We need stricter rules on guns and uniforms

NOBODY’S SAFE?: Who is the parent whose heart will not bleed for the innocent kids of Negros congressman Jules Ledesma who were kidnapped on their way to school the other day on a busy street in San Juan?

Whether it was ransom or some other reason behind the kidnapping of Cristina Julieta Victoria, 10, and Julio Carlos Tomas, 5, the crime was an affront not only to the sensibilities of the community but was also a defiance of government.

Just a few days ago, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo proudly announced that the end was near for big-time kidnappers. Now this.

If the children of top officials and of wealthy families who can afford security details can be kidnapped with impunity, who is safe?

* * *

RULES ON GUNS, TOGS: Witnesses said they thought the gangsters who accosted the vehicle bearing the children and sprayed it (and nearby buildings) with gunfire were policemen. That initial confusion added to the difficulty of reacting properly to the situation.

With the recurring involvement of military and police types in kidnapping, bank robbery and similar gun-related major crimes, we reiterate some suggestions we have made before.

Anybody who openly carries a gun must be presumed to be a soldier, a policeman or a licensed private guard. But he must be (1) on official mission and (2) in proper uniform.

Anyone not in uniform who is seen toting or brandishing a gun will be presumed to be an outlaw and may be shot outright if he resists arrest. The uniform for on-duty private guards must be starkly different from those of the military and the police.

Government agents on mission but not in uniform, such as NBI and AFP intelligence agents, must not draw their concealed weapons until needed. They must train themselves for this rule.

Civilians (those who are neither military, police or uniformed guards) who have permits to carry firearms outside residence must not display the weapons so as not to be mistaken for persons impersonating soldiers, policemen, licensed guards or government agents.

The licensed weapons of these civilians with permits to carry are to be taken out, drawn or displayed only when extremely needed under situations that will be defined in administrative orders.

Nobody who is not military, police or an on-duty guard will be allowed to wear the restricted uniforms or any facsimile thereof. The uniforms of military/police trainees (including ROTC), security guards, and the like must be redesigned so as not to be mistaken for military/police uniforms.

The cloth used for military and police uniforms may not be produced, bought/sold and tailored except for authorized military or police use.

Wearing restricted uniforms when not on duty or when not authorized must be penalized severely.

The basic idea behind all this is that when we see somebody toting a gun, we should be able to determine immediately if he is a soldier, a policeman, an on-duty agent, a licensed guard or an impersonator who must be acting with criminal intent.

In the case of the Ledesma kidnapping, witnesses and lawmen who happened to be there would have been able to react with dispatch if there was no confusion as to the status of the gunmen.

* * *

MALAYSIANS ARE SMARTER: We’re tempted to conclude that Malaysian officials are smarter than their Filipino counterparts. Imagine Defense Secretary Angelo Reyes being sucked with eyes open into a trap laid out for him in Kuala Lumpur days ago.

Joint statements, like that one Reyes issued with his Malaysian opposite number Najib Tun Razak during his visit in Kuala Lumpur, sometimes have tricky nuances that bind the parties in subtle ways.

For instance, in the Reyes-Najib joint statement, the two parties said, "Malaysia and the Philippines would like to see that the issue (of deportation of Filipinos) should not be sensationalized to the extent that it would jeopardize the existing good relationship between both countries."

"There is this issue of the deportees, and so we felt that this is as good as any time to visit," Reyes told reporters after holding talks with Najib.

If the Agence France Presse report on the matter is correct, we think it was careless of Reyes to have used the term "deportees" and "deportation" and thereby implied admission of the fact of deportation.

* * *

EVERYBODY’S DOORMAT: The Philippine should not accept the official act of deportation, which is the sending back of foreigners to their country of origin. Now if Sabah, as we claim, is Philippine territory, there could not have been deportation.

There are many terms in the dictionary that could have substituted for "deportation." Reyes should have had the sense, or at least the vocabulary, to look for another word to use both in his remarks to media and his joint statement with Najib.

* * *

ePOSTSCRIPT: You can read Postscript in advance, even before it sees print, simply by going to our personal website http://www.manilamail.com. While at our ManilaMail.com site, you can also peruse back issues of our column and review past discussions on certain subjects. E-mail can be sent to us at [email protected] and [email protected].