1 PTCFOR for every gun holder

http://www.journal.com.ph/index.php/nat ... lder-.html

1 PTCFOR for every gun holder - People's Journal
Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:47


The Philippine National Police will allow one Permit-to-Carry Firearm Outside of Residence for every licensed gun holder provided they submit nine requirements, said PNP spokesman Chief Supt. Leonardo A. Espina.

Espina said PNP chief Director General Jesus A. Verzosa decided to issue one PTCFOR for a handgun.

“Those in possession of automatic rifles and machine pistols will not be given a PTCFOR,” he said.

A single PTCFOR will be issued to a licensed gun holder provided he or she submits an application form with 2X2 ID pictures; a letter- request addressed to the Chief, PNP (Attention, Chief, Firearms and Explosives Division), proof or document showing that the applicant is under actual threat or his life is in imminent danger, a xerox copy of the renewed firearm license, a xerox copy of the expired permit for renewal; NBI or Directorate for Intelligence clearance (Regional Intelligence Clearance for provincial applicants), neuro-psychiatric test, drug test and gun safety seminar with pictures during the seminar and actual proficiency test (firing test).

Private individuals, including businessmen and professionals, have to pay a PTCFOR fee of P4,000 plus P150 for the PTCFOR ID card.

Verzosa said a maximum of one long and one short firearm will be issued to every individual. Those holding two licensed firearms prior to the issuance of the new directive will be allowed to keep them in their houses. Owners of more than two guns should also register them regularly with the PNP Firearms and Explosives Division to avoid any criminal liability.

Espina said police will accost gun holders, including members of the PNP, the Armed Forces and other law enforcement agencies, carrying guns in the streets without a PTCFOR. Alfred Dalizon


Do note however that the said maximum availability of firearms is out of contex of his directive to to this Executive Order






Amending General Order No. 7, dated September 23, 1972; 
General Order No. 7-A, dated September 30, 1972; 
General Order No. 7-B, dated January 17, 1973; 
and General Order No. 7-C, dated February 21, 1973

     WHEREAS, General Order No. 7 provides that only officers and men of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and police officers in the actual performance of their official mission or duty shall be allowed to carry firearms outside of their residence;

     WHEREAS, General Order No. 7-A provides that agents of the National Bureau of Investigation shall be allowed to carry firearms outside of their residence while in actual performance of their official mission or duty, to include guards of the Bureau of Prisons and of Provincial and City Jails provided that they carry only within the premises of the prison or jail and/or while escorting prisoners;

     WHEREAS, General Order No. 7-B provides that officers and enlisted personnel in the active service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines may hold under license a maximum of only one (1) low-powered rifle and one (1) sidearm of any type or caliber; limits the number of firearms to be possessed by each individual and regulates the operations of gun clubs;

     WHEREAS, General Order No. 7-C provides that commissioned officers in good standing of the Reserve Force, Armed Forces of the Philippines who are in inactive status may hold under license only one (1) low-powered rifle and one (1) sidearm not higher than caliber .45 pistol;

     WHEREAS, the rising threat to peace and order posed by criminal insurgency, subversion, and the secessionist involvement requires the dedicated efforts not only of law enforcement agencies but private citizens as well

     WHEREAS, the present thrust of the Philippine National Police is to combat all kinds of criminality, while current government programs need the support and participation of the citizenry to effectively prevent and suppress criminality and to maintain public order and safety in the land;

     WHEREAS, Section 887 of the Revised Administrative Code, which has not been repealed, provides that any person desiring to possess one or more firearms for personal protection or for use in hunting or other lawful purposes only, and ammunition thereof, shall apply for a license to possess such firearm or firearms and/or ammunition as hereinafter provided;

NOW THEREFORE I, JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA, President of the Republic of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by law, do hereby order:

     Section 1. General Orders 7, 7-A, 7-B and 7-C which authorize certain individuals to possess and carry firearms, limit the number of firearms to be possessed, and regulate the operation of gun clubs, are hereby repealed.

     Section 2. Henceforth, all citizens of the Philippines may possess firearms of any type and/or caliber; Provided that such firearms are not classified as crew-served weapons (CSWs), light anti-tank weapons (LAWs), light machine guns (LMGs), anti-tank and anti-personnel recoilless rifles, bazookas, etc.; Provided further that such firearms are test-fired for ballistics, stenciled and properly licensed.

     Section 3. Only uniformed personnel of the Philippine National Police, officers and enlisted men of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and agents of the National Bureau of Investigation are authorized to carry their licensed firearms outside their residence while in the actual performance of their official mission or duty. All other firearm license holders have to apply for a Permit to Carry Firearms Outside of Residence (PTCFORs) in order to avail of this privilege.

     Section 4. The Philippine National Police shall issue the necessary rules and regulations to implement this order.

     Section 5. All orders, issuances, rules and regulations or parts thereof inconsistent with this Executive Order are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

     Section 6. This Executive Order shall take effect immediately.

Done in the City of Manila this 24th day of February, in the year of our Lord, Two Thousand.

By the President
Joseph Ejercito Estrada


just in...the link of the source is already broken..."ERROR 404" don't know what that means but...what you think happened?...salamat lang na cut and paste ko pa!...

Yeah that was weird, but I

Yeah that was weird, but I just tried it and it's working now.

Let's wait it out first

Let's wait it out first before reacting and see if this is reported elsewhere. Maybe People's Journal is just trying to use shock tactics for more visitors...

There are limitations, right?

I know the C,PNP can issue rules and regulations but such should be for the implementation of laws enacted by congress or executive orders from the office of the president. My understanding is "proceedural" lang yung authority ng C,PNP ... as such he/she can not implement rules and regulations in violation or not consistent with laws and executive orders. Di ba ganoon?

Yes you are right

Correct. The PNP can only implement rules which are consistent with law and executive orders. The Chief PNP cannot contradict policies which are stated in Executive Orders by the President. Apparently, Verzosa is not only anti-gun he is ANTI-BRAINS.

A simple letter to the President or the Executive Secretary should correct this unlawful act. Worst case scenario, Verzosa can be sued for this, among other things.

Copy of official memo is the key.

I think a copy of the official memo issued by the C,PNP must be secured prior to writing to the Office of the President or the Executive Secretary.  Without the written proof (memo), the C,PNP can simply claim that he was misqouted by media.  Possibly he might say that what he stated was, "I would prefer that only 1 PTCOR be issued per legitimate gun owner, more specifically I believe it should be limited to a handgun. Furthermore, I will propose that we return to the one long, one short policy for civilian firearm ownership."

We should not allow him the opportunity to claim that media, as it does happen, simply overstated what was his professional opinion as though it was an actual order for implementation.  That considering the demands of his responsibility he saw no need to spend time correcting an error which was not his to begin with. That as a professional enforcement officer and a gentleman he is aware of the bounds of his authority as specified by law or special executive order.  However, obedience does not restrict him from expressing an opinion or proposing a suggestion which should in fact be expected from his office as overseer and implementor.


What is the law?

This is a very good point. We're hearing lots of things in the media but it is unclear whether these moves are someone's opinion on what should happen, or if it is actually to be implemented by law.

Where can we find out?


DepEd Sec Bro. Armin Luistro is correct in saying that the media often muddles the issue. Another matter....they fight tooth and nail for the Freedom of Information Act, but cries "violation of press freedom" in the Right to Reply Act.


They wish to bake the cake and eat it too.

Sneaky little devil?

What are the chances that C,PNP intentionally planned it this way?

Notice how all this information was released to the media through another person?  I may be wrong but I have not come across any news format (print or tv) which directly qouted the C,PNP personally stating this supposed directives.  Of course it may be argued that this is S.O.P.; wherein all branches of government maintain official spokespersons.  But consider this, in the absence of an official written directive or memo from the Office of the C,PNP, should push turn to shove this could conveniently turn into a he said, she said situation.  C,PNP can conveneintly claim that what he expressed as a personal opinion and preference was interpreted as a directive by his subordinates who consequently released this to the media.

Meanwhile, as no one has filed any formal complaint regarding these supposed directives to a higher office with the power to call the C,PNP to task, the popular belief that these directives are official and enforced is achieving it's planned effects:

>  should the gun community contest (through the media) the 1 PTCOR policy limited to handguns ... the neutral majority would likely wonder why the hell an individual can not feel secure with a handgun to protect himself outside of his home. These guys must be so paranoid they'd need more than one gun, more so a high power rifle for defense outside of residence;

>  notice in the various forums how gun enthusiast have suppressed there desire to purchase new firearms, concerned with the supposed return to the 1 long, 1 short policy.  this at a time when gun discounts are offered left and right even before the scheduled gun show;

>  notice how a lot of gun owners, even those accustomed to having PTCOR's have a adopted a wait and see stance in lieu of news that applications are mostly on hold, new guidelines and requirements are yet being finalized and mental conditioning that fees will most likely be increased; and

>  more ... more ... more.  I can go on but I trust you get what I'm driving at.

NEVER UNDER ESTIMATE THE OPPOSITION ... specially someone with the benefit of military training, galing sa psy-war ng mga iyan.


E.O. 194

I think that E.O. 194 is still valid. The CPNP cannot overstep a presidential issuance by making a contrary opinion.Lets wait and see and if they will insist on their interpretation of the law, let us go to the Courts.