Proposals to extend the gun ban is a danger to our freedom

Those keeping an eye on the Philippine news would probably have noticed regular reports about the rising tally of gun ban arrests. Encouraged by its apparent success, the Chief of PNP is pushing to have it made permanent. Of course, he is also doing this because of the 'overwhelming clamor' from the people for more gun control.

This is propaganda. The facts do not support his claims. I know because I started a project to create an independent database of violent crime incidents during the gun ban. So far, volunteers have recorded over 300 injuries and 440 fatalities due to violent crime between January and May 2010. The ban did not help any of these victims.

Lies, damn lies and ERVIs

Of course, statistics are easily manipulated to fit any point-of-view. The problem with the official figures are that only election-related violence incidents (ERVIs) are counted. That does not take into account what happens to over-all violent crime during the gun ban period. Also, since the country does not live under a permanent state of election fever, there is no reason why ERVIs should be used as a metric to decide a permanent ban.

The proposal to extend the ban comes after series of sudden moves to tighten firearms controls. As usual, the public is supposed to believe that these steps are all geared to make us safer. But why is the PNP feeding us with information that is blatantly wrong? Some of us pro-firearms and liberty-minded people see this trend as somewhat suspicious.

The authoritarian nature of anti-gun

In light of all this, the pro-gun groups are now up in arms. (Figuratively, of course.) They are now getting organized and starting their opposition by releasing to the media their statements against the ban. The situation took a malevolent turn on 27 May with an article published in the Manila Bulletin.

The Chief of PNP is quoted as saying, "There now appears to be some sectors that do not want a gun ban [so] maybe let's check the background of these sectors or these individuals that are giving unnecessary comments."

This simple statement should send alarm bells ringing. Background check? Unnecessary comments? The threat is plain enough for anyone but the most naive. It is a phrase that evokes not-quite-buried memories of dictatorship and political repression. Why should anyone peacefully protesting undergo a background check? Is freedom of speech in the Philippines to be regarded as 'unnecessary comments'? I'm afraid that in one statement, our Chief of Police has shown his true authoritarian nature.

We should always be wary when our leaders start taking away the ability to defend ourselves. The true motives rarely correspond with their outward claims. Firearms control is the biggest but most insidious threat to freedom in our country. History provides us with a consistent lesson: people control and firearms control always go hand-in-hand. Always.