Why arming our security guards is bad for economy

XN Iraki

In the aftermath of the DusitD2 Hotel terrorist attack in Nairobi, it was reported that security guards would be armed in six months. If it comes to pass, the guards, who outnumber police, will be allowed to carry guns. It is not clear what type of guns they will carry. Some have joked that since our policemen recently got new guns, mostly black in colour, there is now plenty of idle guns that can be given to the guards.  SEE ALSO :Man dies during KDF recruitment in Malindi
This idea is likely to spark a heated debate which poses the question, does this make economic sense? First, why was the idea so quickly supported? Why after DusitD2? One reason could be that the private security got a media blitz with photos and TV showing them saving stranded citizens as the hotel was under attack. What we are not told is if any of them got to the “front line.” The media photos of one bulky man shielding a young woman while escorting her to safety was a classic. SEE ALSO :Guards thwart raid at Dominion Farms
Such photos and media clips could have convinced many that arming guards would make a big difference to our security.  If only such scenes would be replicated. Second, the growth in the private security industry is driven by profitability. A certain lobby has lately been very active. Third, could be Americanisation. Our constitution was borrowed from the US, with governors, chiefs of staff and senators. Maybe those who came up with our Constitution borrowed from the American law the right to bear arms.  Fourth, private security is elitist. For the common man, their only private security is their fists. The country elites will most likely have their way, not just in security matters, but on many other things too. The people who make key decisions in Kenya most likely have private security and arming guards would enhance it.  Paradoxically, terrorism might have driven private security industry than anything else. The first wave of growth was in the number of security firms and employment of security guards. With such high levels of unemployment in Kenya, it’s easy to get cheap labour in such industries.  SEE ALSO :Argentina launches security operations ahead of G20 summit
Arming the guards might be the next wave. This will probably change the dynamics of the industry. Shall we have more past members of security services like retired policemen and soldiers recruited? Are we likely to see two layers of security guards, with the armed overseeing the unarmed?  Enough digression. Does arming security guards make economic sense?  In my opinion, no. This is why. One, the Jubilee regime promised to recruit more policemen. They have done that in droves. Why should there be increased insecurity when we have recruited more police? Could their deployment be the issue? When I drove from Gilgil to Nairobi this week, I counted nine police stops for a distance of 120km. You rarely find such stops at night. Before arming the guards, we need an account of the current police force, its adequacy and effectiveness. SEE ALSO :Governor’s security detail withdrawn
Arming security guards is an indirect admission that our security services paid for by taxpayers are unreliable. Unhealthy rivalry Two, arming the guards could make the police and other security organs less effective. The gun is a symbol of power and authority. The police could see the armed guards as competitors and that could breed unhealthy rivalry. Would that perhaps stop the police from doing their work because there is a parallel force? For example, could an estate be denied a police post because they have armed guards?  Three, arming guards will accentuate inequality in Kenya, with some enjoying “excess” security and others none. Private security is generally for the mostly urban elite. The vast majority of Kenyans live in rural areas and their only security is large families or dogs. Will vigilante groups also get guns? What of watchmen who guard our homes and institutions like schools?  Four, arming guards could raise the cost of private security. Expect adverts like: “Our security firm guards are armed with AK47s.” The firms will raise their charges because their customers are now more “secure.” The gun ownership could make some firms more attractive than others. Could there be an intense rivalry to deny competitors guns? And by the way, will firms buy guns or lease them? Will they pass the cost of guns to their customers?  Five, by making such drastic changes because of a terror attack, we create an impression that terrorism drives our national agenda. We create an impression that we make very important decisions emotionally.  One could ask why not after Westgate. Why not after the US Embassy attack? Why not after Garissa?  Did DusitD2 contribute to realignment in the Cabinet, leading to a “super” cabinet secretary or prime minister? Have we thought seriously about how terrorism has changed our lives, including a roll-down on our freedom? Our bags and cars are checked and we have no problem with that. How many of our telephone conversations are monitored? While seeking the evil doers, the good-doers also suffer.  Balance of power It seems that is not about to end. And can you imagine a member of Kenya’s Special Forces entering the twin towers in New York? Six, we have CCTV on our roads and highways, in buildings and even homes. How effective have they been? Arming individuals should be the last resort.  What of other related technologies, some of which might not be known to the public? Seven, arming guards will tilt the balance of power. Will the guns become a status symbol? Will having private armed security become the in thing? One could ask how the criminals will react to this. Will they seek more powerful guns and start an arms race? -The writer teaches at the University of Nairobi

Related Topics