I have never suspected Sen. Gringo Honasan of intelligence. After reading the story below I’m sure any and all suspicions you may have had that he has any brains will vanish forever.
- Honasan: Phl not ready for a ‘gunless society’
By Perseus Echeminada (The Philippine Star) Updated January 30, 2011 12:00 AM Comments (24)
MANILA, Philippines – Sen. Gregorio Honasan yesterday said the Philippines is not yet ready to be a “gunless society” because the government is still unable to ensure the safety of the citizens from lawless elements. “A gunless society can only exist if the government can protect the citizens,” he said in a news forum in Quezon City.
Honasan, chairman of the Senate committee on public order and illegal drugs, said law and order in the country has deteriorated to a point where there is confusion on who should be in charge of the rising criminality.
“Who is in charge? The Department of National Defense, the Philippine National Police?” he said. A bus was recently bombed in Makati City, killing five and wounding several others. Two car traders were also recently killed. Honasan also said law enforcement agencies merely react to terror attacks and high-profile crimes instead of preventing them. Because of this, he said, calls for a total gun ban and the revival of the death penalty will not deter criminal and terror activities in the country.
“A gunless society can only exist if the government can protect the citizens.” That’s the premise, right? Okay, so let’s everybody run around with a gun.
Do we have to walk the senator through what happens when everybody out there is armed? Do we have to rub his nose in the blood?
Would you feel safer if the person next to you has the same type of gun? Of course not. That’s why the senator’s suggestion guarantees an arms race for the most lethal portable gun. How long does Honasan think it will take before someone upgrades his 9mm handgun to a submachine gun and that to a rocket launcher and so on if everybody has the same type of gun?
Okay you can keep a gun at home and you can use it to shoot intruders, your relatives, your spouse, your children, or yourself and any of them can use it on you, accidentally or on purpose. What you do inside your home is none of my business unless we are neighbors and your bullets rip through my walls. But to carry a gun out on the streets and bring it to work and to the playground just because you might run into armed thugs? By the way, one of the victims of those carjackers had a gun. What good did that do him?
There will still be criminals if there were no guns but the thing is ‘no-gun’ criminals will have to do their work within arm’s reach of their victims. They cannot commit bodily harm from a “safe” distance so, gunless, they risk being overpowered by their target.
Of course, someone like Honasan will argue that that’s why everybody should have a gun. But a shoot-out is not the same as a tussle, innocent bystanders do not get hit by stray slashes. So why give criminals the means to commit crime from a safe distance?
Let he who wants to do bodily harm to another do it with his hands, a bladed weapon, or a bludgeon at least he will get some exercise.