National Security ministers carry guns

YESTERDAY, newly-appointed junior Minister for National Security, Keith Bell, revealed that he is prone to gross exaggeration.

In justifying the need for him and National Security Minister Dr Bernard Nottage to carry handguns in addition to having their personal bodyguards, he explained that their personal guns were needed because former prime minister Hubert Ingraham had allowed the country to "become a war zone".

Say what? A friendly suggestion to Mr Bell, who has been making some wild statements lately, is that he should put his brain in gear, before he opens his mouth.

If Mr Bell, a former police officer, had done some simple mathematics before making this "war zone" statement, he would have discovered that in just one month - from the May 7th election to date - murders under the PLP have increased by 98.7 per cent. Not only is this alarming, but we would agree that we now have a "war zone" atmosphere - not created, incidentally, by the FNM, but rather ushered in by the PLP.

From the beginning of the year to May 7th -- the day the PLP were returned to government by the people -- there had been 44 murders, which over a period of five months averaged 8.8 murders a month. In the one month that the PLP has been in charge, there have been 21 murders. This means that the PLP have started their term with an average of 21 murders for one month -- now compare that with 8.8 a month for five months, and the simplest of Bahamians will understand what "war zone" we have now moved into. On average, under the PLP, this month translates into 1.47 murders for every day and a half. These have been unusual murders -- gangland style.

For example, two rival gangs brought their heavy equipment to a club located underneath what was once Gold's Gym on Mackey and East Bay Streets at the foot of Paradise Island bridge, and in the early morning hours had a Wild West shoot-out. One person died on the spot, another died in hospital and the other six were sent to hospital for treatment.

It was soon to be followed by the shooting of a police officer at the Princess Margaret Hospital. He was guarding a prisoner who police will attest was "well known to them". The officer is now fighting for his life, but a few days later another uniformed officer was not so lucky, he was killed on the spot.

What is happening today is unheard of. On Tuesday, a mother and son were gunned down. The son -- again someone "well known to the police" -- was wearing an electronic device at the time of his murder -- in other words out on bail until trial. Ten months ago, his older brother -- another person well acquainted with the police -- was shot and killed. What is obvious is that drugs and guns are still being traded -- and gangs are battling for their turf in the dark of night.

On the campaign trail, the PLP assured us that they had the answer to crime and on Day One were ready to put the lid on to snuff it out.

But what do we later learn from the newly appointed National Security Minister Bernard Nottage? Apparently he's still contemplating what to do. "Everything is under review," he told a reporter. "A lot of those persons who have been -- I can't call them victims -- who have been convicted under some of those bills have made certain approaches to us about the severity of some of those sentences. For example, if you would recall, the appeals court has also given an opinion on that, so I think that is an area that we will have to review."

So while they think of what to do, the killing goes on.

A blog has gone up on Facebook informing the nation that "24 police officers have been taken off the streets for Prime Minister Christie's detail - Ingraham only had 6; BJ Nottage and Keith Bell get their own gun and extra police." It then asks: "Who is protecting us?"

Times certainly have changed. We remember when Sir Roland Symonette became this country's first Premier. The Commissioner of Police immediately sent a police officer to his home as his personal body guard. Sir Roland came out of his house the next morning to walk the few blocks to his shipyard. On seeing the policeman, he asked why he was there. When told that he was to be his personal body guard, Sir Roland sent him back with a message to the effect: "Tell the Commissioner of Police that I can take care of myself. You go back and take care of the people."

Today, Keith Bell admits that he and Dr Nottage have been issued with their personal guns because given the sensitive matters that they are dealing with it is incumbent upon them to protect themselves.

To which former National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest replied that in the FNM's three terms in office a National Security Minister never carried a personal weapon. Mr Turnquest said that all he ever carried was a cell phone.

Times have certainly changed. Obviously the PLP know the kind of people they are dealing with. It is hoped that they can get them under control -- as they promised the general populace.

Comments

Francheska says...

This whole issue makes me feel like Dr. Nottage & Mr. Bell are only out to protect themselves; not me, and not the rest of the country.
I don't like that.
I thought [hoped actually] that the PLP was going to fix the crime problem. I really did. But, now this makes it seem like they themselves are scared and helpless.
So how's that supposed to make me feel?

Posted 7 June 2012, 5:29 p.m. Suggest removal

Choo28 says...

Forget these two! I'd like Jerome Fitzgerald to answer if he would be comfortable dropping his kids off to a "policed" private school. We need to get back to a culture of respect and love for God, family and each other. Only then will change come.

Posted 7 June 2012, 7:50 p.m. Suggest removal

242352 says...

I don't have a problem with Bell carring a gun as he is an ex cop and may have persons still out to get him.
However, why would a sitting MP need to be packing a gun.
AND lets hope that nothing happens and he has to draw his gun and start shooting in public.
Can you imanagne a shoot out in the streets, possible even on Bay street in front of tourists???

Posted 8 June 2012, 10:51 a.m. Suggest removal

Concerned says...

If Bell had enemies, they could have killed him before elections when he had no armed escorts or bullet proof car and was just an ordinary citizen. They could have gotten him at the grocery store, at the mall, at church, anywhere. Why would they finally want to come get him when he is less accessible and more protected?

Posted 9 June 2012, 1:35 a.m. Suggest removal

Log in to comment