Dear Editor,
I read with keen interest the article carried in the state owned newspaper captioned “Cops nabbed trying to steal AK-47”, and immediately my thoughts ran on the President and his reaction when that criminal was killed by a licensed firearm holder. In that incident, the President came out swinging, stating emphatically that all licences for private firearm use would be reviewed with the view that some, or most of them, would be revoked immediately.
In fact, he went on to elaborate that in his view many of the gun crimes committed were done by criminal elements, who got these weapons from licensed firearm holders, a clear case of “guns for hire.” The nation was shocked, literally petrified by that statement; because, in all the cases in crimes involving illegal gun possession, where criminals were caught, in not one instance was it found to be the firearm of a licensed holder.
But we were not totally befuddled by his utterances, because the President is known for these wild, unsubstantiated statements, which usually come back to haunt him. The above incident is a case in point.
Why would a president be so overly concerned when a criminal is gotten rid of? Why? I am of the opinion that President Granger knows fully well that there were corrupt elements within the Force, and as a cover up, he was trying vainly to turn our gaze the other way. Mr. Granger was living in denial that many of these gun crimes were orchestrated from right within the Police Force. Therefore, it would be interesting to know what his position is at this present time.
Guyana is reeling from the onslaught of gun-related crimes, and to have heard the President of this country making a statement like that was very callous and cold. He was insensitive to the plight of the ordinary citizens of a traumatized, crime infested country. In it all, he was in essence castigating the victim and tacitly praising the perpetrator – a very reprehensible thing to do. No wonder criminals were emboldened by that statement, and criminal activity soared.
I would advise Mr. Granger, who is a historian, to do some research before he makes such insensitive and outlandish comments again.
Respectfully,
Neil Adams
