This article came from a Newspaper active in promoting permanent Gun Ban. Manila Bulletin Metro Corner: Banning the gun ban By ERIK ESPINA "When a people is gagged; when its dignity, honor, and all its liberties are trampled; when it no longer has any legal recourse against the tyranny of its oppressors; when its complaints, petitions, and groans are not attended to; when it is not permitted even to weep; when even the last hope is wrested from its heart, then! then! then! it has left no other remedy but to take down with delirious hand from the infernal altars the bloody and suicidal dagger of revolution! Jose Rizal The genesis of our nationhood was guarded by the sword; flame hardened tips of bamboo poles; & even mini-canons, wielded & crafted by our warrior nature, in defense of native liberties and the markings of a burgeoning civilization. Each century written in epic struggles validated in numerous uprisings & martyrs, to protect, initially, communal territories against those who would make of tribal-doms along rivers and in distant islands, reduced subjects, under one territory to a foreign crown. Under three invasions experienced under Colonial Spain, the United States and Imperial Japan, above Jose Rizal quote for blood & revolution is the highest edification for patriotism. For purposes of our discussion, the question that needs posing is -- should an Indio, voluntarily surrender his sword or his weapon, in obeisance to an edict of an occupying enemy? Must a native not bear arms, when he has the means, because of horrid Rizalian conditions described? The answer is obvious under said clear cut conditions of foreign tyranny & oppression. What of extending the question, to a domestic government? How must the citizen of the Republic respond to e.g. another Martial Law or Dictatorship ordering legal gun holders to surrender their firearms? Even under the pretext of safe-keeping? If history is our basis, was not such an order from authorities, nothing more, than actually disarming the civilian population for fear the indio, the native had by historical precedent, the inherent natural/political right to defend his liberties? His community? To revolt in just cause by arms, whether against foreign or home grown tyrants and oppressors? In such authoritarian atmosphere, is not a true patriot one who is ready to defend his people against such a government? As an aside, what happened to thousands of firearms surrendered to the Philippine Constabulary during Martial Law? Should not an inventory or Fact Finding Board determine the question? Must somebody be held accountable for the loss and destruction of private property? Or do we move on & close the books? Of recent, reports to maintain a permanent gun ban for reasons crime has significantly gone down is totally misplaced logic. Law abiding citizens carrying firearms are not the first perpetrators of crime. The good news of declining criminality is not due to the current gun ban imposed by Comelec, but the efficacy of check points. Ergo, maintain the latter even after the election period particularly in drug prone cities & rebel areas; maritime patrols in sea ports; Operation Bakal in bars etc. But to disallow civilians to protect their lives (those under threat) is suspicious particularly after a first automated election; it is & foolish e.g. provide security, given the insufficiency of the police force, visibility, response time, etc. This is a diminished appreciation of the problem, by exacerbating it, placing good people already at risk further in danger. Only rebels & criminals will be free at every opportunity under this mind set. Ban the gun ban!