‘The reason many are opposed to Duterte’s right-to-bear-arms proposal is that they think — and with good reason — that the President’s model is to replicate Davao’s Alsa Masa of the 1980s, which is totally abhorrent.’
ON his first week in office, President Rodrigo Duterte already spelled out his plan to utilize civilians in the fight against drug dealers in their communities. This idea, touchy and concerning on its face, has been given considerable importance by the President. Proof is that nearing the end of his term, Duterte still toys with the idea of arming civilians to help the police in fighting criminals.
Civilian volunteers who fight crime should be given firearms, Duterte said at the launch of the Global Coalition of Lingkod Bayan Advocacy Support Groups and Force Multipliers in Camp Crame, Quezon City.
Police Gen. Guillermo Eleazar, PNP chief, supported the suggestion, saying civilians are “partners of the police in fighting crime.” Anticipating where the wave of criticism would flow, Eleazar immediately clarified that the proposed measure was only a means “to encourage volunteerism and definitely not vigilantism.”
“The suggestion made was aimed at ensuring their own protection, but with an assurance that they will undergo the rules and procedures for civilians to possess and carry firearms,” Eleazar said.
He added that civilians will be made to secure a License to Own and Possess Firearms, firearms license, and the Permit to Carry Firearms Outside Residence, all of which are requirements before a civilian can own a firearm.
Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, however, provided a more reasonable position on the issue, affirming that the government does not need to arm civilian volunteers to fight crime. Guevarra said he believes that the PNP is strong enough to perform this duty, adding that except for a few high-profile incidents of violence, criminality in the streets is at an all-time low, due in part to the pandemic.
“Civilians have always been free to arm themselves for their protection, provided they comply with all existing laws and regulations on the ownership, possession, and carrying of firearms outside residence, including the requirement to pass a neuro-psychiatric test,” Guevarra said.
The right to bear arms in the context of establishing a militia to defend the state is provided for in the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, and is a policy officially adopted by the constitutions of many states. It is a valid and lofty idea if implemented in this context.
The reason many are opposed to Duterte’s right-to-bear-arms proposal is that they think — and with good reason — that the President’s model is to replicate Davao’s Alsa Masa of the 1980s, which is totally abhorrent.
