So some guys got drunk. Then they took to the road. Somewhere in bandra the driver lost control. The car went offroad and mowed down a some people who were sleeping on the pavement.
The police swung into action. The media had a field day. They had all the components to make a great story. The ‘rich brats’, ‘drunk’, ‘big cars’ etc.etc. The driver even showed them his middle finger. No wonder the story made cover page. The masses always love such stories. ‘The poor downtrodden people killed by drunk rich brats’.
Let us look at the facts.
a) Drunk driver creates an accident.
b) …ah ..
I can’t seem to think of point b. Why were the others arrested? For being drunk? If i remember correctly some of them were past their 18 year age limit. Can 18 year olds get drunk? I am not sure. They cannot get into a pub and order drinks, for sure. Whatever…if they have broken some law they must be punished. For drunken driving it is maximum 6 months in jail and some fine.
The point I am getting at is, I hate such news pieces. They do not give a complete picture, which is even pardonable. But they skew the topic in such a way that they get maximum viewership. My point being, why were the people sleeping on a pavement?Didn’t they have beds in their homes? Did they not have even homes? Where did they come from? Why can’t they live peacefully in their village? Don’t they have land in the village? And is sleeping on the pavement legal? Do people in all megacities in other poor countries sleep on the pavements? Why can’t the media ask these questions? Are people on the pavement so part and parcel of our life? Don’t we want them not to sleep on the pavement? To have their own homes.
What is true and will be is that people will get drunk. And some of them will drive. Irrespective of how wealthy they are.