Police fail to provide security for civilians

The killing of trainee waiter Yohannes Berchmans Haerudy Natong, alias Rudy, at the Hilton Hotel in Central Jakarta on Jan. 1 has raised questions about the policy allowing civilians to own guns. The Jakarta Post asked some residents for their opinion.

Kiki, 25, a fresh graduate from the University of Indonesia in Depok, West Java. He lives in a rented house in Pasar Minggu, South Jakarta:

The policy to allow civilians to own guns demonstrates that the police have failed to do their job to protect citizens, especially people who live in big cities, such as Jakarta. If the police can create an environment in which people feel secure, they (civilians) won't need guns in the first place.

By allowing civilians to own firearms, police have added another task in controlling legal gun circulation. They already have so many things to take care of. Instead, they should concentrate on curbing illegal guns that are used to conduct crimes.

Besides, who knows what civilians will do if they have a gun in their hands?

Ella, 37, a housewife and owner of a small shop selling basic commodities in Lenteng Agung, South Jakarta. She lives with her husband and two children.

I don't agree with the idea of allowing several groups of civilians to use guns, as it will be very unfair to others who don't have access to such a "luxury". With the current regulations, I believe only people with money can own guns. Thus, it will only widen the gap between the "haves" and "have-nots".

What if these people use their guns to threaten or even kill unarmed civilians? In the case of Adiguna, Parto and many others indicate that gun-ownership by civilians is now commonplace.

I am very worried what happened to Rudy could also happen to my son as several of his friends own a gun. All in all, civilians shouldn't be allowed to have a gun under any circumstance.

;JP;BBN; ANPAj..r.. Speakup

JP/8/Speakup

Bedjo Rahardjo, 59, lives in Depok. He is a retired civil servant who is now a member of the Jakarta chapter of the Commission for AIDS Control.

Well, it is not easy to say whether civilians should be allowed to have firearms or not.

Ideally, only military and police personnel should carry firearms. But the fact is that many people own illegal firearms. Many weapons are in the hands of unscrupulous people who use them for criminal activities.

This encourages many people, particularly the rich, to buy them. Initially, the weapons are only intended for self defense, but they can hurt innocent people as happened at the Hilton Hotel.

I myself agree that civilians should be prohibited from owning firearms on the condition that the police are serious about conducting sweeping against all illegal weapons in society, because I believe they know where the firearms can be found.

The question is do they really want to do a cleanup?