The hold-up robbery at UP Diliman campus
Posted by: Roy in In the news, blog, politics, thought & opinions, tags: armored van, armored vehicle, bank teller, election, election funds, escort, far east bank, fundings, guard, hold-up, killing, robbery, security measures, shotout, up diliman, victimThe recent hold-up robbery at the UP Diliman campus where a bank teller and his security guard escorts were shot to death, reminds me of the time when I was still a roving teller at a bank. That was way bank in 1992 when I was just starting with the then Far East Bank.
Everyday I ride the armored van to pick-up deposits from clients and bring them to bank for crediting to their account. I was given a bulletproof vest and a helmet then, which I rarely wear because they were heavy and uncomfortable to wear.
Hold-ups were also rampant then. But if I remember right, they don’t kill bankers immediately, as long as they got the money they are after, there will be no problem. Unfortunately, that’s not the case now, as robbers kill people immediately.
I was fortunate that nothing of that nature happened to me then, nor to those who have replaced me. But what was common then with the event today, as well as those other bank robbery incidences that happened in-between is that, it was also an election season or near election time.
No, I am insinuating anything here, but just expressing a factual observation that I had when I was still a banker. Extra cautions and security measures were often implemented before, during and immediately after elections.
Honestly, I hope they were just coincidences.
As for the recent incident in UP Diliman, I hope the perpetrators will be captured soon, so that justice will be served to their victims.
If you liked this post, why not subscribe to The Struggling Blogger by Email to keep yourself updated of the latest posts for free
Entries (RSS)
Om our part, let’s help this country forward by being entrepreneurs. Some people have to resort to roberry because of poverty. We do not need this to happen if we can provide opportunity for such people.
thanks for the comment, I appreciate it.
However, please correct me if I’m wrong, because as I understand it, it seems that people (and government) who can’t provide employment for these people are partly to blame for their actions?
like I said, I may have interpreted it wrong. But I believe that poverty is not (and never will be) an excuse to resort to such a deed.
thanks again.
and yes, I do agree, entrepreneurs can provide employment to more people.