Now the Philippine Gun Culture's the Problem

T

Tom Servo

Staff
There's an article over at the UK Telegraph in which Alex Spillius claims relief efforts are being hampered because of a "prevalence of guns."

This comment is particularly inaccurate when one reflects on the various hotspots on the African continent:

But there are few disaster zones in the world where nightfall is punctuated by the sound of gunfire and aid agency convoys need to wait for the army to restore a semblance of order before leaving their warehouses.
Click to expand...

He brings up an interesting statistic, though. There are 4.7 guns/100 people in the Philippines. We have 89 guns/100 people. The Philippine murder rate is 8.9/100,000 people, while ours is averaged out to 4.7/100,000.

(It's worth noting that Spillius claims the Philippine murder rate is 3 times ours. I'm not sure where he got that.)
 
Last edited:
It is an interesting article, but not surprising that it contains factual holes spread by the anti-gun media.

The murder rate is among the highest in Asia and three times that of the United States, at 8.9 homicides per 100,000.
Click to expand...

This line from the article does not state if that statistic is solely homicide by firearms only. I would speculate that many homicides also happen by knife and other means.

There is no 2A in the Philippines. Only the rich, corrupt, or military groups (and rebels/criminals) have access to guns. There is no comparison to the US because here most any resident in a free state (or even a restricted one) can own a gun.
 
I think both your posts are a little off. The Philippines has an active and legal gun culture. Here's the first article I found in a search. It's about the reduced rights they have after a recent law, which still allows armed defense:

http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/06/02/949166/new-law-gets-strict-gun-ownership

A great number of people I've talked to on various gun forums over the years have been Filipinos. They talk about owning and going to the range like we do.


Also, if the author says that it is unusual to be in a disaster zone where you hear gunfire, I doubt he's including a war zone as a disaster. Much of Africa is living hell, but nearly all of it is from tribal, racial, religious and political fighting. But every tsunami, flood, earthquake, volcano and hurricane I can think of was in the Americas or Asia. And the only other time I recall shooting being part of disaster was Katrina, and there really wasn't much aside from the cops). The Turks weren't shooting at each other after their last quake.

I just don't think that every time someone says that gun violence is a problem it is politically motivated. Some areas of the world have problems with gun violence. It sounds like the incredibly desperate survivors are using their guns as assets - which is a problem, and news worthy.
 
I lived in the Philippines for several years and it is a much different place than most can comprehend, if they have not been there. It is a place of extremes between the haves and have nots. My Navy pay was about $600 a month and I was considered to be in the wealthy category. The "average" person is in a daily struggle just to keep their family fed.

Business is often conducted in a neighborhood or town mafia kind of way. If you want to get something done in a timely manner you have to know somebody that knows somebody or "tip" the right official. If you want to run a business you pay the "tax" to the right people. If you do not your application might never make it to the top of the stack. If you do not pay the correct taxes in a timely manner your business will probably burn down or you might just come up missing.

All of the people I new that had guns were private security for the wealthy or were part of the "tax" collectors crew.

If looting is going on it is probably more on the end of finding food and water than upgrading to a plasma screen TV. If the TV's are being looted it is probably to sell for food or being held hostage to get money for food.

It is an intriguing and beautiful country with some really great and resourceful people. If you want to see amazing things produced from almost nothing it is the place to go.

I guess my point is the news reporters and the rest of us should be careful judging a people and place we have little or no understanding of.
 
If that 'gun culture' consists or extreme religious warriors there might be some cause to be concerned.

Kinda doubt that religion, of any sort, was the main focus of the author's intentions.



salty
 
Last edited:
I read that today. Unreal. It's not the extreme poverty and logistical nightmare, but the guns that are a problem yet again. 7000 islands with about 2000 populated islands, imagine being on some of those remote locations WITHOUT guns and you'd be in trouble 365 days a year.
 
My wife is Filipina and I have been there many times. Gun ownership among most of the common citizens is not very common. The biggest problem with the relief aid is that areas in greatest need happen to be in the southern parts which have the greatest share of Muslim terrorist groups and anti-government rebels who do happen to be armed. Many of these areas carried travel warnings for foreignors under normal circumstances. The aid convoys are being attacked by organized political groups, not by the few individuals who happen to own a gun.
 
Huge +1 to Chaz88

The Philippines (and much of Asia) is very corrupt. There is the rich and privileged few and huge impoverished masses. Add to that an enormous natural disaster and things get ugly.

Make people hungry enough and everyone becomes a criminal.
 
Got the money? You can get a firearm in the Philippines. One coworker had a WW II Thompson that he buried but was dug up by a cousin during the rebellion against Marcos. Another who was a police officer told me that he bought from irregular channels a S&W clone for his duty weapon. It was made there and not very good.

Also had a former coworker who was murdered there. He loved to wear gold jewelry and that got his poorer neighbors jealous. Someone acted on that jealousy/envy.
 
I think both your posts are a little off. The Philippines has an active and legal gun culture. Here's the first article I found in a search. It's about the reduced rights they have after a recent law, which still allows armed defense:
Click to expand...

They may have a legal gun culture, but it is very small and limited to those who can afford it. Remember it is a 3rd world country, unlike the US. Only the upper-middle class and above can afford to even buy guns.

And btw, I lived in the Philippines for over 14yrs. Some of my family on my father's side is military and LEO there. that is probably the only other way to be able to use guns they were issued. Many of my friends there are into airsoft only, not real firearms.

The Philippine murder rate is 8.9/100,000 people, while ours is averaged out to 4.7/100,000.

(It's worth noting that Spillius claims the Philippine murder rate is 3 times ours. I'm not sure where he got that.)
Click to expand...

Yes those numbers don't give the true picture when you take into account the country's population and size:

USA population in 2012: 313 million

4.7/100,000 x 313 million = 27,946 murders

Philippines Pop in 2012: 97million

8.9/100,000 x 97 million = 8633 murders

way less murders in Philippines
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the correction Tom.

I too thought those figures were off. No way a country that small can have as many guns as the US. Firearms are also not that easy to get/purchase by normal law abiding citizens. Its mostly a money issue, but for the most part the Philippines does not have a "gun culture" like the US does.
 
No matter how they shade it when they report it, its not the "gun" culture that is the problem. It is the culture of the strong preying on the weak, might makes right, and criminal selfishness. They just happen to use guns to do it.

Some criminal(s), are robbing rescue supplies (and I suppose, suppliers), its that simple. Call the "gun culture" the problem? I'd say its more like the LACK of a gun culture that is the problem.

The people in need of aid don't have one, nor do those trying to supply aid and failing, because they face armed bandits.

In a lot of the US, besides the police and national guard, there is a large pool of armed citizens that can be drawn upon in severe need. In times of disaster, our people, with our guns do a lot to look after things. They do it pretty well, too, when our govt doesn't stop them.
 
No matter how they shade it when they report it, its not the "gun" culture that is the problem. It is the culture of the strong preying on the weak, might makes right, and criminal selfishness. They just happen to use guns to do it.
Click to expand...

the article hints at that:
Illegal guns are not just carried by criminal gangs and insurgents. They also belong to civilians and politicians who keep private armies.
Click to expand...

This statement from the article is completely false:
It is said that three centuries of Spanish machismo were followed by 50 years of American preaching on the right to bear arms, making for a volatile mixture.
Click to expand...

By saying "it is said" you can just go ahead and dismiss it right away. The US campaign in the Philippines post colonial Spain rule was one of complete oppression. The US killed hundreds of thousands (possibly over a million) of natives in their pacification programs. Weapons were in no way allowed to the native population unless they supported the US rule and even then tightly controlled.
 
Illegal guns are not just carried by criminal gangs and insurgents. They also belong to civilians and politicians who keep private armies.
Click to expand...

This statement from the article is completely false:
Click to expand...

It is not completely false. There are civilians and politicians that keep private armies. "Armies" might be a stretch but large private security forces are common.

I lived down the street from and spent a fair amount of time with one such individual. He was the kind of guy that you did not want to know too well but when he invited you to a party you better have a much better than average reason to say no.
 
It is not completely false. There are civilians and politicians that keep private armies. "Armies" might be a stretch but large private security forces are common.
Click to expand...


That is true.

It was the other statement that is false:

It is said that three centuries of Spanish machismo were followed by 50 years of American preaching on the right to bear arms, making for a volatile mixture.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top