May 6, 2009 by admin
Filed under Daily
Musings
Leave a comment
From The News Room Team
A youth with low IQ has been arrested by police after flying
into a rage at a Meet-the-People session (MPS), upset at what he
felt was his MP’s cold-shoulder treatment of his mother’s financial
plight.
The 17 year old boy hoisted an aluminium foldable chair over his
head and slammed it against a glass door seconds after walking out
of MP Cynthia Phua’s Serangoon North office with his mother. (read
full article here)
According to the teen’s mother, he was unhappy with the
condescending tone of Cynthia Phua during the conversation in which
he was asked many specific questions including the reason for his
unemployment.
His mother was not given a chance to explain that the boy is
mentally challenged and therefore has difficulties holding on a
proper job.
The family has gone to their MP to seek financial
assistance.
Nobody was injured in the fracas. The teenager was whisked away
shortly by a neighbor. Nevertheless, the police still turned up at
his home on the same night to arrest him.
It is not known it was Cynthia Phua or her henchmen who made the
police report.
Like in a previous case where PAP MP Denise Phua was allegedly
“intimidated” by a garaguni man over the phone even though she was
not at the receiving end, the police acted in double-quick time to
apprehend the culprits.
However, ordinary citizens who were assaulted in the streets
usually need to file a complaint to a Magistrates Court before
action will be taken.
Instead of attributing the blame entirely on uncouth residents,
PAP MPs should also reflect upon their attitude and behavior which
may be interpretated as insensitive, rude and arrogant to some.
MPs are paid by taxpayers to serve the people. They should be
attentive to their needs and provide a listening ear to their
problems.
If the teen had slammed the chair against the door of a clinic,
restaurant or school, it is unlikely that charges will be pressed
against him so quickly.
It seems that some people are accorded special treatment over
the others in Singapore especially when you belong to the ruling
party.
The judge should consider the mitigating circumstances in this
case:
1. The teenager is of low IQ and is unable to control his
emotions.
2. He was provoked into a rage by the MP who might have insulted
his dignity with her callousness.
The family is in financial difficulties and the boy has already
repented. A warning will be suffice to teach him a lesson which he
will never forget in his life: never ever throw tantrums at your
PAP MP.
