Dominican vs Tourist views on 'Security'

They do tend to go over the top, don't they!!

It is also a good way to justify all the moneythey spend, and for the upper echelon to get their kickbacks on the purchase of military equipment.

Now, we see that they are going to be buying over a hundred (100) new Harleys!! Wanna bet that in a few years they are no longer in the hands of the cops??

HB

sweaty fingers

I saw them the other day in the Capital. Gys who must really sweat in their Lycra or whatever Darth Vader black suits. I infer from the 50 round banana clip on the assault rifle that there's an automatic sear as well.

God help us if someone's sweaty finger slips -- he appeared to be holding the gun with his fingers through the trigger guard. But I'm sure they're as well trained as the rest of the PN.

sure they are

Tuan said:

I saw them the other day in the Capital. Gys who must really sweat in their Lycra or whatever Darth Vader black suits. I infer from the 50 round banana clip on the assault rifle that there's an automatic sear as well.

God help us if someone's sweaty finger slips -- he appeared to be holding the gun with his fingers through the trigger guard. But I'm sure they're as well trained as the rest of the PN.

Click to expand...

hehehehehehehehehehehearanoid: aranoid: aranoid: aranoid:

Hope they dont have any ammo, like the watchmen, hate it when I have to walk past the business end, because they have it laying on their laps, like it better, when they are leaning on the butt with the barrel stuck in the dirt.

As a tourist who is well versed with guns I do find it concerning that people will little or no training and nothing to lose are protecting peoples property with live weapons.These guards can simply be told by their boss to shoot someone and what are they to do? I would think they would comply. Now lets say some hotel owner or store owner becomes upset that tourist customer wasted his time and refuses to buy something or has created a problem in the hotel. People tend to lose their cool and fly off the handle. If this type of thing escalates it could have disastrous results.

Im actually quite suprised we havent heard of more incidents of security guards killing people as they dont seem properly trained to carry a loaded shotgun judging by most of the ones I have seen and spoken to.

Thankfully

Beads said:

As a tourist who is well versed with guns I do find it concerning that people will little or no training and nothing to lose are protecting peoples property with live weapons.These guards can simply be told by their boss to shoot someone and what are they to do? I would think they would comply. Now lets say some hotel owner or store owner becomes upset that tourist customer wasted his time and refuses to buy something or has created a problem in the hotel. People tend to lose their cool and fly off the handle. If this type of thing escalates it could have disastrous results.

Im actually quite suprised we havent heard of more incidents of security guards killing people as they dont seem properly trained to carry a loaded shotgun judging by most of the ones I have seen and spoken to.

Click to expand...

Most of those shotguns have no ammo, They are kind of like Barney! If they have a shell its in their pocket.:squareeye

bienamor said:

Most of those shotguns have no ammo, They are kind of like Barney! If they have a shell its in their pocket.:squareeye

Click to expand...

A shell in their pocket doesnt make it any safer.

GringoCArlos, in response to your question "What kind of image of the DR is this presenting to tourists?" I think you know the answer already...not the best! Problem being that regardless whether "shells in pocket" or whether the gun is ever used even, the "image" is a negative one. You would (quite logically!) wonder "What's with the guns??" and no doubt assume that you were in a dangerous place as a result! Especially if you came from the little ol' UK! And you are right, tourists like nothing better than to go home and tell others about their trip - including how many guns they saw!!! In the UK that, to somebody that had never been to the DR, would "ring alarm bells" and the DR may be given "second thoughts" regarding their own holiday...generalization or human nature me wonder??
I have not been to the DR yet, that's why I joined here, but if I hadn't and not read things such as your post? I SURE AS ANYTHING would be very OUT of the place and be mentioning the words "lots of guns" on my postcards once safely back in my AI!!! Nope, not the best "image" in the world by a "long shot". Emma ;-)

bienamor said:

Most of those shotguns have no ammo, They are kind of like Barney! If they have a shell its in their pocket.:squareeye

Click to expand...

They are given 1 or 2 shells at the beginning of the shift. They have to return them at the end. If for any reason, they have to use one or are short for whatver other reason, they usually have to pay for it. I can remember one night a few years ago, the guard fired in the air after seeing a thief and the next day the boss told him that it would be deducted from his pay. He came to me complaining and looking for us to pay for the missing bullet. I obviously refused and warned him that the next time he fired his weapon, I wanted to see a body. Then I would pay for it.

Hillbilly said:

Now, we see that they are going to be buying over a hundred (100) new Harleys!! Wanna bet that in a few years they are no longer in the hands of the cops??

HB

Click to expand...

What happened to the Harleys they initially bought? Are they still in the hands of the cops?

-NALs

He scared the thief away though didn't he??? - Ya' mean!! LOL!!!
Any-ho! YOU know that they are unlikely to shoot due to those terms - maybe others living in the DR do too - but not the tourists...:-( Emma ;-)

It depends on the tourist.

MOST tourists only get to see of the DR whatever is along the road from the airport to the resort.

The relatively FEW tourists who visit non-AI or visit AI and explore the sorrounding areas could develop a few images of the country:

1. They could be alarmed by the presence of police guards with rifles and such.

2. They could be making a quick assessment into the risk averseness of the population.

3. They could feel safe since those guards are there for YOUR protection and not to scare anyone away.

However, the presence of so many guards and police shows more the amount of risk the population perceives in the risk of being a victim of a crime, whether the perception or risk is accurate or exaggerated.

Such risk is often accurate when people depend on studies and respectable information about such occurences. Such risk is exaggerated when people depend on the media or word of mouth prior to making up their minds of how risky is would be to be without a guard/police.

A good example would be how many Dominicans are scared of being a victim of crime and yet, the same Dominican would jump on a motorcycle, put his entire family on it, don't wear a helmet, drive like a maniac across town (if not the country) and severely increasing the risk of dying from a car-motorcycle accident given that such accidents are the number one killer in the Dominican Republic, more than any disease, crime, etc.

However, the media is not focusing on the extremely high risk of dying in a car accident, but it is focusing on the crime and people are not talking about fulano de tal getting into an accident and then say "wow, it's dangerous to drive here". However, they are talking about fulano de tal got robbed and they think "it's dangerous out there, oh my god!" Then they turn the television, radio, or read the papers and they see the crime news and nothing about the higher risk of dying from car accidents or colon cancer or anything else that affects Dominicans more than the actual crime itself.

This also leads to a sort of panic and leads people to do anything they can to transfer their share of the risk of being a victim of crime to their neighbors. How you may ask? Well here is a quick example:

Let's say there is a neighborhood of 4 identical upper middle class homes. For the sake of simplicity lets assume that all the houses are identical in everything inside and out. Let's also assume that one of those houses WILL get broken into and robbed by a group of theives.

All those houses each has a 1/4 chance of getting robbed. That is the safest they can be and if they all feel secure with the 1/4 chance of being robbed then the neighborhood will be the safest it can possibly be, considering that one of them will get robbed regardless.

However, let's say there is a wimp in the neighborhood who is not feeling safe knowing that there is a 1 in 4 chance that HIS house will be the one the theives will break into. Never mind that there are 3 other houses that the thieves have a greater chance of robbing (remember the other 3 houses combined have a 3/4 chance of being robbed vs. this "wimp" 1 in 4 chance).

What does the wimp or I should say guy who is risk aversed to a 1 in 4 chance of being robbed will do? He will buy bars and install them on his windows. What happens?

He has transfered his 1 in 4 chance of being robbed to his neighbors and now he feels safe because why would theives take the time to rob his house with bar windows when there are three other identical houses with NO bars on their windows. So, his risk of being robbed went from 1 in 4 down to 0 in 4. However, his neighbors risk now went up from 1 in 4 to 1 in 3!

Let's say all the neighbors felt safe at a risk of 1 in 4 of being robbed, but one of the neighbors don't feel safe at a risk level of 1 in 3. So, he also goes and buys bars and placed them on his windows. He has now transfered his risk to his neighbors who have no bars on their windows.

The remaining two homes with no bars on their windows has now seen an increase in the risk that they will get robbed. First they experienced an increase from 1 in 4 to 1 in 3. Now they experienced another increase from 1 in 3 to 1 in 2 or 50/50 chance of being robbed.

One of the remaining two home owners was risk neutral at the 1/4 risk level, at the 1/3 risk level, but feels risk aversed at the 1/2 risk level. He can't sleep at night any more so, he buys and installs bars on his windows as well.

The entire neighborhood has dumped their risk of being robbed to the last guy on the block who has seen his risk of being robbed jump from 1 in 4 to 1 in 1 or 100% risk of being robbed. 3 out of the 4 home owners are risk free of being robbed, but one now has 100% of the risk of being robbed. Since no one likes to know that they WILL be a victim of a crime, he buys bars and install them on his windows.

What happens? The entire neighborhood now has their original level of risk of being robbed. Why? Because the last neighbor installed bars on his window and has slashed his risk of 100% down to 25% of being robbed. The remaining 3/4 of the risk has been equally transferred to the remaining 3 homeowners.

Everybody in the neighborhood feels relatively safe knowing that there is a 1 in 4 chance of being robbed, but the guy who initially did not felt safe at that risk level will not feel safe now and will employ some other measure of "safety" whether its employing a watchymen or something else and the entire transfer of risk to thy neighbor effect will continue unabatted.

Why did the risk level fell back to its original level once all the houses had bars on their windows? Because the assumption is that the thieves will rob ONE of those houses. As long as there was a house with no bars on its windows, that would have been the preference of the thieves because its easier to break into a house with no bars when the others in the neighborhood have bars.

However, since all the houses have bars, the theives have not choice but to break into a house with bars and since all the houses have bars on their windows now, the risk has been shared by all the members of that community!

In essence, the panic everybody created throws the entire neighborhood back to square one!

And in the meanwhile, more Dominicans are dying from car accidents, diseases, yola trips, sexually transmitted diseases, spouse abuse, etc etc etc.

-NALs

GringoCArlos said:

Everybody is parading around the streets with weapons in full view, there are crazy-looking watchymen every 100 yards with a 12 gauge shotgun bouncing on their knee, every store you go to has the same, sometimes inside and out.

What do you think?

Click to expand...

Don't even get me started on the issue of "gun safety" in the DR, I've seen watchmen swinging, playing and even leaning on their shotguns, hahahaha. I remember a watchman in Sosua, who was watching the villa I stayed in, so I offered him a nice cold one and watched in delightment as he put the stock/handle of the shotgun on the floor with the barrel facing up and then he repeatedly tried to open the bottle with edge of the barrel and he was just hitting this thing, hilarious.

I was chatting to a first-time visitor from the US last week and he asked me "why do all apartment buildings have security guards?" I said that even when the DR was a much safer country, most apartment buildings in middle class neighbourhoods had a guard, as much for the other services they provide - messenger, cleaner, sweeper, etc - as much as actual security.

Even in a relatively safe environment, the fact that these security measures exist gives the impression that the place is unsafe. The Lynx squads are an extreme manifestation of that - they look sinister.

Is this spectacle really a deterrent to criminals? They'd probably be more effective in tackling criminals if they couldn't see them coming.