joel pacheco said:
The secret police/interrogation/death penalty answer is a trujilloista style response. Granted, when Trujillo ruled, crime was low, armed robbery was extremely rare, and let's be honest, with a strong man like trujillo running the DR , a brazen armed robbery like this would probably never happened.
However, people got tired of lliving in fear of the government. That was why so many movements plotted against him. Trujillo's brutality got him killed.
I don't think it is possible to set up a secret police with "star chamber" enforcement powers and not see massive human rights violations start to occur almost immedately.
The price, for the moment, is too high for the average Dominican citizen to support a police state like the one you are calling for. Perhaps if the DR spirals to the level of Haitian style anarchy you might see real support for a Trujillo style police state to return.
The only problem with waiting to the last minute is that by that time, it might be too late.
I know its very Trujillista and such, but look, you even made note of the positive of such act.
I think people would support something similar, though not exactly like the Trujillo secret police and that is not what I am advocating. Many folks already are advocating their preference for a government of "mano dura" (hard hand or hard grip on things).
Trujillo's secret police arrested people with out cause and not even based on rumors, they simply arrested people just because!
What I am suggesting is more cautionary than such, interogatting, getting tips from people, making as sure as possible that such person is a bad apple before the "pre-emptive" penalty is imposed on such person before they make the crime.
I'm just getting sick and tired of these Mexico City style crimes appearing on our shores. I mean, this was not even in Metropolitan Santo Domingo where such crime would be more "acceptable" because of the nature of a big city. This was in the countryside! In Punta Rucia! You know, the supposedly safe "campo"!
There are times when people have to make harsh decisions. Either we continue to hold onto our freedoms and continue to live in fear from crime, or we TEMPORARILY give up some of our freedoms for the sake of society.
I prefer the second option because it brings the possibility of peace to return as normalcy rather than continue to fear for one's life when we stick our heads outside the window.
Don't get me wrong, I am not paranoid or even worried about me being a victim of crime given the relatively low chances for any single individual to become a victim of crime, but those low chances are becoming bigger and bigger. What type of country will my children live in? Will they need bullet proof vest to go outside?
What's next? Urban terrorism? Look at Argentina, they got banks being bombed!
We need to do something now that we have these crimes in their infancy rather than waiting until it gets too out of hand.
But, it should be done with the consent of the people, just to be democratic in the process.