Nobody, including some well-entrenched, influential conspiracy theorists, can convince me that T&T has become anything like the narco-states we know exist in different parts of the world. That the criminal enterprise has so integrated itself into the process of governance that it has become difficult to distinguish between police and thief.
It is perhaps true that a parallel narco-economy does in fact skew developmental parameters to defy some basic economic principles including the relationship between supply and demand and the ready availability of cash.
But the police-thief metaphor can sometimes be stretched beyond the realm of actuality.
Every now and then I am approached by someone bemoaning the situation regarding current pervasive criminal violence with an accompanying assertion that such a condition is being wilfully promoted by the party and politicians in power–rubbish no doubt heard on the political platform.
For their information, I usually advise that an equally-unsubstantiated view relative to other categories of crime is routinely applied each time another party is in power.
Our politicians and their vocal surrogates need to stop this nonsense right now, especially those who know better.
You know, and I know, that one of the keys to prolonged political success in T&T would be the ability to satisfactorily address the issues associated with citizen security.
Politicians rather enjoy remaining in office.
For instance, many of the people rumoured to have been in the game purely to criminally extract personal gain and flee are still among us and very much in the contest to regain power.
What is true, however, is that the phenomenon first noted by academics in the United States almost 35 years ago and described as the "broken windows theory" has found a worthy test case characterised by universal political culpability right here.
Some features of the theory can be rigorously challenged but, by and large, it is evident that when a society decides to leave "minor" infractions alone, the foundations for serious crime become reinforced and tacitly supported by officialdom.
Here is where I come to Sally-Ann Cuffie. Remember her? The lady from Talparo who now has to learn to eat, work and take care of herself minus two thumbs and several fingers?
Somebody, it seems, was simply having fun and enjoying "de culture." For, this is what "we" do at celebration time–Independence, Divali, Xmas, birthday parties and, in St Joseph, after 10 at night on a Sunday.
This time around it was Divali and the victim was Sally-Ann Cuffie. In 2006, it was Anil "Punko" Sankar of Claxton Bay in an incident apparently not reported in the press except when his body was found in a latrine last week and five missing fingers from a "scratch bomb accident" were among the main identifying marks.
More than 40 years ago, it was a friend of mine who now forever uses special lenses to aid a very serious sight impediment.
But, Sally-Ann Cuffie was not "busting bamboo" or throwing squibs or "setting off fireworks."
She was going about her business with members of her family when she became the victim of one of several broken windows–official inaction on a practice that some say is of questionable illegality but is without doubt an incivil activity that has caused great distress to a wide cross-section of the national community.
Now, some expert from a law office somewhere will want to cite the Explosives Act of 1907 or the Summary Offences Act and its accompanying Fireworks Permits Regulations to suggest it is not so much a question of having fireworks, squibs "rockets" and other such devices in you possession as it is about the use of these things.
Based on that argument, possession of narcotics should also not be an offence because the "problem" the law is meant to resolve is their usage.
Well, if that is what the laws say, and the objective is to outlaw the reckless use of pyrotechnics then sale and possession should attract an equal amount of negative attention and the laws should be amended.
I am not for prohibition as a general rule, but much like our obvious failure to self-regulate proper operation of our vehicles on the road or to be trusted with an increased speed limit, it is clear we have not done a good job at being responsible citizens in possession of fireworks, "scratch bombs" and other explosives.
The people who sell the stuff say they are all for laws to regulate "responsible" use.
If they mean this, they should agree to be held criminally responsible for any abuse.
This is a broken window crying out to be repaired. I can only imagine how passionately the other Cuffie, Minister Maxie Cuffie, made his case before Cabinet on this matter.
There should have already been a press conference to announce the outcome of his promised appeal to the attorney general.
I have not yet mentioned the cruel effects of these things on animals.
There is no minister who joins the street search for runaway dogs and cats each time residential districts are transformed into mini versions of Aleppo.
Animals are on no list of electors. There is no bedside for a photo-op and more promises.
Only loss and a deep sense of grief that this particular broken window has already escalated into a most cynical, reckless and uncaring scar on the body politic.
For me, at this stage, nothing short of an outright ban will be a satisfactory response. But I am not holding my breath in anticipation.