Thursday, January 24, 2013
Philippines, exempt from ANPP
Monday, January 21, 2013
"Marriage" a term not for gays and lesbians
Friday, January 18, 2013
The nine types of voters
Last update: 3/21/2010
This document has three parts: (1) The Nine Types of Voters, (2) My Ultimate Guide for Voters, and (3) 2010 Presidential Candidates Pros and Cons.
This article is updated and improved from time to time to accomplish its objective of educating voters. I wrote the original document in November 2009 with a title 7 Types of Voters. In December 2010, it became a 8 Types of Voters. In January 2010, it became 9 Types of Voters.
If you have reaction, there is a Comment button below, right after the article. All reaction will be moderated. Comments that advertise a product or promote a political candidate will be filtered.
Introduction
Others choose a candidate first before they build on supports advocacies. I am different. I define first the judgement parameters and voting guides, then gather relevant feedback about each candidate as the campaign goes on and gradually associate them with the parameters, then compare all candidates with a table of impartial and tell-all Pros and Cons analysis.
I. THE NINE TYPES OF VOTERS
1. Band Wagon Follower
During politrical campaign periods, revenues of TV/Radio Stations skyrocket. As the client demands quantifiable result of effective political advertising, surveys just come out from everywhere like mushroom.
The campaign managers pay a lot of money to launch surveys because it is very effective in influencing the decision pattern of Filipinos. Marami kasing mga Pilipino na sumusunod sa band wagon, lalo na ang mga elitely-educated and fashinista sectors na gusto palaging "in sa uso" at feeling nila kapag-hindi sila sumunod sa survey result eh anti-majority and anti-democracy na sila.
Bihira lang ang Pilipinong may genuine na pang-sariling preference na na-coconvert into actual voting decision. Matatalinong sunod-sunoran bah -- ganyan ang producto ng elite-type education system sa Pilipinas.
Maraming ring botante na ang binoboto lang ay ang mga "kakilala" at "naalala". Dyan naglalaro ang kahalagahan ng political advertising. Ang TV Ads, Radio Ads, Posters, Tarpaulins ang pinaka mabisang makinarya na nakapag-bibigay ng band-wagon effect. Pwede rin ang mga color-coded campaign and ribbons, grabe din mag-resulta yan sa band-wagon.
Ang mga TV at Radio Stations ay hindi pwedeng sisihin -- naghahanapbuhay lang ang mga yan sa advertising. Kahit na magaling ang kandidato, kapag walang pera, eh wala ring pang TV/Radio Ad -- siguradong talo kapag wla etong alam na alternative guerilla type campaign. Diyan pumapasok ang mga demonyong ma-impluensyang tao na bumubuhos ng pera para sa kandidato -- of course may kapalit yang campaign contribution na yan kapag manalo ang kandidato.
2. Winnable Gamble
Ang mga sugarol naman, karamihan sa kanila, sanay mag-basa ng prediction sheet ng Karera ng Kabayo o Masiao. Normally, binoboto nila ang "winnable" o yon bang most probable na manalo para makaramdam naman ng sarap ng panalo. Mga losers kasi ang mga klaseng taong eto na bihira lang makaramdam ng panalo sa sugal at sa ganun din sa buhay. Kaya etong vulnerability na eto, pinupunterya eto at tini-take-advantage ng mga campaign strategists.
In surveys, they normally design the questions in such a way that the result will most probably be advantageous to the client. Ang malala, konti lang talaga ang sampling nyan, kaya hindi reliable. Pero effective talaga ang survey mag-create ng band wagon effect and gambling-win effect.
Eto rin ang mga type of voter na tinatalaban ng bulong ng mga campaign strategist na nagsasabing: "kapag binoto mo hindi winnable, SAYANG ang boto mo".
3. Vote Seller
Usong-uso ang vote selling and vote buying sa mahihirap na population.
This kind of voter accepts money from vote buyers. There are vote sellers who actually vote for the candidate who pays.
There are also some who just accept the money but will not actually vote the candidate who paid him/her. Political swindling/estafa ang tawag ko nito, ang ibang term ay "tablador". Sa dahilang eto, maraming napapatay na botante (of course pinatay ng private army ng politico). Marami ding mga pulitico hindi ang botante ang binabayaran kundi ang mga goons na nagha-hari-harian sa lugar.
4. Fearful Voter
There are places in the Philippines that is controlled and politically monopolized by politicians who employ private armies. Most of the voters in that place are required to cast their vote, sinusundo pa ang mga yan, and they are monitored to ensure they will actually vote for the line-up of candidates that is dictated by the powerful local politician.
In some places, the goons of the local politicians are really serious in making effort and putting a system in place to identify the political detractors and those who vote the opponent of their boss. Once the opponent is identified, the goons issues grave threats and even really put the detractors into permanent silence.
5. Group Voter
These are voters who think that their leader's recommendation is the best vote. It is also known as Follow the Leader.
This kind of voters are usually members of religious organizations that preach Religion and Politics in one pulpit. In the Philippines, there is a myth (that has never been busted) that that most popular Group Voter are the Iglesia ni Kristo led by Manalo, the Philippine Benevolent Church led by Ecleo, and the Kingdom of Christ of Quiboloy. Another groups that are going towards this status of group voting are the El Shaddai of Velarde and the Jesus is Lord (cum Bangon Pilipinas political party) of Eddie Villanueva.
Indeed, when TV shows a group leader rub elbows with a political candidate, it will create an impression that the group leader is supporting and endorsing the candidate. The bandwagon impact of this show is high, that is why campaign managers always prioritize activities to ensure that their candidate will have the opportunity to rub elbows with the group leader. But in reality, there is no group that votes in unanimity.
Kasama na rin sa category na eto yong mga annointees ng Administration at mga political parties na kung mag-salita eh akala mo ang magagaling ay yong lahat na nasa ticket lang ng party nila.
So, kung magpapadala ka sa mga "Vote Straight" campaign slogans na mga eto, eh ikaw ay tinatawag na Group Voter.
6. Selfish-Associate Type Voter
A selfish-Associate type of voter is someone who personally benefits from the politician who sits or will sit in power. These are the family members, ka-apelyedo, employees, business associates, contractors, and dependents of the candidate.
An associate type of voter is one who voted for a particular candidate because of his/her experience of shaking the hands to meeting the candidate personally. This is the reason why candidates would like to go to gatherings like conventions, conferences, sorties, weddings, baptismals, birthdays, reunions, church worships, etc. Handshaking the voters is a personal touch technique of campaign that is very effective.
This is the type of voter who is very difficult, if not almost impossible, to persuade to change mind. The reason being is that "Economic Survival" is the very reason of their vote and support.
7. TraPolitiClan Voter
This is a type of voter who buys the campaign slogans that says "the children of a favorite politician are potentially good politicians".
If you look closer at the logic of the slogan, you can find no logic because it really does not follow. The reason being is that the children, more often than not, does not have the motivations their parents had. The parent-politician became good-hearted to the people because they grew up poor and they acquired the wisdom through life's difficulties. Children of politicians, especially those who enriched themselved while in power, have normally grown up in an elite environment far away from the sweat smell of the masses.
Well, based on experience, I can also say that "the children of good politicians will be the ones who will destroy the names of the good politician parent". Very rarely can the Philippines earn a husband/wife heroes. For example, having Noynoy to become President is a double edged sword. It may satisfy our bet for a "possible" good leader following the blood-line theory, but it will also put the names of our two heroes at risk in the hand of one individual Noynoy. If NoyNoy fails our usually high expectations, the names of our two heroes go down with him. Right?
When we as a nation begin to adopt a pattern of voting for a candidate based merely on his family relationship with a political icon, our generation will be giving birth to a very dangerous political landscape.
Example, there is nothing wrong if after you examined all the candidates, you will choose the children of the great politicians. But if you have chosen the children merely because you liked their parents, you might want to rethink your basis and open your mind to look for some possible better alternatives. Perhaps we have forgotten that our nation had chosen Gloria because of Diosdado Macapagal -- and look at what happened.
8. Campaign Volunteer Type
The most vulnerable under this type are the Youth Sector who dream of getting a job with the candidate they are supporting, if he/she wins. Vulnerable also are those who dream to get "government project contracts" with the help of the candidate they will be supporting.
The Campaign Volunteer type is the best target of political campaign managers. Once a candidate gets the heart of this kind of a voter, its a Jackpot.
These are the kinds of voters who are very participative in politics. They volunteer to do campaigns for the candidate in their small ways using social networking in the internet, wearing the candidate's identity t-shirts, color-coded ribbons, slogans, and other campaign paraphernalias.
These are the kinds of voters who will work hard to influence others to follow their preference, start a band wagon, participate in surveys, join a fans club, suggest some political platforms, all for the benefit of the candidate they have chosen. They sometimes answer questions that are personally addressed to the candidate. They also go to the extent of acting like a defense attorney of the candidate.
The disadvantage of this type is that they tend to become "obsessed fanatics" and they close their eyes to the defects of their candidate. These are also the crabby people who are very prominent in political mudslinging activities.
9. The Conscience Voter
This is the ideal, best, excellent, wise, and patriotic voter. I invented the term "Conscience Voter" to elevate to a higher level the old term they used to call wise voter, that came from the slogan vote wisely. A conscience voter is a wise voter plus a patriotic heart that is inclined to the masses.
Ang conscience voter ay naniniwala na ang pag-boboto ay hindi katulad ng pag-taya sa sugal na iboboto mo ang most probable na mananalo. Hindi siya natatakot pumili kung sino gusto nya. Hindi rin siya na-aapektohan ng survey. Mas lalong hindi siya fanatic na naniniwala na ang pastor o pari ay siyang binigyan ng Diyos ng recommending power sa panahon ng political election. Etong klaseng botante na eto ay hindi i-boboto ang kanyang politikong amo kapag may nalalaman siyang kabalbalan ng amo nya.
A conscience vote is a silent voter. It treats voting as "sacred", like a good judge who does not make irresponsible statements, premature comments, and prejudgemental reactions while the case is still on trial before the appropriate time of judgement.
Definitely, a person is not a conscience voter if he/she broadcasts and announces (during the campaign period), or claims something that sounds like this: "I am a conscience voter, I choose to support PresC Juan De la Cruz, you should vote him so that you will become a conscience voter like me". This type is a campaign volunteer type, he/she creates a band-wagon effect which canot be undone.
But take note, no matter what type of voter you are during the campaign period, you still have your last moment in the voting prescinct, during the election moment, to vote based on your conscience.
II. MY ULTIMATE GUIDE FOR VOTERS
1. Vote on Principle
Election serves its best when people vote based on principle, when each voter chooses the one he/she thinks is best for our country. He studies the background, past performance, platform, and political manifesto of each candidate and makes an independent decision on who will he/she vote for. If there are 58 Senatoriables for the 2010 National Elections, then read the profile of each before making a decision. Sa sobrang daming kandidato, series of shortlisting is a must for your convenience -- but PLEASE DO NOT simply follow SURVEYS as your shortlisting short-cut methodology because you will end up becoming a partial band wagon follower type or winnable gamble type.
2. Act Like a Judge
You would be more decent if you will NOT campaign also if you are a VOTER. Please ACT like a JUDGE. Open your eyes and ears and be flexible for change the entire campaign period. The moment you campaign, you can no longer change your choice.
I know one voter who campaigned for a candidate she initially liked. Later on she discovered something dislikeable about the candidate, but she is already in a dilemma because she could not stop campaigning as she is already known as the champion campaigner of the candidate. In the end, she had to "secretly" vote for someone else new during election. She is an epitome of a person who "sacrificed" her principle. The worse hapenned when her candidate she campaigned for won the election because of her campaign effort. During the whole political term, the elected politician was so corrupt and the voter got so GUILTY.
Pag meron ka nang sinusuportahan, baho ay hinahayaan, wala nang atrasan, wala nang pakikinggan, patay ang bayan.
3. Avoid TraPolitiClans
The parameters of the term "traditional politicians" or TRAPO has never been defined. In fact, if I follow my own definition of TraPo, NoyNoy would be classified as one TraPo.
In my definition, which I think many will disagree, a TraPo is someone who represents the people who financed his campaign. The keyword here is FINANCED. The TraPo has a very weak conviction and principle of Right&Wrong because he is overwhelmed by his loyalty to the persons behind his campaign fund or machinery.
For some, TraPo means an old-timer politician who protects his selfish interest (family, business, organization, locality, financier, cronnies).
Below are my original opinion and I came up with a ten characteristics of a TraPo.
1. Kind of "What's in it for me?"
2. Political campaign is indebted to "someone" who he/she will secretly call "boss"
3. Unethical - lobbies favors for his/her family, friends, political financiares
4. Invests in Campaign Machineries that limits the choices of the general voters (TV Ads, Sobrang dami ng Posters, at lalo na Surveys)
5. Usual political clans -- kamag-anak ng mga "kumita na" sa gobyerno at para bang mga bank robber na pagkatapos tumakas ay gusto pang balikan ang mga natirang kapranggot na barya sa sahig ng banko.
6. Has armed private army
7. No SPECIFIC WORK AGENDA before running for the position
8. Gives alms to the poor using mony and resources squeezed out from government funds and boasts about it as if the money comes from his personal fund.
9. Shows off his thick face and name on Government Projects such as bridges, schools, ambulance, as if the project is funded by his personal donation.
10. Unexplained wealth --sudden expansion of his house into mansions and accummulation of businesses and cars while sitting in power.
11. You can see begging people falling in line in the house of the traditional politician. These people are seeking help for burial, medicines, school tuition fees, fertilizer, baptismal party expense, wedding party expense, bail for an inmate, expenses for sports-fest uniform, and anything else. For dole-out purposes, these traditional politicians normally source out money from corrupt activities (Robinhood style).
A not-TraPo make sides based on their personal conviction and service for the greater good of the country.
Traditional dynasties of politicians becomes unbreakable when we as a nation continue to patronize a political monopoly of the few clan.
Political Dynasty is a heirarchy of politicians from same clans. In other countries, Political Dynasty is associated with "monarchy". But in the Philippines, political dynasty is different, it is not a monarchy type, but rather a GRAND SLAM NEPOTISM.
In the Philippines, we have seen that political positions are very profitable businesses. Maraming politician ang yumayaman sa corruption at gusto nilang ipa-mana ang negosyo-de-gobyerno sa mga anak-anak nila. These corrupt clans have already made a long-term pact with the corrupt contractors and both of them wants to ensure na tuloy-tuloy ang ligaya.
For some TrapPolitiClans, whose main source of wealth is government contracts, the holding on to the political position have become so important in their survival. As the political positions are passed on from one generation to the next within the same family, businesses are passed on, corruption lives forever.
There is no list of TraPolitiClans. You have to determine it by yourself. You should avoid voting or supporting these TraPolitiClans if you want CHANGE in your country or locality. IKAW MISMO ang magbabago ng sistema by not voting the TraPolitiClans (you yourself will changethe system by not voting the traditional political clans.
4. Try the NEW Names
Think twice before you vote a "familiar" name. Look at your country or locality NOW, if you think the past politicians did not do a good job, THEN please do not vote them again -- and this rule must apply to their sons and daughters and spouses who wants to run to continue their clan's hold of the seat of power. New names usually thrive as they offer better services. In placing a bet, I believe that NEW NAMES is better than children of the OLD NAMES.
Para lang yang pag pili ng isda sa palengke. Pag pula na ang mata sa bugbug ng batikos, o masangsang na sa tsismis ng corruption, huwag mo nang bilhin. Kahit blood-line pa yan ni Lapu-lapu, kahit pang sashimi yan na pagka-mahalmahal, kahit suki mo pa ang tindera, kahit anong salestalk ng tindera, kahit dinudumog pa yan ng karamihan, kahit naka-advertise pa yan sa TV. Be safe, huwag mo nang bilhin yang isdang yan. Basta presko, mas makakasiguro ka na safe ang pamilya mo.
Isa pa, kapag matanda na, ipa-retire 'nyo na yan, huwag nang iboto. Hindi kailangan ng sobrang tandang experyensyado sa gobyerno, lalo na sa Congresso (Senate and House of Representatives) dahil meron namang regular staff components ang Congress na mag-guide sa mga bago. Papasok lang ang INNOVATION sa gobyerno kapag mga bata at bago ang politician.
Tingnan nyo rin kung nagkaroon ba nang overseas exposure ang isang kandidato. Maganda yung mga kandidatong meron experience in cultural exchange program or scholarship sa ibang ma-uunlad na bansa. Mas lalong makakaganda sa bansa natin kapag nakakita na ng magagandang bagay sa ibang bansa ang ating mga politiko dahil most likely, gusto niya itong gayahin ang mga kagandahang eto.
5. Watch-Out and be Alert Against TRICKY SLOGANS
Politicians normally have slogans. Be alert! There are two types of slogans: (1) One is a Promise of a DESIRED OUTCOME, and (2) second is a Promise of an ACTION. I recommend you choose the ones with a Promise of Action.
Let me give you an example of a bad slogan that I categorize as a promise of a Desired Outcome. I heard one presidentiable Gilbert Teodoro slogan on the radio, saying "College Graduate Bawat Pamilya". Ask yourselves the same questions I ask: "How's the President going to achieve that? How are we going to measure the success? Can the President mandate that desired outcome? Can you just stupidly get statistical data and divide the total number of college graduates by total number of families?".
The presidentiable could have a better slogan if he will say: "If I become President -- out of the President's discretionary budget, I will personally grant one college scholarship benefit fund for each family without any condition and make sure that the budget is released ON TIME!". Now thats what I call a DECISIVE MAN speaking!
Another very stupid slogan of the GMA Supporters in the past was: "Gloria Kami! Babae katulad ni Cory!"... Helloooow!
But GMA, though, had a very good action slogan that she really stood by in her entire Presidential career: "STRONG REPUBLIC!" --- sa interpretation ko in salitang kanto "Mag Rally Ka, Tutubohin Kita!". Ayan, we got what we deserve -- no matter how people attempted to stirr the public into an oust Gloria Arroyo Movement after the series of corruption scandals, the administration remains strong.
Ngayon naman: "NoyNoy! Anak ni NiNoy! Kasing Galing ni Ninoy!" ..... Helloooow anong logic?
Ang maayos lang na action slogan ay kay Bayani Fernando: "POLITICAL WILL". The slogan is just amazing! And no question, it really fits his character. It encompasses the ideal characteristic of a President which is to IMPLEMENT the laws.
Now let's look at Gilbert Teodoro who is banking on his "EXPERIENCE". The best article about this what Kay Malilong Isberto The Freeman in the FaceBook article How to Sell a Candidate (updated January 26, 2010). Kay said "Most claims about a candidate’s past accomplishments can be verified in various records. I just don’t know if voters will have the desire to go beyond the spin and look into them. For instance, Gilbert Teodoro claims to have job experience as a Congressman. This “experience” includes leading an impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr. after the Supreme Court ruled that the coco levy funds prima facie belonged to the government and not to companies controlled by his uncle, Danding Cojuangco."
Did you get what I am saying here?
6. Read the Contents Label
In looking at the contents label of the candidate, obselve the three elements -- (1) Specific Plan of Action or Advocacy, (2) Hidden Track Record, and (3) Citizenship.
Know The Candidate's Specific Plan of Action
When I talk about Specific Plan of Action, I am simply refering to the Personal Advocacy of the Candidate.
Look at NoyNoy Aquino. Si NoyNoy ay wala talagang original na ambition maging Presidente. At kung na-udyok lang siya na tumakbo bilang presidente, ang presidency niya ay kaya ding patakbuhin ng mga ma-impluensyang mga TraPong nakapalibot sa kanya. He is the only presidentiable na walang klaro na Action Statement. Clearly, he is just taking advantage of the Desperate Hopes of the people, making his mom a convenient color coded packaging. NoyNoy, as of today, is a canned good that came out from a good reputable factory, but he is now on the display shelf without contents label.
Now look also at Dick Gordon's slogan in Facebook. It says: "Leadership must be earned, not bought nor inherited." ---- Parang tunog ng naghihingalong kandidato na kailangan tumalangka ng ibang kandidato para i-angat ang kung sino man yang "someone who earned leadership". ---- The same question all over and all over again ang meron ako: Dick, tell me what specifically will you do if you become President?
Bihira ka lang makakita ng kandidato na klarong klaro ang gustong gawin. Halos lahat parang mga blankong paper na dapat mong pirmahan bilang botante. Unfair naman yan sa botante, diba?
Erap has a very good pro-poor platform.
Look for the Hidden Track Record
You can also look at the track record of the candidate and make that pattern as his/her contents label. Under this category, make a determination of what major issues were brought to him, what he did to it, and what he failed to do. Look at how he handled opportunities for change.
If he had the implementation power as part of the executive branch, look for the tolerations he ever on any the anomalies. If he had experience in the legislature, look for his votes on issues and advocacies that you are personally involved with. If the candidate is from the busines sector, look for historical transaction with government and make a detemination if he had ever "unethically" dealth with the government. If the candidate is from the judiciary, look at the landmark cases he handled.
The very good example is Gilbert Teodoro. He had time as Secretary of National Defense when the Private Armies in Mindanao grew in unmanegeable proportion. The result is the Maguindanao Massacre. He knew about the growth of the private armies, but he tolerated it, did not act on it, and now in his presidential campaign slogan he is saying "no one can tell me what to do". His excuse --- the private armies are already there when he came. From my perspective, this guy is inactive, lazy, unresponsive, no sense of accountability, and no guilt at all. The only thing I can say is, can we just stop debating about this guy and just set him aside for a moment while we choose who are we going to vote for President?
Transparency of Citizenship
This information about a national election candidate is quite easy to determine. But many voters disregard the importance of this factor.
We should also not forget to ask the candidate if he is an American Citizen or British or Chinese or whatever.
I have heard rumors that Edu Manzano is an American citizen. Richard Gordon also has an American-sounding surname.
We should ask them because I strongly recommend that we DO NOT vote for NATIONAL candidates who have other citizenships other than Filipino citizen. They are supposed to protect national interests with 100% loyalty to the Republic of Philippines.
There is such thing we call Conflict of Interest. Their allegiance to other nations makes them half-loyal to the Republic of the Philippines.
We can sleep better at night if our nation's leaders have no other citizenship. This applies to national positions -- for President, Vice-President, Senator, including Secretary level of the various Departments.
8. Vote for a Good Mix of all Political Spectrums
This recommendation is very much applicable in your choices for seats in the Senate.
The Partylist Organizations are assumed to be composed of the "Marginalized Sectors". Their advocacies are stronger when there are Senator (upper house) who will consolidate advocacies with them. The ideologist sector of the political separatists also need a "representative" in Senate.
We, as a nation, might need the logical expertise from the various kinds of political ideologies. When time comes that resources are too scarce, everyone would struggle to get a big share of the income from economic activities of the nation. To protect the marginalized sectors, we need to mix-in a little "socialism" in the concoction of our national policies, if we will fail to do this, the strong will gradually enslave the weak.
These persecuted political ideologists, such as the comminists ideologists, are like endangered species, like tigers, cobras, sharks, potentially dangerous at the moment when mixed with the general population, but they may be very useful in the future. The government has been killing them for years, and they are already approaching extinction. Instead of killing them, we should take good care of them and ensure continuity of their ideology to the next generation and ensure the prevention of their extinction.
If you vote in a candidate with a communists ideology, it does not make you a communist.
By voting for a communist ideologists, you can help put a stop on the killings that are based on political, ideological, and religious differences. The population, in order to be "perfectly" democratic, must increase its tolerance on these differences. There must be a balance of opportunity to speak in the most proper venue of government, which is the Senate. As you can see an imbalance of ideologies in our laws, think about voting a set of candidates in the Senate who advocate represention for the underdogs.
Don't look at any ideology as a solid meat viand. Look at each of it as if it is a mix of ingredients wherein you will only utilize what is "best" in it's ingredients.
In law making, we need to take a little ingredients from the capitalist viand, a little from the religious viand, a little from the communist viand, and a little from the socialist viand.
The best thing we can get from socialist ideology is their concept of equality (pantay pantay lahat).
The best from the communist ideology is government-controlled productivity of the population (bawal ang tamad).
The best we can get from capitalist ideology is the chance of every individual to achieve his personal dream of success (freedom).
The best we can get from religious ideology is the rule of conscience and equality of mankind (if there is anything left of their evolution towards self-righteousness).
A good mix of the best parts of these ideologies is ideal set-up of a Senate. So, if you want a Senate that will be a venue of a perfectly democratic set-up, you can allocate your basket of 12 candidates accross various political ideologies.
9. DISCERN a TOP-DOWN CANDIDATE
Many Filipinos have a mentality that says: "Iboboto ko yang Senador dahil magaling yan dahil Presidentiable nga yan nong nakaraang election eh".
A Top-Down candidate is one who runs for President to gain popularity and momentum for the next election wherein he/she plans to run for Senator. The best example I can give is Gilbert Teodoro, whcih I discerned in a eureka way!
Because of it's VERY poor performance, the GMA administration party (LAKAS-KAMPI) is already recognized by many as DOOMED LOSER in 2010. Nevertheless, they have to field-in a presidential candidate to "keep" the supporters who "benefited" from the GMA administration. Everyone knows Gibo will lose, but just like Jamby, he just run now as President to gain support momentum for his running for Senate in 2013. How was I able to detect this? Well, I have read his platform, and it appears to be a Senatorial platform.
Look for the article about Gibo on his tax policies posted by GMANews.TV on 2/23/2010. It says that Lakas-Kampi-CMD standard bearer Gilberto Teodoro Jr. said on Thursday that he favors raising the rate of expanded value-added tax (eVAT) from the current 12 percent to up to 15 percent if he wins the presidential race this May. But he is also mulling the option of reducing personal income taxes to 25 percent. Speaking before members of the Makati Business Club (MBC), Teodoro said that he agrees with proposals to raise the eVAT given the losses the El Niño dry spell is expected to bring the country, especially in the agricultural sector.
In my opinion, Tax Law determination is not a function of the Excutive Branch. It is the function of the Legislative. The article above reveals the Senatorial Platform of Gilbert Teodoro. Sumingaw ang utot ni Gibo. Sabi nga ng ibang matitibay na supperter ng Administration, "walang mawawala kay Gibo kung matatalo siya sa Presidential race ngayon".
10. Be a CONSCIENCE VOTER
If all Filipino voters are conscience voters, the best ones will be voted, our country will achieve the best result of political elections.
Ikaw ano ka ba, bilang botante? Alin ka sa ibat ibang klaseng botante na eto? Meron ka pa bang na-isip na isa pang klaseng botante, i-post mo sa comment sa baba.
WHAT NOW IS OUR ADVOCACY?
Now that you are aware of the 9 Types of Voters, what specific action are we to do?
What I suggest we do is Advocacy that starts inside your own heart. The battle against this miserable political cycle in the Philippines is a very long battle, we would be counting generations to achieve a stable change.
Through voter education, inch by inch, we will fight this battle starting this generation. In our little way, what we can do ridicule the 8 types of voters and promote the CONSCIENCE VOTER type. Lets associate the 8 types with SHAME. This is our strategy.
When it comes to advocacy, we as a people, should work as a team. Here is an inspirational speech that I would like you to watch. Please welcome, Al Pacino..
Myth of Popularity Vote
There is a myth that says "Who would vote for Unfamiliar Names and Faces?" But look at Richard Gomez, he lost in the Senatorial race. Congressman Pitsay also lost the Senatorial race despite overloaded posters and campaign ads. There is a trend that people is becoming aware that popularity (wellknowness) is no longer a valid basis of voter's choice.
Only new names and new faces in politics can guarantee new directions of our country. The longer we continue with the "usual" ones, the longer we cannot see change. The longer we hold on the the "old" politicians, the more we continue being nailed down on this status quo of poverty. And one election too late to think this way will be equivalent to six years of regret. So, check out the 10 Presidentiables and make a brave CONSCIENCE VOTE -- let us prove it to ourselves that we can make brave decisions ALONE and that we cannot be influenced by the usual campaign machinery of the "usual" politicians!
Religious Leaders Entering into Politics
The most popular candidate who came from the religious sector is Eddie Villanueva. His being a pastor will not make him less entitled to the rights and political consciousness as a citizen of the Republic of the Philippine. But his being a pastor will not also make him a person who is perfectly sin-proof.
In my opinion, leaders of religion and leaders of politics should not encroach the wisdom of one another. Religious leaders speak and render opinion based on their heeding of the voice of God. Political leaders heed the voice of the people.
The turn-off point of Eddie is his strong affiliation to the organization of the Church and makes him potentially violable to the Article 2 Section 6 of the Constitutional provision on the separation of the church and state.If he really wants to run for a National Position, the solution I recommend to him is to QUIT first as leader of the church and lie-low for some time, and re-channel his heart and mind to hard-core politics. And most importantly, he must stop using the word "GOD" in any of his political opinion speeches, because I think it is blasphemy to use GOD as a stamp banner to enforce the strength of any political speech.
Bulk Vote Buyer
Mag-ingat din sa mga kandidato nga "bulk buyers". Bulk buying is a situation wherein a candidate run with a sole purpose of denting the potential votes of the opponents of his client. Example: we have two BIG opposing candidates.Candidate AA is pro incumbent administration.
Candidate BB is opposition to incumbent administration. What candidate AA will do is find someone who share the same political sentiment with candidate BB and ask that person to run and lets call him AAB.There will be voters of Candidate BB who will vote Candidate AAB, and as a result, Candidate AAB will dent the number of votes for Candidate BB, and the further result of the dent will help Candidate AA win. Candidate AAB running the election is secretly finance by Candidate AA, and after the election Candidate AAB is paid by Candidate AA by the number of heads who voted for Candidate AAB.
In short, dalawang pamamaraan para bumili ng boto. First is you buy voters to vote for you. And the second one is you buy voters to split the vote of your opponent. These payments can be done directly to the voters or to the one who will facilitate the bulk vote. The second one is more smooth and efficient to implement because you only have to pay one person.
Look at TV/Radio Advertisement Spending
As of 2009, a 30-second airing of a Political Ad in TV costs around 400,000 Pesos during primetime.
Now, look at your candidate, focus your eyes on his eyes, and ask him these questions below.
- Who pays for the TV/Radio/Print political advertising of the candidate? At the end of the advertising, it normally says: "Paid For by Friends of Candidate". Who are these "friends"?
- Is the candidate realy that rich, where did he get that money that is bigger than the brand advertising of many companies? Did he loaned it, from whom, and how's he going to pay it?
- Is the friend just a fanatic fan extravagant spending without asking nothing in return?
- Is it an investment, expecting something in return?
- What is the meaning if the political ad spending of a presidential candidate reaches 3 Billion Pesos?
- What is the consequences that we have to face if that candidate will win?
Let me tell you some hint guys and this is how amazing campaign funds work. First, you have to know what a President CAN give to a specific person -- APPOINTED POSITION IN GOVERNMENT.
People who ambition to get appointed (as Commissioner, or Secretary, Undersecratary, Regional Director, Officer of Government Corporations, Contractor, etc.) spend at least 3 million pesos to support the political campaign of a Presidentiable (this is based on my personal experience during the 1998 Presidential Election).
There are thousands of appointive positions that a presidentiable can "sell" which makes "presidentiability" a very lucrative money-making activity. Some people who ambition to get appointed give political fund to at least three "winnable" candidates. They spend at least 10 million pesos for split multiple support to three or more candidates, just to make sure that the investment will return. When their candidate wins, they get the position -- and it will be time to "recover" more than how much they spend during election. This is worst than unethical, so basically, nobody wants to talk about it.
So, what am I saying here? I am telling you that the bigger the candidate's spending in ads, the bigger is the potential "hemorrhage" of government funds when that candidate wins. The bigger the spending in ads, the bigger the potential to be corrupt.
How About Social Networking like Facebook?
The number of members in Facebook groups and fansclubs is not a measurement of popularity because many join a group just to "bulabog" and "hakot away" the members. You can check out the discussion groups, hindi lahat loyal sa fansclub.
Nevertheless, Facebook is a more effective medium of struggle for sympathizers. The more the membership of a particular group or fansclub, the more effective ang lawak ng "reach" ng mga hirit. Pag sumigaw o humirit ka sa rally, hindi hihigit sa 50 ka tao ang makakarinig sayo -- panay mga kandidato lang ang nagsasalita sa entablado. Pero sa Discussion ng Facebook, mahigit 200,000 kayang marating ng boses ng mga hirit mo.
Tingnan nyo rin ang mga Discussions sa mga groups, fansclub, and profiles ng mga candidato at ng mga political party nila. Diyan ka makaka-basa ng magagandang voting points at mudslinging. Of course marami ding mga walang kwentang mga hirit ng mga supporters at mge kontrabidas.
Erap has fewer facebook fans compared to Gibo because Erap's supporters are mostly poor which compose the majority.
III. 2010 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES PROS and CONS
Vetellano Acosta
Pros:
Cons:
Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III
Pros: Son of Cory Aquino and Ninoy Aquino
Cons: If I were Noynoy, I would have taken the opportunity to spend my years in Congress and Senate to do remarkable and noble acts to become SOMEONE GREATER than the combined greatness of Ninoy and Cory.
But Noy wasted his time. He never utilized his resources of being a son of a President to do great deeds, and never had a drive to become a better person. He only came out like a self-proclaimed shining star after his mother died.
And now, with the influential elite pushing him to yearn for power, he thinks he can just easily put around his neck the medals of honor of his parents. For Noynoy, he thinks that the Presidency at no sweat of character at all.
John Carlos “JC” De los Reyes
Pros: Association with the Catholic Charismatic Movement. Good interview responder.
Cons: Lacks wide outlook in governance. No political network.
Joseph “Erap” Estrada
Pros: This person's heart is 100% on the masses, and ZERO% on the Elite. Long experience as actor, but longer experience as politician. Overwhelming win in 1998. I have not met one person who supported Erap in 1998 who got turned-off with Erap after the great Aquino-Arroyo conspiracy -- the 11 Million voting masses supporting Erap is INTACT today.
Joseph Estrada is the real man of the masses. I can talk about a lot of Erap defects too as a human being, just like any other candidates. But the best things about Erap is that he is not power greedy, he said during EDSA-2 that he would rather let things happen than order the police and military to hurt a single person who protests against his political will.
I personally knew that Erap was ALL-OUT WAR against Jueteng and Private Armies. After Erap was ousted, these two evils florished like empires. Jueteng became untouchable specially in the North Luzon where Chavhitman is prominent and Central Luzon where GMA's close allies (Pineda). The Jueteng collection now in GMA regime is "Nationalized". Erap is the mortal enemy of the loose guns, both the politically terroristic and criminalistic. If Erap is President, he could have prevented the rise of the Ampatuans of the Maguindanao Massacre.
I personally attest Erap's Plans and Programs in 1999 are a lot more pro-poor compared to the others. This is based on my comparison on all Medium Term Philippine Development Plans of the Cory, Ramos, Estrada, Arroyo administrations.
Cons: Lacks support from the Elites. It is very difficult to undo what the Aquino-Arroyo conspiracy implanted in the mind of the people that Erap personally gained selfishly and unethically from favors he gave to his friends and relatives during his short term as Preseident.
Richard “Dick” Gordon
Pros: Extensive background a Red Cross volunteer.
Cons: I asked him in his facebook account, "do you have other citizenship other than Filipino citizenship?". His answer is, I am 100% Filipino Citizen. Very clever, but not as clever as a fox. Other citizenship will not make a candidate lesser than a 100% Filipino citizenship, but a candidate's allegiance to other nations will make him prone to "conflict of national interest". The other Cons about this candidate will only be written here after he answers me directly with a YES or NONE on my question: "Do you have other citizenship other than Filipino citizenship?".
Jamby Madrigal
Pros: Persistent
Cons: No concrete advocacy. Allegedly associated with the leftists.
Nicanor Perlas
Pros: Environmentalist
Cons: No Political Support Network.
Gilbert “Gibo” Teodoro Jr.
Cons: The heart of this guy is a 100% on the ELITE side, and Zero% on the masses. His experience amidst and outlook about corruption is more of a TOLERANT type, typical elite lawyer who would go where the money is. He was given a chance to be chief of the DND from 2007 to 2009. The report of the existence of the private armies in Mindanao passed his nose, but his inaction is an act of toleration. Not only that, he also rubbed elbows with the local political gunlords such as the Ampatuans who are now charged with multiple murder on that celebrated Maguindanao Massacre where over 50 people were killed for the mere reason that they went out to file candidacy for the 2010 election. Unfit for the small job of impementing laws, therefore unfit for the big job of the super implementor laws. Besides, the personalities behind the political machinery of Gilbert Teodoro are the same faces behind the Arroyo administration that is perceived by many as the most corrupt administration of all times. His slogan should have been: "Business as Usual".
Pros: Gilberto “Gilbert” Cojuangco Teodoro, Jr. was the youngest Secretary to hold the Defense portfolio at the age of 43, when he assumed the post in August 2007.
Before he became the Secretary of National Defense, he was Congressman of the First District of Tarlac for three (3) consecutive terms starting 1998. At the House, he assumed the position of Assistant Majority Leader (11th Congress) and Head of the Nationalist People’s Coalition House members. He was also a member of the House contingent to the Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council.
This guy is the favorite nephew of tycoon and Marcos cronnie Danding Cojuanco. So, he farly got lots of money compared to his peers. Shortly after he completed his secondary education at the most expensive school of his time, Xavier School, he was elected President of the Kabataang Barangay for Tarlac in 1980 and concurrently assumed Presidency of the Kabataang Barangay for Central Luzon until 1985.
He also became a member of the Sanguniang Panlalawigan of Tarlac from 1980 to 1986. Gibo successfully completed his Bachelor of Science in Commerce, Major in Financial Institutions at the De La Salle University in 1984 (which explains why his supporters call themselves GREEN TEAM).
In 1989, he completed his Law studies at the University of the Philippines where he was awarded the Dean’s Medal for Academic Excellence. In the same year, he topped the Philippine Bar exams (while his auntie Corazon "Cory" Cojuanco Aquino was then President of the Republic and almost all top brass members of the judiciary were her appointees).
For seven years, he worked as a lawyer in the famed EP Mendoza Law firm. Then he went to the Harvard Law School in Cambridge (paying student) for his Master of Laws and completed it in 1997. He was also admitted to the State Bar of New York during the same year. Gibo who holds distinct memberships in the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, UP Alumni Association, UP Law Alumni Association, Harvard Alumni Association and the Harvard Law Alumni Association, is also a licensed commercial pilot (wow only rich kids can afford this schooling) and a Colonel in the Philippine Air Force Reserve.
Eduardo “Eddie” Villanueva
Cons: The turn-off point of Eddie is his strong affiliation to the organization of the Church and makes him "potentially" violable to the Article 2 Section 6 of the Constitutional provision on the separation of the church and state.
Pros: The hand sign means "Victory" during Marcos time. When Bro. Eddie was asked about he hand sign, he said (for him) it means "For the Greater Glory of God and Country".
His program for the first six months of Presidency is to establish a strong Republic, internally, via hands-on management of the Dept of Defense. When all is set, he will then give 24 hours ultimatum to the crooks (syndicated gunlords, druglords, gamblinglords, armed rebels) to stop their activity or else they would face the full strength of the law.
This guy was a fan of the young and good Ferdinand Marcos. At the very moment Marcos started abusing his power, this gut "right away" turned back at Marcos and fought him in the streets as an activist. Unfortunately, he was jailed for rebellion, perhaps. In short, this guy is NOT A TOLERANT type, unlike Gilbert Teodoro.
Regarding my criticism about this guy about him "potentially" violable to the Article 2 Section 6 of the Constitutional provision on the separation of the church and state." His response is: he is aware of it, that is why he already resigned his ecclesiastical office before he filed his candidacy as President. The only thing I can say is, this guy did resign out of his own initiative without someone telling him -- this is a good sign of a high moral and ethical standard imposed on oneself -- a perfect picture of sacrifice.
I can't see any Elite Families and TraPoliticlans lurking around behind this man.
Manuel “Manny” Villar Jr.
Cons: Manny Villar owns Real Estate Development firms that is very "noted" in (1) employing unlicensed real estate agents colorum, and (2) transacting businesses that is disadvantageous to government. He became super rich "allegedly" and "suspiciously" from these unethical practices in real estate service industry. His campaign strategy is similar to what popularized the Wowowee of Willie Revillame -- appealing to the emotions of the poor, dole-out economics, and heart-warming TV campaign ads. This candidate has visions, good slogans, but no plan of action (yet).
Villar cannot fool the Masses on his clain that he is an opposition to the Arroyo Administration.
(1) Villar helped the EDSA-Dos Conspiracy who stole the Erap presidency.
(2) Villar is a fake who claimed that he is the true opposition at harap-harapang niloloko ang masa sa kanyang TV Ads. There are many colors and slogans Villar can choose, but he made a wrong decision to steal the color and pro-poor slogan of the true and original man of the masses Erap.
(3) Villar is a close ally of the Arroyo Administration for three proofs. (A) The Administration of GMA made it easy for Villar to get budget for the infrastructure of C5 and made billions of money from it. (B) Pacman is an ally of the Administration (c/o Lito Atienza, Chavit Singson, etc) and his alliance with Villar is the strongest proof that Villar is a secret ally of Arroyo Administration. (C) Ang campaign resources ng GMA Administration ay binuhos kay Villar imbis na kay Gibo -- si Gibo ay decoy lang.
Pros: Published by Oliver Pablo Dela Pena (25 Feb 2010, Facebook)
The public life of Manny Villar straddles both the worlds of business and politics. He is one of the few who managed to excel in both.
1.Working Student: Hard work, persistence, and perseverance became his guiding principles in life. This earned him the title “Mr. Sipag at Tiyaga.”
2.Entrepreneur: So with an initial capital of P10,000 in 1975, Villar purchased two reconditioned trucks and started his sand-and-gravel business in Las Piñas.... See More
3.Housing Innovator: Manny Villar became the housing industry leader, and the biggest homebuilder in Southeast Asia, having built more than 100,000 houses for the poor and middle class Filipino families.
4.Awards and Distinctions: For his business achievements, he was made cover story in the Far Eastern Economic Review. And his life story was also featured in Asiaweek, Forbes, AsiaMoney and Asian Business Review.He garnered various awards such as the Ten Outstanding Young Men Award (1986) by the Philippine Jaycees, Agora Award for Outstanding Achievement in Marketing Management (1989), Most Outstanding CPA by the Philippine Institute of Certified Public Accountants (1990) and Most Outstanding UP Alumnus (1991).
5.Political Career: In a stunning political debut in 1992, Villar won with the most overwhelming mandate among congressmen in Metro Manila.
6.Champion for Entrepreneurs: In 1995, Manny Villar ran for re-election and won an unprecedented 142,000 votes, the highest number of votes for a congressman in the entire country. Winning media acclaim as an outstanding congressman as well as the respect and recognition of his peers, he was elected to chair the Committee on Entrepreneurship.
7.Speaker of the House: It was no surprise then to those in the know when he gained the remarkable acclaim of 171 of 220 congressmen as the Speaker of the 11th Congress of the House of Representatives.In a time when the country is slowly recovering from a host of economic and political crises, the election of the ‘brown taipan’ at the helm of Congress signaled a watershed event in the Philippine political history.
8.Senator of the Republic: In the national elections held last May 14, 2001, despite being a relative newcomer in national politics, Manny Villar posted one of the most impressive showings in the national polls. On his first day in office, he filed 204 bills covering a comprehensive legislative program of action— the first among neophyte senators and the third highest filer among the senators of the 12th Congress of the Philippines.In February 2004, he was elected as President of the Nacionalista Party—the country’s oldest and grandest political party. He was also named the Most Distinguished UP Alumnus—the highest recognition given by the UP Alumni Association—for his exemplary public service and achievements.Senator Manny Villar, despite his numerous accomplishments and heroism, has remained simple and unaffected. A true family man, he is a devoted husband to Congresswoman Cynthia A. Villar (Lone District of Las Piñas), and a loving father to sons Paolo and Mark and daughter Camille.
PARTING NOTES
So for you po what is an ideal presidential candidate? (Analyn G. Carlos, Facebook)
Marami nang nagtanong sa akin kung ano ang ideal na presidentiable ko. Habang tumatagal ako sa kaka-isip at kakasulat ng article ko na Nine Types of Voters and Voting Guides, dahan-dahan nabu-buo ang preference ko sa isang presidentiable. Sa ngayon, ang mga eto ang nasa-isip ko.
1. Only one citizenship -- FILIPINO citizen. No other citizenship.
2. In the positions he/she occupied in the past. He/she never had a history of TOLERATING irregularities in the organization that is within his control.
3. Presents himself as a stand-alone individual. Does not use the name of God or his Popular Relatives to attract voters.
4. Has a clear Political Manifesto in a form of Action Items. You give him a situation, he can tell what he will DO instead of just telling you his vision.
5. Makes a promise to implement the Law without hesitation, exemption, and toleration.
6. Modesty in campaign expenditure and methodology.
7. Transparency. Publish the names of his/her relatives, friends, and campaign fund contributors and promises to the public that he will not appoint nor tolerate the appointment of these people in any appointed position in government.
8. You can personally ask him questions through the internet, he personally answers questions, and maintains a Frequently Asked Questions website.
9. Follows the campaign rules of Comelec by the letter.
10. Not a Trapo (I defined the parameters of TraPo in my article Nine Types of Voters and My Ultimate Guide for Voters (this article at http://petalcorin.blogspot.com/2009/12/voting-guide.html).
Walang candidato na PERFECT. Titimbangin ko sila lahat base sa criteria na eto. Ang iboboto ko ay ang the one na pinaka-konti ang kasalanan. Hindi factor ang "winnability". At ang pipiliin ko ay mananatiling secreto sa puso ko.
If you like this article, this youtube below is for you.
Vote buying in bulk
Mag-ingat din sa mga kandidato nga "bulk buyers". Bulk buying is a situation wherein a candidate run with a sole purpose of denting the potential votes of the opponents of his client. Example: we have two BIG opposing candidates.
Candidate AA is pro incumbent administration. Candidate BB is opposition to incumbent administration. What candidate AA will do is find someone who share the same political sentiment with candidate BB and ask that person to run and lets call him AAB.
There will be voters of Candidate BB who will vote Candidate AAB, and as a result, Candidate AAB will dent the number of votes for Candidate BB, and the further result of the dent will help Candidate AA win.
Candidate AAB running the election is secretly finance by Candidate AA, and after the election Candidate AAB is paid by Candidate AA by the number of heads who voted for Candidate AAB.
In short, dalawang pamamaraan para bumili ng boto. First is you buy voters to vote for you. And the second one is you buy voters to split the vote of your opponent. These payments can be done directly to the voters or to the one who will facilitate the bulk vote. The second one is more smooth and efficient to implement because you only have to pay one person.
Kung gusto mo nang marami pang komplikadong pamamaraan sa politika. Beer lang ang katapan nyan, kwekwentohan kita! He he he. (Friendster Blog. 9/21/2009)
The ideal quality of front line services
Advocacy for tighter cigarette policies
Sooner, the Philippines will take a lead as the first country that will ban tobacco sale and consumption nationwide. This is the bottomline mission of my advocacy againts cigarette.
Cigarette is an unecessary and deadly product. Our people spend too much in tobaco-related medical treatments. Let's wipe this out once and for all. Ban also any movie or ad that shows the existence of this tobaco product.
Alam ko maraming papalag dito, pero wala akong paki-alam, huwagnyo akong i-boto para malulong kayo dyan sa bisyo na yan at pati mga anak natin sa susunod na generation!
Eh ako nga naging smoker din since 15 years old (1989), umabot nga ako sa 2 packs a day, pero tinigil ko ito bisyong ito in christmas eve of December 25 2000 dahil binulong ko eto sa mainit pang katawan na kamamatay lang na tatay ko. Ang sabi ko sa kanya, ititigil ko na ang paninigarilyo at ipapangako ko na gagawa ako ng paraan para mawala na itong productong eto sa Pilipinas at kung maari sa buong mundo. Since then, hindi na me nag yosi dude. Effective pala ang panata kapag ibinulong sa kamamatay lang na mahal sa buhay.
Maraming gustong tumigil mag-yosi, eh nahihirapan tumigil dahil maraming binibenta sa tindahan at mura lang at marami silang nakikitang tao na nag-yoyosi. Dapat pumasok ang gobyerno because in this partucular instance, the "vulnerable" sector are those who want to stop smoking or those people who want their love ones to stop smoking.
Sinabi ko na eto in advance ha, kapag maging Senador ako, there shall be a law that will totally ban cigarette sale and consumption in the Philippines. So kung magsilabasan ang mga Petalcorin Scandal na mga photos or videos (eeewwww Hayden Kho type, ha ha ha ha joke lang), alam nyo na na si Lucio Tan o si Philip Morris o yong cowboy na si Marlboro Man ang may kagagawan at nagpakawala ng mga paninira na eto (tawa naman dyan).
THIS FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR DEBATE!
Reaction from the Public:
My Response:
Advocacy for tighter gun carry policies
Personally, I would advocate for a total gun-carry ban across the board. No gun outside the house except PNP and AFP in uniform, on duty, and with a trackable, visible official police/afp vehicle. Gone is the business of firearm. I am fed up with the "responsible ownership" slogan that goes beyond the streets. And everyday, everytime people read gun-killed persons in the newspapers, I know I would be gaining the support of the general population.
Consider me obsessive compulsive, but each piece of the AFP/PNP ammunition, on the individual level, shall be accounted for on a daily basis, by usual accounting and auditing process. I don't care if the government needs to spend more for the process. I just don't want a single loose bullet. The AFP and PNP will be counting bullets in front of their officers everyday, funny, but that is eventually what I want.
And one false move, I'm gonna go for regulating the knives and the ice-picks. I am just showing you how fierce I would fight for the potential victims, the weak, the oppressed, who are still alive, by focusing on preventive measures.
To start-up and perk-up your interest on this advocacy, please allow me to state a few features. Then as I participate in debates in the internet, through time, I will also keep on adding more detail of my advocacy using a Reaction and Response format that you can also read below.
Start-up Features
- Only AFP/PNP enlisted personnel ON-DUTY and IN UNIFORM can CARRY holstered unconcealed guns outside residence.
- One hand-gun inside the house with maximum of 20 ammunition accounted every year.
- Sportsshooters and Hobbyists can have as many guns they want, but only one gun at home, they have to deposit the rest in a firing range where they are members of. Definitely, NO permit-to-carry shall be issued to transport guns from house to firing range -- police escort is needed to do this type of gun transport.
- All guns will have a tamper-proof plastic insert in the barrel with serial number that is fully accounted for by the government. One can fire the gun even if the plastic is installed. One cannot be authorized to carry a gun without that plastic insert. That plastic will determine if the gun is fired or not.
- All guns will have RF-Identifiers. All check-points in Streets, Malls, Busses, Tollways, Firing Range, shall be connected to a centralized firearm database.
- Number of carried ammunition shall be rationalized. There should be no excessive ammunition.
Comment from the Audience:
"The right to bear arms should be for everyone. The problem here is the rich and powerful having an arsenal; whilst the poor law abiding citizens are left defenseless. this makes the poor common folks open to oppression. Until we can have an effective police force in the area we should educate and teach law abiding citizens in the lawful use of firearms." ...
... "John, like I said before, I am pro-gun ownership, I have seen police officers intimidate law abiding citizens with their guns. Law abiding peace loving citizens! Criminals, police, military, and the rich have guns to protect their interest and ply their trade, what about the common man who just wants to be left alone in peace, what can he do to protect himself when one of those afore mentioned gets out of line, or decides they want what is his? We have already seen that our law enforcement cannot protect a lot of our citizens, the chainsaw murder victim, the three victims of the child assassin, and I am sure many, many more unreported. Like I said before there are more good than evil, only thing is; EVIL IS ARMED. If the playing field is levelled, GOOD WILL EASILY WIN. The only people who are afraid of armed good people are bad people." (Ronnie Levina)
My Response:
You said: "The only people who are afraid of armed good people are bad people". So how do you explain bankrobbers, payrollrobbers, hi-jackers neutralizing the security guards before they declare the hold-up? Kahit may baril pa ang nagbabantay, titirahin talaga yan kung gusto nilang tirahin.
Armed BAD People are basically Armed GOOD People. Its just they spend "opportunity time" to commit crimes when they get the chance of time and space. They do bad work on part-time basis. After doing a bad thing unreported without getting caught, they immediately go back again to the good mode -- patay-mali parang walang nangyari.
When an good armed person is in need of money -- what will he potentially do with his gun? Sangla or hold-up lang ang gagawin nyan. Masama din ang sangla dahil ma-transfer ang possesion to someone who may not be qualified to possess a gun.
During traffic altercation, when you have a gun in your car and you're blood pressure shoot up because of anger, you lose your control and temper, would you go down the car without a gun in your hand to scold the other driver? You are about to confront someone out of anger and of course you do pre-emptive defense that is why you have to come down the car with your gun. Do you know what will happen if things will go out of control? --- BANG BANG BANG!
Personally, I believe that Philippines should have a 1:1 ratio of guns:adult. This will make our country capable of fighting invaders (national defense issue). But this is not the focus of my policies.
What I want are policies that will PREVENT good armed men from doing something bad. Preventive measures is what I want.
I would rather do something to ensure the WHOLE POPULATION that there will be NO ARMED MEN who will terrorize them, than allowing a few to carry firearms to protect themselves.
Question from the Audience:
How about those rebels, armed groups, and private army of various political causes? How will you look at them from government perspective? Who will protect the public from the harassment of the private armies?
My Response:
Any independent individual or group who wears garments that looks similar to Military or Police uniform shall be charged with usurpation of authority.
Comment from the Audience:
"You have a very warped view of your countrymen and very little trust in the goodness of your fellowman."
My Response:
I have a NO TRUST in ANY MAN who carries a gun (1) OUTSIDE PROPER UNIFORM, (2) OUTSIDE TIME OF DUTY, (3) OUTSIDE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY SUPERVISION.
GUN is not a TOY.
GUN is also not a SECURITY BLANKET.
PERFECTLY CONTROLLED GUN-CARRY LAW is society's SECURITY BLANKET.
In the Philippines, in my time in the future, in the streets, screwdriver is the maximum weapon wrongdoer can find, acquire, carry and use; the maximum weapon a police can carry is a 9MM caliber pistol.
In any event a criminal suspect resists arrest is believed to be carrying a gun, just even a small gun, I will send out the Military with bullet-proofs and tanks and bazookas and high-powered firearm -- with a mission: "Get me that single loose gun and a head on a plate".
The big guns stays in the firing ranges inside military camps that is closely supervised and guarded by the military. Another thing. No more gun and ammunition businesses are to be operated by private sector. Guns and ammos will become an exclusively government product.
Organized criminal groups are like wolves concealed in clothing of sheeps with guns. So, to uncover them, I will tell them that sheeps don't carry guns.
Organizad criminal groups are not afraid of citizens who own guns. But they are afraid of checkpoints. So, to defeat them, I will have to give them more checkpoints.
NO gun carry special permits. More checkpoints in mobile locations. It will be like gun-carry ban during elections, but whole year round.
Question from the Audience:
How supportable is this advocacy to the law enforcers?
My Response:
The sector who will also get the highest benefit of my proposed policy is the uniformed military and policemen on-duty in the streets. If it will be easy for them to identify who are supposed to have authority to carry gun, and who are not supposed to carry gun , it will lower down the risk on their part.
The AFP and Police uniform I want is something that has a number at the upper back that is as big as a plate number ng motorized vehicle. The public can send a single text message to verify if the person in police uniform they see carrying a gun is on-duty at that very moment. They can send the text to a Firearm Center that will immediately reply without any human intervention.
Statements from the Public:
I hope you fools sell your cars along with your balls and brains. If a criminal wants to kill you, they will. My guns put meat in my freezer and on my table and provide countless days of relaxation and enjoyment while hunting. Educate yourselves and eliminate the real problem, criminals, not guns.
My Response:
No one would feel terrorized by a man who carries a riffle in the forest for sportshunting. What is terrorizing is when that man will carry his rifle outside the hunting zone, especially in heavily populated urban areas.Why? Well, how about me carrying an armed battle tank as my private car in the city?
Reactions from the Public:
So if I live in the city and I go to the shooting range and I bring my rifle in its case from my apartment to my car, that I am terrorizing people?
My Response:
Yes you are. The solution I am looking at is Sportsshooters and Hobbyists can have as many guns they want, but only one gun at home, they have to deposit the rest in a firing range where they are members of. Definitely, NO permit-to-carry shall be issued to transport guns from house to firing range -- police escort is needed to do this type of gun transport.
Reaction from the Public:
Why? What would this do or prevent?
My Response:
It will prevent "excuses". Organized criminal groups are like wolves concealed in clothing of sheeps with guns. So, to uncover them, I will tell them that sheeps don't carry guns.
Reaction from the Public:
What if they attack me with a knife or an axe or blow up a building or shoot me with an arrow or strangle me or burn my house down while me and my family are asleep and we don't have time to get out, what if someone kidnaps rapes and murders someone with out using a gun?
My Response:
You can have gun in your house for the protection of your family and property because no government can deploy a standby securityguard for each and every house.
But outside your house, in the streets, while driving or walking, no private citizen should carry a concealed gun. Only policemen on duty-time can carry a gun in the streets. Safety of the street is not the job of the individual private citizen, but of the government.
Reaction from the Public:
So, what if while I am walking down the street at night a group of kids attack me and pull knives out on me, or what if I am a woman leaving work late at night and as I walk to my car I see a man running towards me and he is dressed in a dark coat and a ski mask? What if while walking through the woods I come across a bear and her cubs and she ... See Morestarts to charge my way?
If you take away my means to protect myself, am I guaranteed a Police man with me every second I am out of my house till I get back to my house?
My Response:
If you are attacked, RUN! If every second of your life you are afraid of "isolated mishaps and crimes", then see a therapist.
If your neighborhood is indeed and factually that unsafe, then government should implement curfew for kids and random frisk-check for adults. This extreme government measure will be temporary and will gradually stop when ... See Moreyour feel safe again with your street.
What if you carry a concealed gun and EVERYONE else thinks the same way as you and they ALL carry a more powerful gun compared to you?
Reaction from the Public:
What if everyone carries a gun? Criminals will stop and think before they pull one out to rob you. Just the thought of more government is a bad idea. Do you have any idea how many guns are in the public's hands already? Are you going to clog up the justice system with everyone that is found in possession of a gun after a particular date? Maybe if ... See More criminals were irradicated we wouldn't have a problem with guns. I believe the problem is the people. Eliminating guns from our society is impossible because criminals will always have access to them, just like crack or meth, if you want it, you can find it. (Edward "Ed" Flancher)
Additional comments from a second person:
What if I am surrounded? What if I am handicapped and can not walk? How am I to run then? What if I can run but the person I am running from has a gun, his bullets can all run faster than I can.
I don't think you understand how crime and criminals work.
First off, the only way to give the state of emergency you are speaking of is to totally militarize the town you live in, which starts to be like a dictatorship. why should we do anything if we are going to depend on the government for all of our safety needs?... See MoreCrime will only stop when the criminals stop. To avoid drunk drivers, should we ban all cars? should be ban alcohol? Or punish those who are drunk behind the wheel.
Murders have been happening well before the invention of fire arms, and they will continue as long as we have criminals but punishing law abiding citizens who have every right (at least in America) to own firearms for defense, or for recreational use or for hunting is a privilege and it also guarantees us that our freedoms will never be taken away from us. (Khun)
My Response:
Your arguments of a gun-for-everyone is the choice that you took as a nation of gun makers. I hope you will feel safer in your streets in the long run. Good luck. But for the Philippines, I am looking at a new direction. A new model. I believe that a tighter gun-carry policy will help in reducing gun-related crimes in the streets. No crime-complainer country has ever tried the idea I have in mind, so I am redesigning something without a model. If my model will work, this will be my legacy to the next generation.
A criminal is not a 24/7 criminal. A criminal, before he commits a crime, is just like any ordinary person like your good self, your good wife, your good son, your good neighbor, and me. The access to any terroristic weapon makes a person "capable" of executing the crime. Gun is the ultimate terroristic weapon in the street that can be easily acquired. The second is bladed weapons such as knives.
It is almost impossible for government to stop anyone from holding on to a gun when he needs it. Guns can be easily acquired in some nations like USA.
It is almost impossible for government to stop a heavily-gun-armed bank robbers from declaring hold-up in the bank, even if the bank guards and every customer in the bank have guns.
But it is possible for government to make it difficult for criminals to move to and move out of the crime scene. And this is through a "very systematic" random check-points that will operate on a round-the-clock basis.
The courts will not be clogged, because the message is clear -- the police function is to execute on-the-spot anyone who carries a gun outside the house without proper authority.
The local police officer will be held accountable for any gun-related crimes that will take place within their jurisdiction.
Reaction from the Public:
I see where you are going, but let me say this. A gun doesn't make the criminal commit the crime, don't get me wrong it does help. Criminals are people who make choices like you and I, good and bad, but they will make the choice time and time again to go against the law, to go against the good people in society.
If firearms are banned the criminal will still commit the crime, if they do not have a firearm to use they will find something else to help them in their act.Guns are easy to get in the USA, as long as you are a law biding citizen with no criminal record, have not been in a mental hospital and in some states you have to take classes and courses (which I believe everyone should have to take, safety first) .
There is a big difference between Ed Flancher,myself and the rest of the responsible gun owners in America vs the "gun" culture that the media and Hollywood makes us out to be. we value and follow the rules the law gives us, we are very responsible with our firearms and treat them with the utmost respect. Other people, criminals, gangs and people who have firearms who shouldn't have them are the ones that need to be dealt with. And that is not an easy job.
I'm not sure how things are in the Philippines, I know it is a good country with lots of good people and I know that they have the same problems with firearms that we have here.in the wrong hands, firearms are a problem, it's like that with anything that ends up in the wrong hands.
I think some of your methods are good, but target the wrong people. I would suggest that you use your methods to punish those who misuse(d) firearms, make the crimes so harsh that they won't or can't happen with the same person again.
Putting everyone into one category is unjust, If I am a law biding citizen and do not have a criminal record, why should I be treated as a convicted felon? If the Police know who I am, know that I have no convictions and a clean police record and they know I have registered firearms, where is the harm in that?
Statistically, law biding citizens with concealed weapon permits are not a threat, very rarely have they used their firearms in crimes or anger. And in a lot of cases we have also used our firearms to stop crimes from happening, Media and Hollywood won't show that because it is more entertaining and exciting to show someone misusing them than responsibly using them
My Response:
Not giving a gun-carry permit to ALL (including you) is not an act of treating you a convicted felon. There is no methodology yet that is able to determine which of the hands are wrong for firearm carry permit. Everyone is safer when everyone does not carry a firearm.
Reaction from the Public:
But see, you've missed everything I've just said. Convicted felons can not get a permit to carry a gun. I am not a felon so taking away my right to have that permit does put me in that same group as the felon.
Have you seen what is happening in England? when the English people lost their rights to own firearms the crime rate sky rocketed. What gives you the right to say who can and who can not have something?
You are taking an object out of a criminal element and you assume that with that object removed that criminal activity will stop. Let me ask you this. How many bullets were fired on September 11th 2001? How many guns were used to kill over 3,000 people?
My Response:
In my NEW policy, there will be separate requrements for (1) permit to own firearm and (2) permit to carry firearm out-house.
In my NEW policy, not only convicted felons are disallowed to carry gun, but ALL and EVERYONE is disallowed to carry gun with exemption to policement in uniform and on-duty.
In my NEW policy, gun ownership will still be permitted for household protection and sports purposes, but there will be tight QUALIFICATION. To get a license to own a gun, the person must present evidences of existence of real estate ownership and existence of substantial amount of personal income.
In my NEW policy, the number of ammunition that will be allowed for each gun permit will be RATIONALIZED.
In my NEW policy, you shall see a government that is very effective in operating searchpoints and frisks, such that it would be impossible for a person to move a concealed gun or any bladed weapon in street distances from one house to another.
Reaction from the Public:
You are going to have to figure out a way to pay for one massive police force. Even if it is government run they still need to get paid. Your policy is going to place someone between every single house to search anyone who walks down the street?
Not only is that impractical, it is also a waste of resources and also grounds for harassment.What if I am walking home from the market with milk? How many check points will I have to pass before I go home?
Will I be given papers the way the Jews in Germany were given as well?
And now your policy states that only people with homes and who have an "existence of substantial amount of personal income" can apply for a permit.
You said that people with firearms on the street "terrorize" people, but now after being so dead against it, you are allowing people to have a permit to carry a firearm?
So, now you are excluding people just because they don't make enough money,again falls under discrimination. And how much money is a substantial amount?
... "you shall see a government that is very effective in operating searchpoints and frisks, such that it would be impossible for a person to move a concealed gun or any bladed weapon in street distances from one house to another". The only way for this would be for strip searches and body cavity searches.
Your policy is very oppressive.
My Response:
With the same number of police force, what I will do is operationalize a perfectly mobile checkpoints in various random areas. Policemen checkpoint team are assigned different places everyday, and the headquarters makes decision as to where the checkpoints will be located. Hours of change-venue of chackpoints will also be unannounced and random.
The frisking will only be to search for guns and bladed weapons. The police will not look for your identity paperwork in a routine frisk, unless you are caught red-handed possessing or carrying with prohibitted materials not limited to guns. No strip searches. No body cavity searches. Just a simple metal detector search and dog sniffers for drugs.
Gun license for home use is essentially for the purpose of protecting your property and self-value. If you have nothing in value to protect, I think you don't need a gun, so I will not give you permit. While you are still poor, I will give you a free stick to protect your household.
If you consider police visibility as harassment, I am beginning to think you are the ones with the "wrong hands" I mention earlier, that is why you don't want tighter gun-carry policies.
People always complain why Police arrives only at the scene after the crime. It means they want Police to prevent crimes. My tighter gun-carry policies are intended to meet that level of law enforcement service that the public demands.
Reaction from the Public:
"Gun license for home use is essentially for the purpose of protecting your property and self-value. If you have nothing in value to protect, I think you don't need a gun, so I will not give you permit."So, what you are saying is that, my TV and my money are worth protecting and my family is not? my family is not my property and I don't value them in the sense of dollars and cents.
And now you can tell you does and does not need a gun? Can you also tell who does and does not need a door lock?
How about who does and does not need 911.Hitler, Stalin and Mao would have loved you
My Response:
I forgot to mention that your family will be included in the valuation of real estate value as long as your family member lives with you under one roof.
Well, the door-lock could be a related analogy. But I think if you don't have a door, you don't need a door lock. Have you ever heard of a crime using a door-lock as a weapon of the criminal to over-power the victim?
Forget Hitler, Stalin and Mao. Lenin is my idol.
Reaction from the Public:
I own several guns, why? Because I use different guns for different types of game. 22 or 20 gauge for squirrels, 12 gauge shotgun for ducks or waterfowl, 223 for coyote, 12 slug gun for deer, 30-06 for deer or hogs, 7mm magnum for deer.
See why I oppose any gun regulations? I'm not a criminal and most hunters own many guns for similar reasons.
I'... See Moreve also taken game with handguns, its my choice. And my freedom of choice that I will not give up. Someone with intent to murder or commit crime is not choosy about the weapon they use, they'll use the first thing they can get their hands on.
If you watch Cops or similar shows, you'll see those people will commit crime with anything, quite ridiculous at times but that goes to show how stupid they are to start with. I'd be willing to bet that most guns in the U.S. are owned by sportsman and used accordingly.
Felons buy or trade for guns all the time, but its from other felons. A tricky subject but goes back to the ones that live outside the laws that are already in place and taking away my freedom because of them is not going to happen.
My Response:
It is okay if you own several guns for hunting, you can easily get license fro sports and hobby purposes. Under my new policy, all hobbyists will just have to deposit it in the arsenal depository of the hunting-range club house, you can't bring your guns and ammo home. For hunting purposes, your freedom of choice of gun will not be taken away from you.
There is no such thing as gun-production companies by felons. Guns in the street are produced in legitimate gun factories. After the guns leave the factory, they pass though hands of good people before they reach the bad people. That's is the anomaly.
My solution ONE is, implement a tighter licensing requirements for the good-people-sector. Regulate also the movement of guns and rationalize the allowable amount of ammunition.
My solution TWO is, deter the bad-people sector using police check-points.
My solution THREE is, regulate also the policemen to prevent abuse. They have to be treated the same way as any civillian when they are off duty and not wearing uniform.
Reaction from the Public:
So the Phillipine government must be one of a kind. What makes you think that corruption isn't in your politics? Stalin is your idol? Seriously? I'm postive that these ideas of yours will only be that, ideas. Not realistic in America or any democratic country, have you noticed how Obama's approval rating has fallen through the floor in one year? He promised things that he can't deliver and he's implementing policies that free people don't agree with. We don't not agree with Communism or Socialism or Facism. If those are the type of government you like than maybe you should live in those type of countries, not America.
My Response:
I told you that Lenin is my idol because you mentioned some names who are out of the topic. Purist capitalists will not work in the long run because the exploitation of the rich over the working class will eventually explode. Purist Communists will also not work in the long run because there are always lazy people you can't force to work. Purist Socialists will also not workin the long run because the freedom of those who want to excel are suppressed. I am an independent politician in Philippines who advocates a good mix of capitalism, communism, socialism, theocracy, and democracy in every law that I will legislate. But this is really out of the topic. Is there a way you can go back to the gun-crime issue?
Reaction from the Public:
My mistake, Lenin not Stalin.In any society, you will have the criminal element. All levels of each class will have bad apples. Its human nature and to expect a government to control all aspects of people's life's will not ensure safety for everyone. Its been a problem since the beginning of time, its not a gun issue its a people issue. Gun ... See Morecontrol is not an option in my country because we fought and died for these rights and freedoms. If you grew up in this country you would understand it better. The restrictions you want to impose on others may intern be imposed on you by someone that has more authority or money or influence. Maybe someone will say that no car needs to travel more than ten miles a day or go faster than 50 mph. Its safer for everyone that way. Removing guns from society will lead to other types of weapons being used and then you will have taken away freedom from hard working honest people. Why would you want to harm the legitimate "good" people?
My Response:
Indeed, Gun Control is not an option in the US because you are primarily a gun-producing country and your economic direction is towards becoming a military super power in the whole world. The movies and TV shows that you produce that that are distributed worldwide are primarily intended to "showcase" the superiority of your war weapons and your army.
Well, I don't care how Americans will run their government. I don't care what amount of responsibility and accountability the Americans will associate with their sense of Freedom.
It is your affairs.In the Philippines, I am the politician of the near next generation. I promise you, as long a I am alive, I will prevent any foreign guns from entering Philippines, especially those that comes from US. I wil advocate in the whole Asia that in case we need to import guns, we will get it from neighboring nations within SouthEastAsia. And your Rambo-type movies will be a contraband film in the Philippines when my time will come.
Did I ever say I will remove guns from society?
Reaction from the Public:
Hi john check this video ..this is very interesting http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu5j8C2Hrc0&feature=related this could be your mother , your sister or your cousin.. your pick (Andy)
My Response:
1. Please read our advocacy before you started reacting.
2. The Youtube says Ruth is unarmed in her house when she was attacked. Our adocacy allows gun ownership permits for in-house protection purpose, but we do not allow guns to be carried outhouse.
3. I have gun at home, my mother, sister and cousin is safe at home. But outside house, they don't carry firearm along with 99.99% of the population who does not carry firearm. So, why should I want the .01% of the population to carry firearm if that .01% don't know who among themselves are bad and who are good in every second of their lives. I represent the weak and the gunless, that is why I prefer a NO GUN OUTDOORS except for cops on duty and in uniform.
Question from the Audience
You mentioned that there will be many checkpoints. Would it is a hasstle to the motorists and people in general gets checked many times in a day?
My Response
That's a very good question. There will actually be two types of gun checkpoints. One is a vehicular checkpoint and the other is a personal checkpoint.
The vehicular checkpoint will be very different that what you see in the past and nowadays. In my new policy, each checkpoint will be manned by uniformed police officers. The checkpoint has a big signage of a checkpoint number of some sort and the motorist can send the checkpoint number to a certain cellphone number that will respond if the checkpoint is legit, location of it, and the name of the officer who man the checkpoint. The officers also have ID numbers on the chest, back and shoulder -- you can text this number to a celphone number that will respond verification if the officer is legitimately assigned in that checkpoint place in that particular time. When a vehicle is checked, the plate number is sent by the officer to the central database, and the next checkpoint will no longer check the same vehicle -- the data is deleted at a random period of hours between 12 hours to 72 hours. There will also be ordinary citizens who will be given the opportunity to act as volunteer "checkers" and "reviewers" of the behavior of the checkpoint officers, they will act like deputized police internal affairs who will report irregular treatments by the checkpoints, and a volunteer's opportunity expires after three days.
The personal checkpoints are already in practice right now in almost all malls in Metro Manila. What I am planning to do is to expand it. These personal checkpoints will be installed in the entrance of rallies, concerts, subdivisions, condominiums, and at the perimeters of "gimikan" in the evening.
Reaction from the Public
You put too much blind faith in government, what happens when the government fails? what then?
What if the land I hunt on is my private land, what if I own over 100 acres of land that no one is allowed on and I have all my hunting tags and I hunt on my own personal private property, am I a criminal I do that?
My Response
There is chance that any government fails, but the government is the only institution we can CONTROL. If that land is your own private property, you may carry a gun outside your house as long as you don't cross the border of your property.
Reaction from the Public
It's no wonder you are so afraid of guns, with laws like yours, I would be afraid of being shot at too. It sounds like you would live by your rules if you were in charge, but would you live under your rules if you were just a citizen?
My Response
As a citizen? Of course YES! No one will be exempted from the no-gun-carry policy outhouse, whether politician, police, military, ordinary citizen.
Reaction from the Public
And yet you do nothing to stop crime. that is the reason to ban guns, is it not? Name me one way how your 'policy' stops crime? all you are doing is giving the government total control of it's people
My Response
Crime causes have many theories and can be stopped from many angles. But I only advocate on one angle, which is tighter gun-carry-policy. I am doing this advocacy to control peace and order by controlling the potential criminals who comes from private individuals and moreso from the criminals who hold office in government. The government must have control of itself and control/respect of the people.
Reaction from the Public
So, how do you plan on stopping crime in the real world?
My Response
So, how do you plan on stopping crime in the real world?
Reaction from the Public
No, Give me a particular way that banning guns is going to stop MURDER, give me a particular way that banning guns is going to stop DRUGS from coming into the country, give me a particular way that banning guns is going to stop ROBBERY, give me a particular way that banning guns is going to stop RAPE, give me a particular way that banning guns is ... See Moregoing to stop TERRORISM. Give me a particular way that any of what your policy does is nothing more than disarming the law biding citizens while doing nothing else to prevent crime.
My Response
In your policy, at pre-crime stage, the police and the citizens would not be able to identify a criminal and a law abiding citizen who both carry guns in the street.In my policy, at pre-crime stage, the police and any citizen would be able to identify a criminal and a law abiding citizen, because a law abiding citizen is not carrying a gun, and ... See Morethe criminal carries a gun. Government checkpoints will be very effective in making the criminals AFRAID to move from one point to another. All of the criminals you mentioned above carry weapons and the most prefered weapon is a gun. And as I have said all over and all over and all over again, we do not advocate TOTAL GUN BAN. What we advocate is tighter gun-carry-policy.
Reaction from the Public
"All of the criminals you mentioned above carry weapons and the most prefered weapon is a gun."you have proof on that? I would love to see the stats on that. Murder has been happening since the beginning of mankind, well before a gun was even thought of, Rape has probably been happening for just as long. Terrorists killed 3000 people in one day ... See Morewith some box cutters and a couple air planes, and you do not need guns to run drugs into a country, one of the most notorious cocaine runners in American history brought coke into the states on private planes.
My Response
We are not in the topic and in the advocacy of stopping non-gun-related crimes. Moreso, we are not in the advocacy of making crime statistics to ZERO. Your mind wanders. Let's just focus on gun-related crimes and finding ways to reduce it effectively. FOCUS: Gun-Related Crimes
I would like to invite you all to join the first division of my Advocacy Group in Facebook entitled Tighter Gun-Carry Policy (Gun Control Advocacy)
Reaction from the Public
I carry my gun outside all the time, I have a concealed weapons permit by my state and my gun is concealed at all times. Seeing how I have a state permit how does that make me a criminal? I've broken no laws and my state and government granted me my license.
My Response
From the perspective of those who does not carry guns, you are exactly that picture above.
Reaction from the Public
That must be the perspective of a paranoid crack head.
My Response
A paranoid crackhead carries gun round the clock for a lifetime. He dies old without ever using the gun for defense purpose. But he's got secrets on moments he used the gun.
Reaction from the Public
You forget that it is illegal for a crackhead to carry a gun in public, so instead of crying about guns cry about lazy cops not enforcing already existing laws.
My Response
Oooops... pointing so something else! He he he. That's a secret crackhead right there, carrying a concealed gun in public!
Reaction from the Public
Make some sense illiterate crackhead, whats pointing?? i'm not allowed a concealed gun in public, in australia and the u.k that is a government approved activity for criminals only. Do paranoid crackheads also carry around pepper spray and stun guns, You know, mostly women who have used those two devices to fend off rapists?How many other women and men for that matter that carry these two devices around carry them and thankfully never use them? John, when you must be a paranoid crackhead when you get in your car and put on your seat belt and get behind its airbags. Oh and John, you're all about government. government, government and government that is your answer to everything, well my government gave me the permit to carry my pistol. You know, I hope I never have to use my gun, and if I could see the future and see that I would need it one day thirty years from now, I would only take it out on that day.
Joe, the problem with John is that he has no idea what he is talking about. His only defense is guns bad/government good. and is reply to anything that he has to answer for is 'government check points"
See John comes from a second world country, He doesn't truly understand freedom, he doesn't understand what a privilege it is for a country's population to be allowed to own let alone carry a firearm . The right to bear arms is the second amendment, that means that the only thing more important to the second amendment is the first amendment and that is freedom of speech.
I've run circles around John and have shown time and time and time again that his 'policy' is worthless, it doesn't work and it would never work. His 'policy' is an oppressive policy aimed at taking away from the citizens and giving all to government and he has even admitted himself that he worships Lennon (and not John Lennon) so that tells you what he really has in mind, he wants power, not to stop gun crimes
My Response
That picture above depicts who you are. Criminals hiding behind sheeps clothing.
Reaction from the Public
You're pathetic, you ignore everything I said and this is the best response you have? I received my license to purchase and carry hand guns and revolvers from the federal government (you know, the people you put all your faith into) they checked me out and with my license it proves that I am not a criminal.
And what grounds do you call me a criminal? Are you judge, jury and executioner? you know, Hitler labeled Jews criminals the way you are labeling people who own guns the same way.
My Response
You are the one who set the new rules of the personal mudslinging instead of intellectual discussion. And now you are complaining about the new rules? That's exactly how criminals think! So that's it! That's exactly you! You are it!
Reaction from the Public
So anyone who doesn't agree with you is a criminal?
My Response
In the same rule as anyone who doesn't agree with you is a follower of Hitler. You set the rule of the game.
Reaction from the Public
Haha, are you going to use the "I'm rubber and your glue" defense next? I like when people disagree with me, freedom of speech is wonderful, I don't try and take away their rights and label them criminals like you have with the picture above.
My Response
Lets assume you are a subset of a group of people who carry gun outside house. Another subset of the same group are the criminals. How do you differentiate yourselves as good man and criminal at PRE-CRIME stage?
Reaction from the Public
Are you serious?
My Response
I am serious. You are in a big room of 1,000 people who carries guns. one of you in that room is a would-be criminal who will go amok any moment. Are you safe in that room?
Think that that room is a movie house. It's dark. You are watching movie. You have a gun just like anyone else. But you know that any moment, one of you will start shooting people inside that room. Doyou feel safe in that room?
Reaction from the Public
Do you have the I.Q. of 15?
If a person pulls out a gun and shoots people,(criminal) and takes lives, I (not criminal) will remove my gun and kill the guy who is shooting into the crowd of people saving lives. And if you are in a room with that many people, you would probably have to go through metal detectors and security to make sure you are not armed first.
My Response
I thought it's okay for you that everyone carries a gun for defense purpose. And now you like metel detectors, well that's a good start of you liking my policy.
You don't know whose gonna get shot first. I am just asking if you are safe in that room. Do you feel safe in that room? Yes or No.
Reaction from the Public
I have said time and time and time and time again (proving that you don't read what I say but just come up with your own shit) that I am for people carrying guns the way I carry mine, legally and with legal permits. (not criminal)
a person who does not carry a permit and carries a firearm is doing so illegally and is a criminal (criminal).
and yes, if I am in the room and have my legally carried firearm with me, I feel very safe.
what if in that same room, that same criminal carried a bomb on his person, how would your policy stop that?
My Response
Before you answer my question. I would just like to go back to your statement that I am supposed to rebutt. You said thatif a personpulss out a gun and shoots people and take lives, you would remove your gun and kill the guy shooting into the crowd. Here is what I'm gonna say to that. Well, I hope no one else who thinks he is good will also shoot you for his safety. But have you ever thought that your defense have only became a good purpose only AFTER lives are already taken?
Your gun is too late. Someone was already shot in that DARK room! Crime was already committed! The gun you are carrying to defend yourself did not work in PREVENTING crime!
Now, you are looking at the checkpoint, that all of you who carries a gun in that movieroom must deposit all guns in the depsitory before you enter inthe movie room -- no exemption.
Reaction from the Public
No, now it's a dark room? Was it the butler? Did he use a candle stick?
John, if people see someone shooting people for no reason at all and then see someone shoot that person, you don't have to add 2+2 to figure out who is not trying to kill you and who is trying to kill you. (this is called common sense)
I carry my legally registered gun for... See More my protection, I do not go around looking to stop crime, I am not a police man, but I do carry my gun to protect my life and the lives of those with me.
My Response
Of course. The criminal gunner also carries a registered and licensed gun, just like you. What I am asking is, do you feel safe in that room?
Reaction from the Public
You're right, I am so stupid. Of course a criminal would carry a gun that he would use in a murder or other crime that has all his or her personal information, Why would the criminal want to get a gun from the street or steal one from a gun store or someone's home and make it HARD for the police to find them? I guess all criminals who do crimes ... See Morethat are not gun related also leave their names and addresses with the witnesses so that they can give the police all the info they need to arrest them promptly. A.and as I answered before, yes I do feel safe in that room, because I have the tools to protect my life and the lives of others, where as your policy would make it so that the only person in the room with a gun is the person killing everyone and with no means to stop him/her. That's a real well thought out policy you have there.
My Response
Now I will give you a comparative scenario. You have two separate movie houses, showing the same film. One movie house allows guns to get into the room. The other movie house does not allow guns to enter the room, no exemption. Which room will most movie goers prefer, especially those who have family, children and wives going with them to watch movie?
Reaction from the Public
People will go see the movie regardless so it doesn't really matter, you will get more people into the theater that does not allow guns because you have to be (at least in America) over 21 years old to own a hand gun. So your theater that does not allow guns will have more people in it mainly because more people will be under the age of 21 who want to see a movie. Keep setting them up John, I'm having fun knocking them down. If I were a bowler,this would be a perfect game.
My Response
Now, imagine that those two movie houses are America and Asia.
My friend, the direction of the wind will change in due time.
Reaction from the Public
I was, and I hope the wind does change soon because I am tired of smelling all your bullshit.
My Response
In my time to come, Tourist and Immigrant visa to Philippines will be 100 fold more expensive that visa to USA. And I hope US will not become a Nigeria with lots of guns and fat lazy people.
Reaction from the Public
T.that's a great plan, make a country that depends on tourist dollars to survive all of the sudden not get any tourist dollars at all and go under and sink, you have fun with that.
My Response
Tourist dollars? Did I mentioned tourist dollars? Would we encourage tourist dollars with very high visa fee?
Ahhh okay. I got it. Tourist will come and insist on coming to us despite high visa fee because they know they will be safe here with no guns around and our beaches are nice and we don't have winter. Yousee, you are learning now the benefits of a gunless outdoors.
Reaction from the Public
There are four major terrorist groups active in the Philippines today: The Moro National Liberation Front, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Abu Sayyaf and the New People's Army.
Gunless outdoors you say?
My Response
I know that. They are not on city streets. They are in the forest and mountains. Their heavy firearms are all US-made, many of which are war surplus of the Americans. Their never-ending ammunitions are mostly coming from Philippine Armed Forces arsenal. They a have political fronts and they rub elbows with the local politicians. They are the "... See Moreorganized" crime groups in the provinces, they sometimes mix up with the regular population, and I have very doable plans to eradicate them effectively by installing checkpoints to cut their access to major economic supplies. I will open up seats in Senate for their representatives to battle peacefully in a debate. And I will ensure that armed struggles, in whatever form, is not a workload of the courts, not a workload of the Military, but of the Police and the Mortality statistics office.
Reaction from the Public
Wrong again, Mostly all terrorists despise American weapons and cling to AK-47 models made by everyone but the Americans.
Hhy don't you go tell them all about your policy, after all, they have all the weapons outside, they carry them outside, go send some police check points over there, hahaha
My Response
What? AK-47 here in Philippines? Your mind wanders withyour Discovery Chanel propaganda. Organized crimes here don't carry AKs. They carry M16 because that's what's supplied to them by crooks in the Philippine Military that rub elbows with the Americans gun-runners at the borders. AKs is not a good buy here because Philippines does not produce AK47... See More ammo.
And YES, I shall have heavily armed police units in the provinces specially trained to eradicate these organized groups. And every piece of gun we recover from the terrorists here, we will make sure that we will mention (in our press releases and news and national propaganda) the name of the nation who makes these guns being held by the organized crime groups.
Reaction from the Public
Where did you get the idea that checkpoints on the streets can effectively stop gun crimes?
My Response
I got the idea from a bank robber. He said he had experienced at least a dozen of robberies in Metro Manila. He said that they are not afraid of opponent guns in the rob site because they are fully aware of it and they know they can overpower them. He said that what they are afraid of is "surprise" police checkpoints from their hide-out going to the bank that they will rob. He said that they usually send at least two advance parties to ensure that there is no checkpoint along the way.
Reaction from the Public
How can you ensure that there will be no abusive searches in checkpoints?
My Response
This is the easy part. That can be done through a lot of ways. First, the police must be trained to be friendly and must be repeatedly seminared on their limitation of search. Each vehicle will have a primer (reading material FAQ) on checkpoints. There will be volunteer private citizens who will act like an ordinary driver and will review checkpoint operations. Policemen and checkpoints will have some sort of a big plate number wherein the motorist can text to the the headquarters -- in prompt text response, the HQ will tell if the checkpoint in that particular location and the policemen is legitimate. Etc. etc etc...