'PM's security breeched... Hello!'
Surfers are divided over fate of erring youth but shocked at security lapses.india Updated: Jul 29, 2006 12:19 IST
Two women and a young man, presumably under the influence of alcohol, drive into the residence of Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh. They pass the first security cordon but are checked at the second cordon.
And the nation is shocked! Hello, isn't this supposed to be the residence of the most powerful Indian? Who are these youngsters? Are we to laugh or sit up?
We asked our surfers if the youth ought to be let off with a warning or taught a fitting lesson.
Surprisingly, opinions were divided. A majority said punish them. You don't breech PM's security for "fun". While quite a few insisted they should be let off with a warning. After all, it was a harmless prank.
But what was a revelation was that both the parties were equivocal in their denouncement of the security deployed there. How could they allow the breech? Without fail all said, it is they who needed to be pulled up.
Here's how it went.
Harsh punishment for them
Asam from USA said, "They should be punished for intruding national security."
Rajat Sharma from Faridabad, India, "They should be punished and that too harshly. It's the residence of Prime Minister of India we are talking about, not some hotel's lobby where you can go and have fun."
VK Sharma from New Delhi, India said, "As confirmed by Air Sahara both the airhostesses were charged with indiscipline. They should be punished to learn a lesson for a lifetime. This will be a message to others to mind their conduct."
Arjun Kumar, New Delhi, India said, "they cannot feign ignorance or innocence in this day and age".
A measured Raghu from New Delhi said the "youngsters should be punished as well as the security personnel who let them go inside without checking".
Perth-based Nirbhay made a judicious statement. He said, "they should be warned for breaching the security of the PM house but should definitely be punished for drunk-driving on roads. But just punishing them is not enough. Even the security personnel who allowed them inside and then let them go away should be subjected to some disciplinary action".
Desi Punk from Chicago said it is because we are lax on such issues that drunk driving is so rampant.
"It's because of such easy-going attitudes that Indian streets are full of drunk drivers running over people and moving scot-free. They have the money to bail themselves out. Had it been any other country these people would have been shot dead the moment they breached the security."
BR Prusty from New Delhi felt this was display of immature behaviour. "They all aware about the present scenario of our country and crossed the first security range. They should be punished so that others learn a lesson. Further they reduced law and order as well as security/public look like laughing stocks."
Manoj from Ahmedabad, India felt, "nobody can do such things again for publicity. Such things are a waste the time for the police and for common people".
Manish from Auckland said, "This incident turned out to be a blessing in disguise for the sake of India's PM's security. These youths were drunk and should be charged with drunk driving and trespassing into a high security zone rather than being punished for breaching into PM's house.
This is a wide eye opener for the Indian security forces that even after major bomb blasts in New Delhi and Mumbai they don't have enough resources to protect the most important man in India. Or are the security forces simply too relaxed or careless?"
"Yes, they should definitely be punished. In North America if a person is caught drunk while driving their vehicle their licence can be suspended and in almost all cases they lose de-merit points which could be a problem in driving record and moreover in car's insurance.
However in India there are no such rules. These youth not only breached prime minister's security but also caught driving under the influence of alcohol. Perhaps, it could be pre-planned to gain media attention. Since they committed two major offences I strongly believe they should be penalised," said Pankaj from Toronto in Canada.
Saurav from New Delhi said, "No, being a youngster doesn't mean that you can do any misadventure with the national security. The guilty should be punished. This is a case of a security lapse. Lazy security officers should also be punished because they let them go inside."
C'mon, it was just a prank
"Let them off with a warning," said Babu from Kerala.
Murli from Vijayawada, India felt every Indian had the right to meet the Prime Minister.
"Why should they be punished? Aren't they people of India? It is not a crime to meet the PM."
Shantanu from New Delhi felt it was a harmless prank.
"Definitely they should be let off with a stern warning! Although such acts cannot be condoned, it was most likely a harmless prank. The police or other agencies should not try to make a big issue out of this to cover their own serious shortcomings in this episode."
Letting off the youngsters for their behaviour Vikram from New Delhi, India said, "I think they should be let off. They have not done any crime. They were just ordinary citizens of India who want to meet the prime minister. They asked the security and with due permission entered from the first barrier and with SPG officials permission drive off from that place. So, why should they be punished or taught a lesson? It should rather be security personnel who should get the punishment."
Ajay Pandita from Mumbai, India too thought on similar lines.
"How could you even think of a topic of debate on punishing them? They are citizens of this country and have every right to go and meet the PM. The security has indeed been breached by these guys but it is actually the security in-charge responsible for the goof up. If they did not know the procedure of meeting the PM, it is the responsibility of the security to politely tell them the process. PM is a part of us. Let's understand that bit."
Sash from Hyderabad, India felt the security was more at fault. "I think they should be let off with a light warning. But, they should be also given a small commendation in exposing such a serious flaw in the so-called tight security which the so frequently fussed about. In fact the persons responsible to let them inside should be immediately removed from their positions and sent back for duties not so demanding."
Amol from Atlanta, USA said, "Absolutely not! What is their crime? They are not criminals. If anybody needs to be taught a lesson it is the SPG for their laxity."
All views and opinions presented in this article are solely those of the surfers and do not necessarily represent those of HindustanTimes.com.