We’ve known that the recent school shootings were not isolated incidents. And while lawmakers are scrambling to ban social media and violent online video games for minors, little attention is paid on addressing the bigger issue of how these children got access to the guns to begin with.
According to news reports, the guns used by the different child perpetrators were owned by their family. These firearms, which were licensed to either security men or police officers, were left unattended and within easy reach of the minors who obtained them. For example, the two minor suspects from the Tacloban shooting got their weapons from a police officer aunt and a former security guard grandfather. Meanwhile, the shooter in Zamboanga got his firearm after it was left behind by his father in a vehicle.
What are the raps that reckless gun owners can face for negligence?
Stronger Penalties Sought
An individual must meet certain qualifications to be able to own firearms for self-defense. Republic Act No. 10591, or the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act, requires psychiatric and drug tests, a gun safety seminar, and police clearance.
The act specifically recognizes negligent loss of a firearm as a ground for the revocation, cancellation, or suspension of license or permit. Under Section 39, it lists commission of a crime or offense involving the firearm, ammunition, or major parts thereof; and loss of the firearm, ammunition, or any parts thereof through negligence.
Currently, it penalizes the individual who used it unlawfully with imprisonment of prision mayor to reclusion temporal, which ranges from six years to 20 years of jail time. If it was used for a crime, it would then be classified as an aggravating circumstance, which promises a heavier penalty.
For Philippine National Police (PNP) personnel, there are stricter rules set. Under the PNP Memorandum Circular No. 2022-117, PNP personnel who have negligently “appropriated, taken or misappropriated, or have consented to the taking by another person of his issued handgun” will be criminally charged with the crime of malversation of public property. It also cited Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.
There is also an amended law from 1997, Republic Act No. 8294, colloquially known as the “Robin Padilla Law,” which reduced the penalties for illegal firearm possession and made possession of loose firearms a bailable offense. Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) Chief Jonvic Remulla recently called for the revision of these penalties to make it non-bailable and impose a full 20 years of jail time, as well as the need for a more comprehensive law.
“Gun ownership also carries with it gun responsibility. The government should have the right to inspect their homes at any time and to see if the guns are in safekeeping at any time,” Remulla said in a statement. He further highlighted that owning guns is a privilege and not a right.
On August 25, the Department of Justice (DOJ) recommended the filing of reckless imprudence resulting in multiple homicide and physical injuries charges against the police staff — the aunt of one of the shooters in the Tacloban attack — whose gun was used. The aunt also previously admitted that she once brought her nephew to a firing range.
The privilege of legally owning a firearm only demands a few things in return, and this includes the obligation to make sure that the gun does not become a child’s access point to violence.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Yes. Under RA 10591 Section 39, negligent loss of a firearm is grounds for license revocation, and the individual who lost it can face imprisonment ranging from prision mayor to reclusion temporal — six to 20 years — depending on how the firearm was used.
Republic Act No. 10591, the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act, sets ownership requirements including psychiatric and drug tests, gun safety seminars, and background checks, and recognizes negligent loss as grounds for license suspension or revocation.
Under PNP Memorandum Circular No. 2022-117, personnel found to have negligently allowed their issued handgun to be taken can be criminally charged with malversation of public property, citing Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.
Republic Act No. 8294, known as the Robin Padilla Law, is a 1997 amendment that reduced penalties for illegal firearm possession and made the offense bailable — a provision the DILG Chief has called to reverse.
On August 25, the Department of Justice recommended charges of reckless imprudence resulting in multiple homicide and physical injuries against the police officer aunt whose firearm, previously used to bring her nephew to a firing range, was taken and used in the attack.
Recommended Video
