Add this to the list of shit that goes down in Shah Alam

Whatever criticism I level at Shah Alam, there will be those who are quick to come to its defence by saying that the town may not be as lively, entertaining or cosmopolitan as some of the other parts of the Klang Valley but “it’s safe and peaceful.” This statement is usually followed by some other rubbish implying that the rest of the Valley is only filled with hardened criminals, road-raging drivers in day-long traffic jams, and degenerate liberals.

I’m not going to deny that we have a ton of those outside of Shah Alam, but it’s not like Shah Alam is Seventh Heaven or anything where only the righteous and pure of heart and deed may enter. Methinks, that these folks are confusing Shah Alam’s dull facade with peace. Just look at the papers for the past year and you’ll find that all sorts of shit go down in Shah Alam, precisely because it’s so dull – even I’m considering resorting to some kind of crime, be it something as simple as possession of illegal substances or something more exotic - like sacrificing goats to the Death Metal Gods (like they did in Kedah all those years back) just to liven things up. A month or two ago, some guy lost his mind in the neighbouring state of Negeri Sembilan, chopped off his father’s head, placed it in a bag, took the train to Shah Alam and tried to bury it here. Why? I don’t know. Maybe he thought his father could rest in peace here. Geddit, geddit? Not funny? No?

The other day, the Inspector General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan was quoted in the papers saying that Section 11, Section 9 and surrounding areas in Shah Alam have had high occurrences of burglaries (some of them armed, one lady was even killed in her own home, in front of her daughters). Yes, this shit happens everywhere and that includes Shah Alam. Safe and peaceful? No more than the next bandaraya, my friend.

Anyway, some of you can probably guess by now why the IGP was going on about the crime rate in Shah Alam in the papers – it all has to do with the recent fatal police shooting of a 15 year old boy in town.

The boy was on a joyride at 2am when the police caught on to him at Section 11, Shah Alam. The police officer said that it was dark, that repeated orders to the driver to stop were ignored, and that he was driving in a reckless manner “typical of a hardcore criminal.”


He didn’t stop because he was driving without a license and had snuck out his older sister’s car. He was 15. He panicked. He thought if the police caught up to him, he was going to get into so much shit with his parents or something. Maybe get grounded for life. Maybe have them look at you with that unbearable look of disappointment. Maybe take away his PlayStation privileges. Well, I don’t know, but that’s probably what would be going through my head if I was 15 and in that situation. Well, even at almost 25. Okay, so he wasn’t acting with much reason. So as he was driving away, he might have endangered the lives of others with his reckless driving. But let me just say that this is Malaysia. Pretty much everyone in the fucking country drives recklessly – license or no license, criminal or non criminal. Also, 15 year old teenagers aren’t known for their fantastic sense of logic or reasoning; I think even scientist have discovered that that particular part of the brain doesn’t develop until you’re well in your 20s (and even that doesn’t happen for some. Like me.) But I don’t think for one second he thought that it would lead to him being shot by the cops. In the back of the head.

My colleague knows the boy’s teachers, having worked closely with them on one of our community programmes. The teachers said the boy had no record of disciplinary problems in school. He was a fairly good student, and never gave any sort of trouble.

The IGP goes on to say, “The death of this teenager is unfortunate and sad. But how could the policemen have known that he was just a 15 year old on a joyride at 2am?” And he goes on to add, “In self-defense….the rules of engagement. It is not only a  parang or a gun that can be used as a weapon. Even a vehicle can.”

Correct us if we’re wrong but in self defense, the rules of engagement mean that you don’t shoot someone in the back of the head and call it self defence. It means that the person, whether wielding a parang, or a gun or driving a car was aiming and heading away from you. According to reports, the police officer said that the boy had tried to reverse the car into him. Hence a shot to the back of the head. Whether this is true or a concocted cover-up, is not for me to say.

Another colleague of mine, one of those obnoxious law-background blokes, started talking about another accidental police shooting case that happened a while back - an entire family travelling in a van was mistakenly, and fatally shot by the po-po. Extended family members sued the government. They lost.

My manager, who I tend to talk to everything about BUT work, started going off on a rant about “How come everyone’s just looking at what the police officer did wrong and not what the boy did wrong?” Well, mostly, boss, because the boy is dead. And the police officer is alive. What’s the point of harping on what the boy did wrong when he’s already had a bullet in his head? It seems to me, like punishment enough for the most heinous of crimes, let alone, for what began as a misdemeanor; a moment of teenage transgression.  

The Sun yesterday captured the IGP responding to the public outcry regarding the shooting, by saying, “So do they want us to enforce the law? If they don’t, just say so and I will tell my men. So no need to check suspicious looking cars, no need to stop the Mat Rempit.”

Wow, you sound just like my mother when I tell her that I'm almost 25 years old for god's sake, so stop calling me every 5 seconds when I’m out for dinner with my friends. Except this isn’t dinner, is it?

No, Musa, Mr. IGP-man, it means that we just don’t want your men to mistakenly shoot another teenager in the back of the head, for the “crime” of panicking and an inability to properly think things through.  It means that if we the civillian public, must answer to the Law, then your men should too. And the Law requires questioning. Being the IGP, you should very well be aware of it. It’s not wrong for the public to question, so stop saying shit like, “The question of police discharging firearms shouldn’t arise…..”

The Law sometimes requires more questions than we have answers to.

The public is angry not because we knew the boy. But because any one of us, could’ve been the boy.

Nobody said being a teenager was easy. No one ever said it was going to come down on you this hard.

I never knew you. But we all could’ve been you.

Rest in peace, Aminul.