears to me that many Jamaicans are misled by the usually flawed crime rate reports prepared and published annually by various foreign organisations.
For starters, because a report expressed “murder rates” based on per 100,000 citizens in a country it does not mean that is a fair and accurate way to inform the world about all crimes committed in a particular country and here is why: In the first place, anyone who understands the value of fair and accurate quantitative analysis will agree with me that when using a variable (such as the size of a country’s population) to express crime rate, countries with smaller population will more likely than not be at a disadvantage. Therefore, Third World countries will more likely than not make the top 10 most dangerous countries (serious crimes committed) than, say, the US with over 320 million people, or China and India with over 1 billion people, respectively. In fact, based on a recent FBI report on violent crimes for every city in the US, when you look at cities’ violent crime rates per 100,000 people, the five cities with the highest totals (New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) disappear from the top of the list. They have the highest crime rates, yet, considering their populations, have a lower number of violent crime occurrences than the cities with the highest violent crime rates (just because of the flawed use of rating crime rates per 100,000 people).
In my opinion, the fairest way to express the overall crime rate of any country is to use a standard/fixed measure (such as time). For example, if crime rates were expressed as crimes committed per hour in a particular country, I think that would be a much fairer way to express crime rates. Let us test this theory below:
In 2014, America had a violent crime rate of 365.5 per 100,000 residents (a total of 1,158,635 violent crimes — based on a population of 317 million people), and a murder rate of 4.5 per 100,000 residents (Source: FBI Report on Violent Crimes for Every City in the US). If we focused only on the murder rate for America, there were 14,265 murders committed in 2014 in America (based on 317 million residents). Given that there is 8,760 hours in a year, that means 1.628 murders were committed every hour in America in 2014. In 2014, Jamaica’s murder rate was 36 per 100,000 residents, or 1,005 murders (Source: JIS, as reported by the Commissioner of Police). Again, if we focused only on the murder rate for Jamaica, and given that there is 8,760 hours in a year, it means that 0.11473 (less than one) murder was committed every hour in Jamaica in 2014. Therefore, based on a fair measure (time), more murders are committed per hour in the US than Jamaica. I will further posit that if this fair measure (time) was used to calculated the murder rates of the other nine so-called most violent countries (Honduras, Venezuela, Belize, El Salvador, Guatemala, Swaziland, St Kitts and Nevis, South Africa & Colombia), the US would likely be the most violent country in the world (based on the most murders committed per hour). Trevor H Francis is a chartered accountant (JA) and certified public accountant (US).
http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/The-myth-about-which-country-commits-more-murders-based-on-its-population_63878http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/The-myth-about-which-country-commits-more-murders-based-on-its-population_63878