Monday, October 8, 2007


IT IS ONCE said in the 19th century: that the gunpowder is the devil's most destructive invention ever and that guns were the offspring of this vile instrument of death. Ever since Samuel Colt created and mass-produced the first sophisticated weapon in the world in 1860, there had been far more many mortalities of humans and animals alike in a short span of roughly a hundred and fifty years when modern guns, cannons, bombs and similar contraptions were used than those that happened in and around 2,000 years of human aggression history. It tamed the wild West, participated in two world wars and aided in numerous pockets of conflict and ethnic cleansing.

Surely, you wouldn't feel secure having people around you toting guns, would you? And, conversely, you do feel secure having a gun with you, don't you?. What for? Protection? Or empowerment of your ego? Human nature, whether we like it or not, are prone to fits of aggression and that impulsive behavior associated with the greed for more power, territory and domination.

Guns are a commodity which everyone has access to nowadays provided you have the moolah to procure one. In the process, every one individual is assumed to own a gun, legit or not, it doesn't matter at all how they use it for their own benefit or ends.
Society has never been so unsafe as before and the authorities, with prodding from middlemen and from gun lobbyists, have tolerated the proliferation of controlled and loose firearms in the guise of the constitutional “right to bear arms” (as if we lived in a medieval age) and for profit. Big profits, of course!

You don't need special skills now how to blow away to smithereens your perceived enemy. Hide behind a corner, just close one eye and squeeze the trigger. Effortless. Clean. Masterful. Forget the sound effects and ignore the stench of burnt cordite. It comes with the package. If you miss once, you have five or more chances and, surely, your prey could not outrun the ballistics you let loose at 400 feet per second? You liked it the first time and you crave for more. More blood, that is. Go make an enemy of your wife, your mother-in-law or your school teacher or whomever you think is a threat. Choose your targets well. Master your firing position. I just could not imagine, in the end, your bullet will come back full circle at you as you take aim at your own mouth in a fit of self-annihilation. Well, it happened at Columbine High. At Virginia Tech. In the Middle East, they do it much grander and with more public participation. By dying as “martyrs” with bombs strapped to them.

Legitimate gun owners have been carping about gun ethics and responsible ownership. Rubbish. Ethics apply only to them as they see fit that benefited them – as a tool to skip around gun-control laws. I don't see any reason perfecting your craft for years just by shooting at cardboard targets that don't shoot back. Obviously, behind that hobby, as a pistol-shooting enthusiast, is a primeval instinct of aggression that is veiled and unharnessed yet, but, in due time, as opportunity would permit, would use that honed skill against a hostile adversary in a traffic snarl or against an unwelcome intruder of property or home. The urge for the first kill is first and foremost of every gun holder's mind.

Firearms or guns, if by chance be allowed of use to, should be limited only to those who composed the tactical units of the police and the military and should be strictly monitored and accounted for. Not only that, they should pass regular and strict neuro-psychiatric tests and other behavioral evaluations. In this way, it is understood that these individuals are highly-trained and competent in the use of guns and its derivatives and, therefore, will give the assurance that they are fit to carry weapons.

Private individuals who opted to pursue the privilege of possessing licensed firearms should be screened tightly and strictly, limited to possess only short firearms of a firepower not exceeding caliber .32 (Magnum .22 is not included) and inside residences only for a period of one (1) year. He or she has the option to re-apply. The permit to carry guns outside residence should be discouraged and rebuked.

Criteria for issuance of gun permits should be evaluated to the following: threats to life, retired military or police personnel, personal or VIP security personnel, corporate and bank security, local executives tasked to enforce the laws and to those persons who administer areas or territories which have no assigned police or military personnel. Special transit permits is accorded to those who comprise the national shooting team and legitimate gun club members.

It is important to note that private vehicles should not be made as an extension of one's home which many gun holders have found it convenient as loopholes against gun control statutes. Collection of guns as a hobby should be considered unlawful despite being defanged of firing pins and other mechanisms and it is not advisable either to display guns in a museum or the like for it promotes a culture of violence. Ditto with staging of gun shows.

Bearing firearms is not a right but a privilege that can be stripped of anytime.

It is interesting to note that here in the Philippines, one man has the courage to advocate for a Gunless Society despite the sheer number of oppositors and the threats he received while waging this unpopular campaign. He is Nandy Pacheco. I never met him but I heard of him. I only lent and add my voice to his, hoping some of us can make a difference with the advocacy of a gunless society in this gun-crazy country.

And lastly, “There's no honor killing people using guns. It's a cowardly thing.” (from the movie, The Hunted).

Document done in OpenOffice 2.1 Writer, Trebuchet MS font, size 12.


Nighthawk said...

The recent drive-by shooting at the different areas of Cebu City (V. Gullas St., Sanciangco St., Uytengsu St. and Ascension St.) last October 4, 2007 perpetrated by 2 killers riding tandem in motorcycles which resulted to the deaths of Engr Laurence Morados (44), William John Aznar (24) and Lord Stephen Vasquez (18) which also maimed 5 others should remind our authorities that our gun laws are weak and anybody could simply acquire a gun without difficulty. A war of attrition happens also between the Alpha Kappa Rho and the Tau Gamma Phi that snuffed out almost a hundred young lives of their respective members. You add the 184 extra-judicial killings of people who have criminal records which vigilantes have collected murdered and you have an equation of loose firearms in sheer volume and branding Cebu City as the new murder capital of the Philippines. It is time to repeal RA 8294 which only prescribes penalties in difference to the calibers of guns and gave some loopholes to circumvent around PD 1866. It's time to amend PD 1866 by increasing the penalties to 20 years or more irregardless of the caliber.


Your Dream for a gunless society shall never die. The Achilles of this advocacy is now born.

Anonymous said...

I bought my first firearm when I was already 30 years old. It was after much thought, research, and yes, prayer. I wanted to pursue Practical Shooting as a sport. I spent countless hours of training in gun safety. I agree that gun ownership is too lenient in this country. More stringent rules and procedures should on gun ownership should be established. I am also in the belief that only legitimate security forces be allowed to carry their firearms in public. As a competitive shooter I fail to see the difference between Practical shooting and archery, fencing, kendo, javelin throw, yes even martial arts as sports. All of these Olympic events trace their origins as tools of war and destruction. Do they still have the same notoriety today as they did 200 years ago? I am against every juan and pedro owning a firearm just for the sake of it. But there are some of us believe it or not that enjoy practical shooting as a sport. I dread the day when I have to fire my firearm to take another human life. I never carry my firearm outside of my residence unless I have a legitimate match sanctioned by the recognized NSA. I welcome regulation if it means ensuring that only persons of sound mind and body be allowed to own them. If it means that only persons who enjoy the sport and who are active competitors be allowed to own them. But if you are suggesting that we should ban everybody from owning firearms just because of its violent nature, then I suggest you also ban martial arts, archery, and stop watching Pacquiao matches. They're violent in nature right? We can go all day at this but it's hard to make people understand when they don't want to listen to you in the first place. Learn to listen first instead of immediately dismissing dissenting opinions as rubbish. You cannot expect to win an argument if you go about it blindly without researching and understanding the opposing side first.

Oh and lastly, you might want to think about quoting that particular line in a movie.

“There's no honor killing people using guns. It's a cowardly thing.” (from the movie, The Hunted).

I saw that movie. The main antagonist said it because he preferred killing and gutting people with knives instead of guns not because he was against violence.

PinoyApache said...

I prefer there should be a total ban except those that are already enumerated which you are already part of being a member of a shooting club.

About that quote from the movie, The Hunted; at least, with knives, you could do it close and personal.

Anonymous said...

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion/s, I have read yours and find this too simplistic and gather sometime in your life you have been the subject of a firearm related incident. This is shown in your last reply stating you would rather kill someone with a knife rather than use a gun because as you said "you could do it close and personal.". I defintely would be concerned giving you a knife much more a gun after making such comment. Obviously you have some sort of hatred towards guns or people who have guns. I'll logically explain why I believe your suggestion to a solution will create more of a problem.

If you put into a place a law that totally bans firearms, the only guns in circulation then will be loose/illegal. Only law abiding citizens follow the law thus only people who do not obey the laws will have guns. All gun control does is take away guns from the good guys. The saying "If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns" is somewhat old and overused but still remains because this is what really will happen when a total gun ban is in place and legal, responposible law abiding gun owners know this.

Taking guns away from good people, law abiding and God fearing citizens will not solve our country's peace and order situation as anti gun groups and some sectors of the PNP and politicians would lead us to believe, it will make it worse. Proper and visible law enforcement is the answer.

The Chief PNP recently said he is considering extending the gun ban because the Comelec ban has reduced criminality and killings during the election period. I do not know where his stats came from because I do read the papers. Giving him the benefit of the doubt that this is correct, criminal elements know that random checkpoints are in place thus they think twice before perpetrating their evil deeds during the election gunban. Some will still take the chance because they know their law abiding preys will most likely be unable to protect themselves because of the gunban. Even General Versoza the Cheif PNP himself knows that most of firearm related crimes are committed by illegal guns.

Here is a quote from this article
"The PNP records indicate that almost all guns used in crime are unlicensed, Versoza said, adding that similar crime data revealed a ratio of only one licensed gun for every 1,000 guns involved in crime."Based on this data a lot more people are killed by undisciplined and errant bus drivers (excluding all other errant drivers) annually but why is there so much hoopla about disarming licensed firearm holders?

Continuing to monitor checkpoints and coordinate operations to apprehend criminals and also the apprehension of illegal firearm holders, importers, dealers and manufacturers is the answer. Implementing a total gunban is not.

We have exercised our freedom of speech, the freedom to express our views and opinions in this blog and we are blessed to have this right. However there is one right that is most important and supercedes all our other rights. This is the right to live, the right to protect myself and my loved ones from anyone or anything taking this from us. This is the most basic HUMAN RIGHT of all and the most unconstitutional thing any government or individual can do to us as a human being is to take this right away from us.

However if you still feel strongly about living someplace where there is a total gunban, You can move yourself and/or your family to Maguindanao. There has been a gunban there in place since late November 2009.

PinoyApache said...

You too are entitled to your own opinions and I respect that very much and thank you for taking the time to visit and read and make comment. I appreciate it very much.

No I am not in a trauma about guns. In fact, I am professionally trained in handling & using guns but I prefer not to own one. I find no reason in it.

As I explained beforehand, it is okay to own a gun as long as it fall on the merits enumerated above. But mine is just a suggestion. It's not the end of the world for you or your kind.

You're right, the number one taker of life are vehicular accidents but it is done unintentionally except for a very few rare cases. With guns, the intent to kill is there and so made up the bulk of crime statistics.

I am alright with my present residence. It is a tough neighborhood comparable to Maguindanao (minus the Ampatuans though) only we settle scores here with fistfights.

Just read and don't take it personally. It's just an opinion, right? I am hoping I get to enjoy that freedom of speech and to dream dreams. Let's just be friends and leave this issue to the dustbin. Thank you again and God bless!

Fredrick said...

Good day.

We respect your preference not to own a firearm. We just hope to gain the same respect from people like you.

We have so many laws already regarding firearms and they're more than sufficient. We do not need another restriction on this matter.

"corruptisima re publica plurimae leges"

It's good that from where you come from, people fight fare: "mano-o-mano". In my four decades of existence, I have only fought fair fistfights on the mat or the ring. The closest thing I ever had to a fair fistfight in real life is when I was mugged by six people. I still managed to survive without a scratch but that isn't too fair, is it? Most of the time I had to face it off with knife wielding assailants and several time with gun totting attackers (all carrying UNLICENSED firearms). Thank God I survived those too. I would have agreed with you when I was young, fit, and single but now that I have my own family, a dangerous and demanding career, I need an equalizer to promote life-preservation. I need to protect myself and my family. This I believe is shared by many of my brothers.

Please allow me also to comment on your remark regarding blades or knives. I am sure you are aware that 99% of progun are also into knives and blades. In fact, many are just like you either in training or by profession. However, as much we want to bring knives instead of guns, we cannot do so as it it against the law. It is a misconception that blades longer than 3 inches are allowed: ALL blades are illegal (unless used as part of profession). Since very few of us are chefs or butchers, and being the law abiding citizens that we are, we have no choice but to carry licensed firearms. When time comes that we are again allowed to carry daggers, swords, and axes, rest assured I'd be the first one to leave my firearm at home and bring my karambit with me.

We understand where people like you (anti-gun) are coming from and we respect that. What we don't understand is the need to lobby for total gun ban? Why not lobby for a less corrupt government and LEO to go after the illegal arms and bad elements? It is your (gunless society) choice to stay away from firearms as it is ours (progun) to live with it. Let's just give each other mutual trust and respect. Live and let be.

Thank you very much for allowing me to post a comment on your blog.

SPARC179 said...

Think of it in these simple ways:

When our government, such as it is right now, is able to protect me and my family effectively and consistently from lawless criminals and drug addicts who more often than not are carrying ILLEGAL weapons,then I will start leaving my pistol at home.

And reflect on this, if your home is invaded by a group of bad guys intent on doing you and your family harm, rape your wife/girlfriend/daughter/niece, steal or destroy all your expensive possessions and your only recourse is to use a gun to stop them, wouldn't you? Or would you rather try to 'talk them out of it' by asking them nicely to leave? Would you call the police knowing that it will take them at the very least 30 minutes to reach your home, hoping in vain they will save you and your family?

Banning and severely limiting the legal use of firearms will only make people go underground with their weapons since the fear from criminal activity will always remain. Hence, even more firearms will become unlicensed. The problem then becomes bigger rather than the opposite. More illegal guns will become unregulated.

Just some thoughts to ponder.

Thanks for your time and space on your blog.

PinoyApache said...

Once upon a time I cast my lot with guns and it came to a point that I could not live forever with a gun at my side anymore and that took considerable restraint and control over fear and uncertainty plus infinite hours of re-inventing myself to where I am now.

In every grave situation there is always a small margin of success. But some people relish under that route and able to reverse the pressure or situation to his advantage. It is a route taken by just only a few and it takes skill, wit and cunning and speed. I have done that long ago with a gun and I believe I could still do that without. I now know how.

Thank you SPARC for making me sentimental.

PinoyApache said...

You might think I grew up with dolls. Is that a joke? You guys gang up on me in your forum and I enjoyed it. Hehehe...

BTW I could raise your adrenaline with my article here:

Anonymous said...

Good day.

Would you mind sharing why and how you have been able to wean yourself away from guns? It looks to me that you were once a gunowner who once shared the sentiments of many pro-gun people but has made a 180 degree turn.

Your experience will probably help other people decide if carrying guns is really for them.


PinoyApache said...

Thank you for visiting.

Actually, it was a personal decision and I cannot consider myself an instant expert regarding that. I blame all that to the everyday news of tabloids and newspapers.

sandman said...

If a total gun ban is really an effective solution, then the politicians, PSG,PNP,NBI, BJMP and the military should also be prohibited from carrying firearms, whether or not they are in complete uniform and on duty. No one but no one should be exempted. If it is truly effective, then what would they need their guns for? Right? I thought so.

Arms Down Philippines! said...

Hi! I'm Rhoda from Youth for a United World (FOCOLARE).. we are currenly promoting a worldwide campaign on peace .. it's called ARMS DOWN!
It was started by Religions for Peace International (WCRP New York), he world’s largest multi-religious organization, aims at gathering 50 million signatures worldwide by calling on the world’s religious believers and all people of good will to participate in the lobby campaign to be submitted to the United Nations General Assembly by October of this year to pass resolutions on the following:
1.Abolish nuclear weapons.
2.Stop the proliferation and misuse of conventional weapons.
3.Redirect 10% of military expenditure to achieve the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015.

We want to ask your support for campaigning for this since you are an advocate of a gunless society :)

For more information .. pls visit :

You can also email me at for some campaign materials.
Thank you and more power!

SABER said...

Well I respect your opinion, but i honestly believe that even if you ban all guns , youll just be taking away the means of law abiding citizens to defend themselves. and the criminals? Heck, they wont care about the laws you'll advocate and enforce, cause theyre criminals anyway! You know what , i think the criminals would be most supportive of a gunless society, think about it keep the streets safe for crooks and criminals , give them a safe working environment by rendering yourselves (law abiding citizens) defenseless.

So i guess we should ban all cooking knives(all knives for that matter) , Cars(hey they can be used to hit and run over people) , planes (They can be used as missiles), and heck Pillows (yes pillows , ban them all especially the soft and fluffy ones ) , since all these things can be used to commit murder right?

My point is : a Gun is a tool and nothing more , it can be used to do good or bad . Dont hate the gun , hate the criminal who uses the gun for bad and evil things.

I would rather be a gunpowder advocate, than be an innocent victim and a statistic .

Thank you and have a pleasant day .

Wacky Gochoco said...

I'm sorry but I fail to follow your logic of removing firearms from citizens but allowing private security to bear arms. That leaves the average person, who does not have the resources to support close in personal security, in the wind. Would I want to have a gun if I felt safe? Probably not. I chose to purchase a firearm and go through the lengthy and expensive process of getting a permit to carry it to protect myself and my family. I am a father and a husband. It is my responsibility to my family to get home alive and keep them safe.

Also, about the "honor" of killing with a gun? I'm sorry but I would have to disagree sir. There is no honor in combat, there is no such thing as a fair fight. While I respect your point of view, mine is simple. Win at any cost. If that means i have to shoot a home invader in the back, I will not feel the least bit of remorse because I know that any chances I take with him may result in the death of my family and myself. It is a reality that we face and have to live with.

Lastly, there's alot of talk that guns kill people. So do motorvehicles, maybe we should work on banning those too.

I hope that someday things work out so we won't need to go through all these measures to protect ourselves. In the meanwhile, I will do everything my power to ensure the safety of my family, myslef, and my loved ones.

PinoyApache said...

I'm sorry too, Wacky Gochoco. I, too, am a family man. I am a former cop and I'm expecting future visits of those whom I put in cages long time ago and that includes their ilk - their relatives. You know what? They are many! But I don't use guns against these perceived threats even if I have skills to match it. I prefer traditional weapons and my cunning to subdue any adversary. Does that mean I am the better man with one having a gun?

John Tan said...

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to even bother discussing anything with you sir. You come up with this Gunless Society thing while at the same time you have photographs of yourselves practicing with firearms all over this site and in your Facebook. Your blog is all about self promotion and how awesome you THINK you are. What does this say about your credibility, and this "honor" thing that you seem to have a fetish with?

PinoyApache said...

This article was written in 2007 when I read and hear Filipinos killing each other with guns. Guns made all dastardly things possible and we all know that.

Okey, present time. By the time the Chinese knocked on our shoals, I feel it is right that I shed this advocacy for a while to teach every Filipino how to shoot a gun. Your last name sounds Chinese.