Burglary too needs Commonsense!

I think we can all agree that burglary is a valid source of income. Firstly, it gives the practitioners something tangible, something that is solid; unlike ethereal things like Bitcoin.

Then, it is egalitarian, redistributes the wealth amongst the have nots, and gives us vicarious pleasure when the rich are its victims. No wonder we all love Robin Hood. It is particularly conducive for making a quick buck without having to master cumbersome (and useless) educational degrees. I for example, am a science graduate and had in my schooling days, acquired a working knowledge of calculus, periodic tables, Boyles Law, and even imaginary numbers (they are not imaginary). Not once have I used any of that knowledge in my working life.

Try for example, answering the question, “what are your strong points” during a job interview for a marketing head at Patanjali with “inverse trigonometric functions”.  You might as well say that you can talk to tomatoes. Mention being a ‘team player’ (integral to burglary) on the other hand and you will be immediately recognised as Admiral material.

Similarly so with History. History teachers, as we all know, are finicky about dates and hence I mugged up plenty of them. When did Vasco Da Gama come to India? Write 1497 instead of 1498 and you will score a grand total of zero on your answer sheet. But the utility of the correct answer? Nil. “Why do we even have history classes?” Primarily, I remember reading somewhere, if it were not for History classes, what would all the History teachers do?

Now burglary on the other hand has no entrance test or job interviews. It doesn’t matter therefore if one cannot differentiate between gerunds and adjectives, trigonometry from cooking, or Pythagoras from mushrooms.

Neither does success in this career depend on race, caste, creed or even sex. Burglars do not depend upon reservations or affirmative actions by the government. All that they need are wit, daring, and commonsense. Particularly, commonsense, because as we have all heard: common sense is like a deodorant. People who need it most, like the unfortunate gentlemen – Satheesh and Muniyan – tend to use it least.

No who the hell are Satheesh and Muniyan, you ask? Well, they are two hardworking common citizens from Tamil Nadu who, having perused innumerable classifieds, realised that their being unaware about the end result of (a+b) whole squared, would make them ill-suited for any job interview.

They therefore expanded their job search criteria and having discounted milk/newspaper delivery as too simple for their intellect, zoomed in on the one vocation that almost seemed to beckon their enterprising nature – burglary.

Notwithstanding, aware that all that glitters is not gold, they, being methodical,  judiciously listed all the pros and cons on a sheet of paper so that they could arrive at an informed decision. The human mind perceives what it wants to perceive. Apparently, psychologists call it ‘motivated perception’. Satheesh and Muniyam, perceived that the cons were zero. Pros as identified by them included:-

• It was just like entrepreneurship; with the added advantage of not having to make elaborate PPTs for venture capitalists.
• It was immune to market fluctuations, interest rates, fiscal and monetary policies.
• Burglary did not tie one to a rigid office routine and, provided one could outrun most other homo sapiens,  allowed plenty of flexibility.
• Was not vastly different from retail therapy; without of course, the added hassle of having to pay.
• It had no HR asking them, ‘where do you see yourself five years hence.’
• No need to attend infructuous PPTs, such as ‘Ethics and Profits’.
• The barriers to entry were helpfully, low.
• Lastly, they told themselves that they would not be doing anything that rich businessmen (or politicians) don’t.

And thus, they set out on a successful career, collecting valuables for themselves while divesting others of theirs. The thing about burglary however, as I said earlier, is that one needs to have wit, daring and commonsense. Wit, they had. Daring too. Insofar as commonsense is concerned unfortunately, they were like those who needed deodorant.

So it came to pass one day that they, always on the lookout for an easy target, spied a liquor shop which their keen eyes told them was begging to be broken into.  Decision made, they took but a jiffy to burrow a hole in the wall and squeeze into the shop.

They started rummaging for cash, but found none. They were naturally disappointed. However, even through their disappointments, they did sight a lot of alcohol. One can say that they reasoned thus – Morale is a very important ingredient in any field of endeavour. And what uplifts morale faster than whiskey?

It was in the fitness of things then that they decided to help themselves to a few tots. But you know how it is with alcohol, one smooth peg exhorts us to have one more. Satheesh and Muniyan too, having imbibed one peg each, felt that they deserved another to compensate for their disappointments, and then another to boost their morale, and then another three – well, just for the heck of it.

To cut a long story short, the sozzled duo had soon forgotten the peculiarity of their circumstances,  and started discussing the beauty of Silk Smita versus that of Rajnikant. Sides were taken – Satheesh for Silk Smita and Muniyan for Rajni. Friendship was forgotten, tempers got raised and somewhat incoherent arguments got put forth.

Now if there is one set of people that burglars hate, it is pesky policemen. Unfortunately for the two entrepreneurs, two such pesky individuals happened to be passing by.

Perplexed by the sounds of raised tempers coming from within a shop that was ostensibly closed for the night, they decided to investigate. Sighting the burrowed hole, they peeped in. Correspondingly, Satheesh and Muniyan sighted the peepers too.

As soon as they realised they had company, the duo quickly discarded their differences and took on the mantle of solicitous hosts. Athithi, after all, is devo bhava.

They genially (but a bit incoherently) invited the two peeping heads to join in and sample the excellent fare. One could say they were hospitality personified. Till they discerned through their grogginess, that the two heads were adorned with regulation police caps.

You would forgive them for feeling chagrined.

The police on the other hand were dour beings and it was clear that they had never heard the phrase, ‘to err is human, to forgive divine’. Indulgence towards enterprise,  risk taking appetite and genuine hospitality, they had none.  

They asked the duo to crawl back out of the same hole that they had used to get in. To say that Satheesh and Muniyan made the egress in a far more sombre mood than the ingress, would be an understatement. The embarrassment should have been punishment enough, but the policemen, ignoring the exceptional initiative shown by the duo, charged them with sections 380 and 457 of the Indian Penal Code too. Drat!

Satheesh and Muniyan also learnt that though alcohol sometimes gives a correct answer, it often only complicates the question.

Moral of the story? While wit and daring are excellent qualities to have, never undermine the value of commonsense.

PS – You can read the unembellished account here.