Say no to safety and security?
For the last few months, TheStar have been publishing many articles about guarded and gated security. Here are some of them:
- http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2009/12/25/lifefocus/5344655&sec=lifefocus
- http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2009/12/17/central/5309721&sec=central
- http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2009/12/16/central/5308214&sec=central
- http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2010/2/6/central/5476878&sec=central
What surprises me is that Taman Megah have frequently used as an example (or maybe I’ve noticed it more since I stay around here). Anyway, the most recent article caught my attention most. It painted the Taman Megah resident associations in bad light and went to the extend of quoting unhappy residents. I wonder where were those so called interviews with the residents done since majority of the residents were supportive of the idea, only very few which disagreed. TheStar, however, interesting only managed to speak to those who disagreed. Maybe TheStar should be invited to the Taman Megah Resident Association’s meeting and witness for themselves the true feelings of the residents.
Anyway, just a few points I’d like to highlight about the “reasons” given as the negative impact of the gated community. It may be a healthy debate to see the pros and cons of such a system.
Quote from TheStar:
“The affected residents claim that since the security scheme started, certain roads had been blocked permanently with oil drums and boom gates making cars previously accessing the roads to the LDP highway having no alternative but to use Jalan SS24/10.”
Making cars previously accessing the road to the LDP highway having no alternative? Let’s be realistic about this, most readers may not know where SS24/10 is unless they’ve been to that place and witness the roads arrangements. SS24/10 is a main road with traffic lights, which connects to another main road that leads to LDP. Inner road of SS24/1, SS24/2, SS24/4, SS24/3 and SS24/7 are where the boomgate and oil drums are located, all these are trunk road in housing areas and none of these roads connects to LDP.
Map of Affected Area
Quote from TheStar:
““Although I teach at a school nearby, I have to leave home before 6.45am so that I can reach my work place in time which is just five minutes away,” she said.”
I guess my best assumption is that she’s a teacher in SK Taman Megah or SRJK (c) Yuk Chai. I’m amazed with that statement because the only way to get to those 2 schools is to hit SS24/1 (main road) and make a U-Turn. None of the main roads have been blocked, and it is obvious that SS24/10 is the road to go.
So why was the roads with boom-gates known as the “alternative routes”. Maybe I should shed some lights here. Sometimes during the peak hours, there are many cars that would zoom pass SS24/3 or SS24/7 from SS24/10, take a turn into SS24/4 and then hit the main road of SS24/1. Logically, the average waiting time for all users who needs to get to SS24/1 or LDP does not change; the only difference is that those using the “alternative routes” have indeed tried to cut the queue but the bottleneck will still remain at SS24/1. It will only become more unfair to those who has waited patiently along SS24/10. Bear in mind these are all single lane roads within housing areas and definitely not for high-speed driving, but I’m sure it’s obvious by now that many drivers using these roads are going to be reckless. If they can’t wait in-line for their turn (and need to cut queue instead), do you think they will slow their vehicles down?
To make things worse, there’s a children’s playground between SS24/3, SS24/4 and SS24/6 - the roads where the cars zoom pass. Now, could you imagine how dangerous is it when the kids crosses the road to the playground? Are we waiting for an accident to happen before stopping those reckless drivers from getting through?
Quote from TheStar:
“Another resident said the committee which initiated the scheme clearly did not plan to include those in Jalan SS24/10. “Most of us are not members of the gated and guarded scheme because we have been totally left out of it and our road is easily accessed by anyone regardless of whether they live here or not,” said the resident. He added that some houses had also been been broken into, while others who parked their cars outside their houses along the road had their windscreens smashed by passers-by.”
Now let’s analyze this statement. Is the resident along Jalan SS24/10 indeed expressing a wish to enjoy the same security as well? If it wasn’t because they were on the main road, they would have probably done the same and gated the road. I do emphatize with them, but isn’t it really selfish to say “if I can’t have it, nobody else can”? The fact that he added that some houses had also been broken into further emphasized the need for additional security. What’s he indeed trying to say here, that we should remove all the security so that the crime gets distributed and not too centralized at that road? If there’s a way to provide additional security to residents of SS24/10, I’m sure the resident’s association would have been more than willing to sit down and discuss alternatives. It’s in the residents association’s meeting that things can be discussed and all it takes is for the residents to turn up for the meeting (maybe with the press if need be).
I guess permanent barricade isn’t the best way to go, a boomgate will be a better option to facilitate any need for emergency. But besides security from crime, I’m sure the closure of few road have given residents some safety from reckless drivers as well. Just thinking aloud, maybe several speedbumps might deter few cars from speeding through the area (and wipe out those inconsiderate drivers taking short-cuts in the expense of making others wait longer).
Eventually, the best option is still to have all the representatives sit down and discuss.
Share on Facebook
LOL. I think these people really need some “REALITY-CHECKUP”.