The duality of the State's approach to gun possession

Today starts the gun show of the Assn. of Firearms and Dealers (AFAD) at the Megamall. Everytime there is a gun show, notable among the usual clients are government officials (especialy those who belong to the local units), and those who have the financial means to purchase a gun.

Interestingly, Executive Order 817 also known as the Gun Amnesty program was signed last July 7, 2009 to take effect this week and will last until Oct 31. This is supposedly the last and final amnesty and the last chance for delinquent gun owners (or those who failed to renew their license) to update/ renew their license. In other words, the gun amnesty targets the then- legal-now-illegal gun owners (in the PNP parlance, guns whose license are not renewed automatically falls under the category of loose or illegal firearm) . The EO 817 will not cover the "paltiks" (of the illegally manufactured and traded guns), and improvised guns (e.g. "sumpak").

Three arguments I want to point out here.

1. The popularity of guns among local govt officials and the rich is clearly a sign of fascination on guns.

a. The fascination is either due to the mystery and romance of the gun as a technologically advanced (lethal) instrument, while at the same time presented as seemingly innocuous piece of art.

b. Or the fascination stems from the gun representing a socially constructed value of power and protection.

In the study I've conducted, most of the respondents from the lower and middle income groups perceive guns/ firearms as instrument of power and protection (or an instrument with a constructed value). The appreciation of guns as a sporting instrument or as a work of art (i.e. as a neutral instrument) are notably, interpreted by those who hail from the upper income bracket.

In other words, guns create various interpretations and one's interpretation, to a large extent, is framed based on one's social and economic context.

2. The Executive Order 817 or the gun amnesty program reflect the duality of the State's appreciation and treatment on gun possession. The State seemingly has no problem in extending the privilege of possession to those who have the (financial) means, but is wary as regards gun ownership of those who "have-none."

Executive Order 817 or the gun-amnesty program creates an imagery of the State extending its hand and trying to woe back into the fold of law its prodigal sons, willing to forgive and forget their irresponsible act (of non-renewal of their gun-license); while the other hand goes after the illegal owners with a castigating stance and final ultimatum to surrender the illegal gun (during the amnesty period) or suffer the full consequence of the law.

The "paltiks" are basically a poor-man's gun. They are illegally manufactured and traded, and therefore mere possession is already a crime in itself. While I agree that a lot of "paltik" owners use the gun for questionable-to-outrightly-illegal dealings, there is also a good number who simply keep it in their homes to assuage their perception of insecurity. I call this the "silent group" who are simply reacting to the insecurity created by their subjective interpretation of their environment.

While I am not in favor of illegal ownership, there is also a problem if we take an absolutist posturing here. The perception of social insecurity is largely brought about by the inability of the State to satisfy the safety/ security demands of the citizens. In other words, I believe that if the people feel secure in their homes and their communities, there is less motivation for them to own (socially constructed) instruments of protection like guns.

3. Gun ownership is pervasive and the effect of gun amnesty will just be a drop in the bucket. In the PNP's estimate (2008), there are 1.1M illegal guns in circulation; the Small Arms Survey (2007) placed the value at 3.9M (high of 5M and low of 2.8 M legal and illegal) guns in circulation. There is also no accurate gauge on the number of guns-in-circulation in areas with active conflict.

Again, in my research (2008-2009), I asked the respondents to give concrete figures / number of gun-owners they know outside of their family. I did a 'convenience non-random sampling' and therefore the findings cannot be used to generalize for the entire population. Still, let me quote my findings verbatim here:

"Half of the respondents admitted to know someone outside their family who own a gun. Disaggregated data is more revealing: mostof the respondents from Cagayan de Oro (84%) and Bacolod (69%) have links with people with guns, while half and a little over half of the respondents from Cordillera (59%), Bohol (57%), and NCR (50%) have gun-owner contacts."

"These figures obviously do not represent the population and is a poor measure on the actual amount of guns in circulation. The relevance of the figures, however, is the seeming audacity of gun-ownership in the country – audacious in the sense that on the average, each respondent know at least one gun-owner. Likewise, if we take the ratio of male and female gun-owners, there is 1 female to every 5.5 male gun owners. The wide disparity of male and female reported gun-owners adds support to the argument that gun-possession is dominantly a ‘male-thing,’ that is, gun as an instrument of value is linked with the heteronormative conception of assigning the function of protection to males." (Oreta 2009)

Based on the three arguments, I caution those who hail the gun-amnesty program as a major step towards addressing the issue of gun-proliferation in the country. The gun-amnesty is simply an administrative measure to legalize again those who have "slipped" into the illegal fold because of their non-renewal of license. More efforts must be done to (a) curb the illegal manufacture and trade, (b) institute more control to discriminate and/or prevent the issuance of license to abusers (most especially those who have history of domestic abuse), and (c) assuage the perception of insecurity of civilians by instituting measures that would make communities feel safer.

Gun Amnesty must therefore be appreciated and framed in this context.

Gun amnesty and Norberto Gonzales??

Last tues or weds, Norberto Gonzales remarked that the President might entertain the idea of emergency rule (the context of the remark was the dud bombs discovered in Manila - i.e. Ombudsman, Dept of Agriculture, and One Burgundy Plaza, all located in Quezon City; and bombs that exploded in Cotabato and Sulu)

Maybe I am just too paranoid and too 'conspiracy theory thinker' but I hope there is no connection between this statement and the gun amnesty signed last July 6, 2009. After all, isn't it that the first thing that dictators do (before or after the declaration of martial law) is to round up all guns from the hands of civilians? Marcos did that, just as Mussolini and Hitler did too.

gun amnesty ... again!

"President Arroyo signed yesterday an executive order authorizing the Philippine National Police (PNP) to implement gun amnesty for loose firearms in preparation for the 2010 elections.
Chief Superintendent Ireno Bacolod, director of the PNP-Civil Security Group, said the executive order is now on the desk of Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita for disposition." (Felipe, 7 Jul 2009, Philstar.com)

The gun amnesty is being peddled now as the final and last amnesty. This is the 12th thus far, since the time of Pres Cory Aquino. To be believed that it is really really really the last, the public must get the impression that the Phil National Police is indeed serious. Right now, it's hard not to be skeptical, what, with 12 amnesty ... and counting? (each time that an amensty is offered, it's always peddled to be the last final)

"Nicole" and Smith: The end of the saga

Newspapers' headline yesterday and today declares that "Nicole" recanted her story. In her affidavit published verbatim by the PDI, she stated that she's not sure if she was raped or brought it upon herself, and practically acquits Smith. This ends the 3-year saga that showcased how the Philippines - the government in particular - allowed itself to be bullied by Big Brother the United States. While I am deeply saddened by the action of "Nicole", I do not blame her. What, with pressure from the US, and even more from her OWN government, who wouldn't cave in? I'm sure she has her reasons for doing that affidavit, but the implication of her action is great if we look at it from the macro-level.

1. By stating that she was too drunk and may have been too intimate with Smith, she indirectly blamed herself for what happened. But rape is rape - it is a question of power. Even if the woman is provokatively dressed, or is intimate with someone, no one has the right to violate her. "Nicole's" action brings the debate back to blaming the victim. (It's the fault of the victim that's why she's raped)

2. The Phil. government, instead of protecting "Nicole" openly and publicly caved-in under the pressure of Washington. If your own government can't support your cause (or at least pretend to support your cause), how can one expect a lone individual to rally the flag? The surrender of Smith to the US embassy was a clear violation of the Phil. laws, and even the VFA - as declared recently by the Phil. Supreme Court. But instead of being the primary institution to uphold the law, the Arroyo gov't was first to violate it. And the biggest insult was when Dept of Justice SEcretary Gonzales justified the action of the Phil. govt in handing over Smith to US custody. He practically became the defender of the US!

3. The ending of this saga creates a dim picture for other Filipinas violated by US servicemen. Quo vadis?

While I feel bad for what Nicole did, I do not condemn her. People's action are, to a large extent, determined by the context and condition one operates in. Her fortitude 3 years ago was stronger, but we don't know why she caved-in now. I'm pretty sure a lot-lot-lot of pressure were exerted on her in all fronts.

Was it easy way out? Call me paranoid but remember that the VFA was "revisited" again when Gloria failed to meet Obama despite the monumental efforts she exerted. Remember that Senators Joker and Miriam, all of a sudden became "patriotic" and raise the issue of VFA out of nowhere. Yes, I'm saying that Gloria used the VFA (and Smith) to get the attention of Obama. When he called her finally, what do you think are the trade offs?

It's really sad that it seems very few Filipinos are willing to sacrifice and do the right thing for the sake of justice, but if you're caught in the middle of giant icebergs, what will you do? Let's condemn the action, but let's condemn even more the institutions that allowed it to happen. "Nicole" was the victim, and continues to be the victim here - raped by Smith, abandoned by her government, feasted by the media, "used" by cause oriented groups as their poster girl against US imperialism. Now, condemned by everyone. Compassion and understanding, not villifying, is what she needs.

Gloria Arroyo's record in freeing criminals

Today, Gloria Arroyo frees the last of the Ninoy Aquino convicted murderers.

She has, thus far, the highest record of granting pardon to the most notorious and controversial criminals --

a. Romeo Jalosjos, the convicted child rapist
b. Manero, who brutaly killed Fr. Tulio Favali during the 80's. He was (still is?) the leader of the notorious Ilaga group.
c. Teehankee, the killer of Maureen Hultman
d. The 10 Ninoy Aquino convicted killers

She was also reported to have contemplated on granting pardon to Sanchez, the former Mayor of a Laguna town and the convicted rapist and killer of the two UP Los Banos students, and Rolito Go, the killer of Eldon Maguan (a DLSU graduate) over a traffic alteration, had it not for the strong protestations of concerned groups.

And of course who can forget the case of Erap - who was granted Presidential pardon barely a month after getting convicted of plunder.

Sadly, these efforts, while regarded by some as humanitarian in nature, also deliver the message that the powerful and mighty (or even just close association with them) would always have their way in a political system controlled by a few. No wonder the accusation that the Arroyo administration promotes a 'culture of impunity' just sticks like glue.

Joker and Miriam nationalistic? Baaahh!!

Have you ever wondered why, all of a sudden, Miriam Defensor Santiago and Joker Arroyo became nationalistic and questioned the World Bank and VFA respectively? And why only now does Joker lament about the so called 'document' he has read being not beneficial to the Philippines - it sounded too late the hero.

My husband has an interesting take on this, and I completely agree with him. He said it's Gloria's way of "punishing" Washington for ignoring her several attempts to have a photo-ops with Obama. By taking on the VFA and the World Bank (which is very much identified with the US), the US will surely take notice. Twisting the US hand like this might make Obama change his 'attitude' and pose a friendlier tone towards GMA. Cheap trick from GMA, The Unloved!

How many guns are "out there"?

Last September 2, 2008, we (Phil. Action Network on Small Arms) had a discussion with members of the PNP-Firearms & Explosive Division-Civil Security Group. These are the figures they gave us: In the first semester of 2008, there are 1,081,074 licensed firearms, half of this number (517,341) are in the National Capital Region or NCR. The number, on the other hand, of firearms with expired licenses for the same period is 482,162. The distribution of this 1M firearms is surprising: 69.85% are in private/ civilian hands, and 30.15% are with the 'authorities' (police, military, deputized govt employees, reservist, diplomatic corps, elected officials).

The PNP has a gauge on how many "loose" FA are there in circulation, but have no accurate gauge on the "illegal" guns as well as the guns-in circulation in the conflict areas."Loose" FA, according to the Phil. National Police, refers to guns purchased from legal manufacturers but are not registered or the license is not renewed. "Paltik", "sumpak" and such other home-made and improvised guns, as well as guns that are illegally manufactured and traded are referred to as "illegal." These guns are unaccounted.

Gun law in the Phil

The enforced law re gun possession and manufacture in the Philippines is PD 1866 - a presidential decree during Marcos's regime. The irony of it is that it was decreed by a dictator, not by a legitimate, elected legislature. It has not been repealed when Aquino took over power in 1986.

What Aquino issued was a Natl. Emergency Momorandum Order No. 6, a reaction to the Dec 1989 bloody coup attempt. This memorandum orders the re-registration of all licensed civilian firearm (FA), orders the inventory of FAs issued to police forces, and orders the seizure of all unlicensed FA.

RA 7166 was passed (Synchronized elections law) in 1991. The law bans the carrying of FA outside one's residence during election period, and gives power to the COMELEC (Comm. on Elections) to give permits-to-carry, and suspend the issuance of civilian FA licenses. This, however, applies only during election period and is not a permanent fixture.

Incidentally, a lecturer told me that the Philippines is the only country in SEA that issues FA license to civilians. This is an interesting information that needs to be verified.

("meanlin" called my attention and said the Phil. is NOT the only country that issues FA licenses to civilians in SEA. Malaysia, Singapore, Myanmar and Indonesia do issue FA license to civilians, too, although highly regulated . Thailand, too, but not as regulated as the states earlier mentioned. Thanks, "meanlin".)

Violence in Mindanao - what will you do?

A civil society leader, Ka Vic, based in Davao, Mindanao, was shot dead yesterday afternoon. The gunman casually walked toward him while Ka Vic was talking with a fellow cooperative board member, shot him at close range, twice in the head and another near the armpit. Ka Vic was dead on the spot. It was a fiesta, and the Vice Mayor was in the community earlier that day. There were police roaming around. A lot of people were in the area when the shooting happened. The young gunman's face was only covered with a towel. He killed Ka Vic - in front of many people - casually walked away and took off via the get-away tricycle. Take note - a tricycle - a vehicle so small, it can be overpowered by a group of people. But no, the audacity of the act shocked the community, especially those who witnessed it. In fact, no one, save for the cooperative board member Ka Vic was talking to, was willing to testify.

There was a time in our collective history when killing a person - especially that brutal - hits one to the core, and that regardless of the danger to oneself, defending what is right and decent were considered as higher, noble goods. When Evelio Javier, Fr. Favali, Bobby dela Paz, Ninoy Aquino, and many other modern-day martyrs, were killed in cold-blood, the dastradliness of the act moved people to fight for what is just and right. The belief that one is fighting for something higher than oneself made people oblivious to the dangers they were facing. And defending the sacredness and dignity of life was regarded as the highest of all goods.

Now, we see people being mugged in the street and we just look, not wanting to get involved. We witness a crime but we look away. A person gets killed in cold blood, right before our eyes, and we deign innocence.

Sad. Really sad.

Below is the statement issued by the Phil. Action Network on Small Arms (PhilANSA) as regards the Nov. 10 University of the Philippine's armed incident.


The boldness of the action of the perpetrators in the UP heist last Nov. 10 sent chills to a number of people, especially students of nearby universities and residents of Quezon City. Not only did it happen in broad daylight, it also took place in a university, a supposed haven for scholarship and morals. Three men died – abruptly ending lives, and inflicting insurmountable pain on the families they have left behind.

This incident is but one of the hundreds, if not thousands, of similar events involving illegal guns that are happening everyday. Hundreds more will happen in the advent of the holiday season particularly because of the global economic crunch and joblessness. Statistics and logic tell us that there is a direct correlation between economic insecurity and crime incidence.

Gun proliferation is a big concern in the country, but few of us take notice. Criminal syndicates and other lawless elements are prevalent because they can easily access guns in various ways imagined. With guns proliferating in society, more people are killed in street crimes and thefts than armed conflicts. Its misuse kills an average of one thousand people a day (globally).

It’s about time that our lawmakers seriously look into the problem of arms proliferation and misuse. Current government programs addressing gun proliferation, such as gun amnesty, balik-baril, and checkpoints, maybe necessary but are insufficient responses to the enormity of the problem. An uncorrupted police and justice system that truthfully track down criminal elements, a law imposing stricter measures on arms/ gun possession, and a socio-economic program that provide basic services to the poorest of the poor can help mitigate the problems of criminality.

Philippine Action Network on Small Arms (PhilANSA)
11 Nov 2008