Andrew Sia
COMMENT | Say a young punk often races illegally in his Ferrari. All he cares about is the thrill of speeding. And showing off how “bravely” he can sapu (sweep) corners. He even illegally modifies his car to go much faster.
One night, he recklessly sprinted onto a poorly-lit highway from a curving side road. A truck driver, who could not stop or avoid him in time, smashed into the Ferrari and killed the punk. The trucker was following the speed limit and not drunk.
Whose fault is it? Most people would say padan muka to the punk. People usually react emotionally as such luxury cars are a symbol of some super-rich, entitled people who tend to behave like spoiled brats.
So, the speed junkie got what he deserved because he was irresponsible and foolhardy. Moreover, he broke laws on speed limits and car modifications.
But wait… then “the system” decides, no, it was the truck driver who is to blame. What? Why? Because how can anybody kill a Ferrari driver and escape punishment? That somehow seems so “wrong”, so “unfair”, says "the system".
The trucker is then thrown into jail. People are confused, even angry. Perhaps the first thing they would ask is: was the punk the son of some VVIP? Who was “entitled” to protection as part of the so-called “public interest”? Even though he was breaking laws?
Since issues are easily racialised in Malaysia, what would the gossip be like if the Ferrari driver was named Tengku so-and-so? And the trucker was some regular Joe called Ah Keong?
Sense of entitlement
Now, swap the Ferrari with basikal lajak. It’s the same problem of entitled, irresponsible and devil-may-care people doing something wrong (ie: racing on public roads) with illegally-modified vehicles. The only difference is that the rich, pampered young punk are some poor boys using cheap bicycles.
It’s fully understandable if we sympathise with the eight boys who were killed because they were teenagers from underprivileged backgrounds. In general, we humans tend to side with the weaker party. And of course, any death is always tragic, what more eight in one night.
Yet, we feel no such pity for an impetuous and inconsiderate Ferrari driver. Is it because he’s rich enough to drive such an expensive car? Yet, if we look at it logically, rather than emotionally, in reality, there is no difference between my hypothetical hot-headed Ferrari driver and the hot-headed lajak boys. Except that maybe the responsibility of these underaged kids is transferred to the parents who should have supervised them.
The “reckless driving” guilty verdict of Sam Ke Ting in this case raises disturbing implications. For one, has it given the lajak boys an indirect legal right to suddenly appear on our roads anytime, anywhere they like?
And, as the facts of the case show, they even seem to be “allowed” to “conquer” all three lanes of a major road, such as Johor Bahru’s Jalan Lingkaran Dalam. For folks in Kuala Lumpur, imagine if 30 daredevil cyclists can suddenly take over all three lanes on Kuala Lumpur’s Middle Ring Road 2 (MRR2) without legal consequences if an accident happens.
In other words, has our system unwittingly created a new class of “entitled” and “privileged” people, called budak lajak? If so, we are encouraging a new kind of subsidy mentality, not in terms of financial handouts, but of safety handouts - others must pay extra attention and care to ensure totally irresponsible cyclists are not harmed by their own reckless behaviour.
Kings of the road
Therefore, we should now have 50km/h speed limits in Malaysia for all roads. Why? To be certain we can brake in time to protect our new road VIPs, our dear little budak lajak.
If a driver crashes into them when they appear like ghosts in the night, the cyclists are not guilty of reckless riding. Rather, it is you, the driver, who is guilty of reckless driving. The burden of negligence is taken off the young punks’ shoulders and shifted to adult motorists.
Just to make doubly sure that motorists won’t get jailed, from now on, they should stay off major roads between midnight and 4am. That's not the time for people to drive cars, that's the exclusive time for the budak lajak to roam the highways and byways!
So awas! We now have to treat basikal lajak boys as entitled young brats who have the regal right to rule the roads. Since society has not punished them, don’t be surprised if they grow up to become lawless and heedless Mat Rempits who terrorise other road users (as columnist Miriam Mokhtar describes)
Society won’t tolerate it if a bunch of immature and spoiled Ferrari drivers run around town at high speed. But the system seems to be saying that we should tolerate the two-wheeled versions.
So Malaysia, please say hello to our new Kings of the Road.
COMMENT | Say a young punk often races illegally in his Ferrari. All he cares about is the thrill of speeding. And showing off how “bravely” he can sapu (sweep) corners. He even illegally modifies his car to go much faster.
One night, he recklessly sprinted onto a poorly-lit highway from a curving side road. A truck driver, who could not stop or avoid him in time, smashed into the Ferrari and killed the punk. The trucker was following the speed limit and not drunk.
Whose fault is it? Most people would say padan muka to the punk. People usually react emotionally as such luxury cars are a symbol of some super-rich, entitled people who tend to behave like spoiled brats.
So, the speed junkie got what he deserved because he was irresponsible and foolhardy. Moreover, he broke laws on speed limits and car modifications.
But wait… then “the system” decides, no, it was the truck driver who is to blame. What? Why? Because how can anybody kill a Ferrari driver and escape punishment? That somehow seems so “wrong”, so “unfair”, says "the system".
The trucker is then thrown into jail. People are confused, even angry. Perhaps the first thing they would ask is: was the punk the son of some VVIP? Who was “entitled” to protection as part of the so-called “public interest”? Even though he was breaking laws?
Since issues are easily racialised in Malaysia, what would the gossip be like if the Ferrari driver was named Tengku so-and-so? And the trucker was some regular Joe called Ah Keong?
Sense of entitlement
Now, swap the Ferrari with basikal lajak. It’s the same problem of entitled, irresponsible and devil-may-care people doing something wrong (ie: racing on public roads) with illegally-modified vehicles. The only difference is that the rich, pampered young punk are some poor boys using cheap bicycles.
It’s fully understandable if we sympathise with the eight boys who were killed because they were teenagers from underprivileged backgrounds. In general, we humans tend to side with the weaker party. And of course, any death is always tragic, what more eight in one night.
Yet, we feel no such pity for an impetuous and inconsiderate Ferrari driver. Is it because he’s rich enough to drive such an expensive car? Yet, if we look at it logically, rather than emotionally, in reality, there is no difference between my hypothetical hot-headed Ferrari driver and the hot-headed lajak boys. Except that maybe the responsibility of these underaged kids is transferred to the parents who should have supervised them.
The “reckless driving” guilty verdict of Sam Ke Ting in this case raises disturbing implications. For one, has it given the lajak boys an indirect legal right to suddenly appear on our roads anytime, anywhere they like?
And, as the facts of the case show, they even seem to be “allowed” to “conquer” all three lanes of a major road, such as Johor Bahru’s Jalan Lingkaran Dalam. For folks in Kuala Lumpur, imagine if 30 daredevil cyclists can suddenly take over all three lanes on Kuala Lumpur’s Middle Ring Road 2 (MRR2) without legal consequences if an accident happens.
In other words, has our system unwittingly created a new class of “entitled” and “privileged” people, called budak lajak? If so, we are encouraging a new kind of subsidy mentality, not in terms of financial handouts, but of safety handouts - others must pay extra attention and care to ensure totally irresponsible cyclists are not harmed by their own reckless behaviour.
Kings of the road
Therefore, we should now have 50km/h speed limits in Malaysia for all roads. Why? To be certain we can brake in time to protect our new road VIPs, our dear little budak lajak.
If a driver crashes into them when they appear like ghosts in the night, the cyclists are not guilty of reckless riding. Rather, it is you, the driver, who is guilty of reckless driving. The burden of negligence is taken off the young punks’ shoulders and shifted to adult motorists.
Just to make doubly sure that motorists won’t get jailed, from now on, they should stay off major roads between midnight and 4am. That's not the time for people to drive cars, that's the exclusive time for the budak lajak to roam the highways and byways!
So awas! We now have to treat basikal lajak boys as entitled young brats who have the regal right to rule the roads. Since society has not punished them, don’t be surprised if they grow up to become lawless and heedless Mat Rempits who terrorise other road users (as columnist Miriam Mokhtar describes)
Society won’t tolerate it if a bunch of immature and spoiled Ferrari drivers run around town at high speed. But the system seems to be saying that we should tolerate the two-wheeled versions.
So Malaysia, please say hello to our new Kings of the Road.
ANDREW SIA is a veteran journalist who likes teh tarik khau kurang manis. You are welcome to give him ideas to brew at tehtarik@gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment