Armed men beat up four traffic enforcers

**nerbyoso** · August 14th, 2006 07:23 PM

hahaha! baka naagawan sila ng negosyo. robin hood? kathang isip lang yun. classic case of small fish eaten by bigger fish.

**smooth** · August 14th, 2006 07:25 PM

sorry OT pero ang napasin ko lang ang SPO1 ay si Ricardo Gomez heheh

muntik nang naging goma

**leoric11** · August 16th, 2006 08:45 PM

If you look closely, lahat halos ng kinuha ay mga communication equipment - cps and handheld radio. The perpetrators only tried to make a full-proof move. This way, the enforcers had no way to call for aid.

If only madalas mangyari to, I believe these crooks in uniform will think twice sa kanilang mga racket.

**squala** · August 17th, 2006 02:27 AM

Originally Posted by mazdamazda

I agree with this.

A lot of people are quick to draw to conclusions.

What if those traffic enforcers was just doing their jobs and chanced upon a group of armed robbers?

If they were to just give a "warning" to those traffic enforcers, why did they have to get also their personal belongings & their government issued radio?

And even if the traffic officers are indeed corrupt, another wrongdoing doesn't correct the previous wrongdoing. We have proper channels to course it thru.

Doing their jobs? I wouldn't think so. Technically, these guys are criminals now, but would they beat up 4 puny traffic enforcers and become fugitives for no reason? Also, they can only desire to clobber them if they apprehended them for stupid reasons, victimized a friend of theirs, or simply a vigilante act for the sake of other motorists in the area.

As for armed robbery, why would they want to steal communication equipment? If they have theft in mind, maybe ambushing a rich guy after a bank withdrawal would be more realistic. And one of us is right, they eliminated possible traces by taking the walkie talkies and stuff with them.

**niky** · August 17th, 2006 10:02 AM

If they have a legitimate complaint, take it up with the police.

If they want to make a statement? Throw rags at them.

But to steal police equipment? To beat up people? That's a civilized way to do things? That's justice? Forgive me if I still don't shed a tear if someone runs those "vigilantes" down and sends them to jail. Robbery and assault, the last time I looked, are still criminal acts.

Two wrongs never make a right. Especially if the SECOND wrong is WORSE than the first. A lousy P500 bribe isn't worth a couple of busted teeth and a bunch of cellphones and walkie-talkies.

What's the ideological difference between this and shooting a teenage girl for being a prostitute? Think about that. Different degrees, but the same thing.

**Driv3er** · August 17th, 2006 10:52 AM

rapang gotham city na talaga ang pilipinas :P

**Galactus** · August 17th, 2006 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by squala

Doing their jobs? I wouldn't think so. Technically, these guys are criminals now, but would they beat up 4 puny traffic enforcers and become fugitives for no reason? Also, they can only desire to clobber them if they apprehended them for stupid reasons, victimized a friend of theirs, or simply a vigilante act for the sake of other motorists in the area.

As for armed robbery, why would they want to steal communication equipment? If they have theft in mind, maybe ambushing a rich guy after a bank withdrawal would be more realistic. And one of us is right, they eliminated possible traces by taking the walkie talkies and stuff with them.

Technically, from a legal standpoint, the crime of armed robbery has been committed. That the incident happened is a fact, and the absence of the equipment is of little importance. There is never any justification for roughing up people, and the mere fact that they were armed doesn't help them.

I also used to endorse vigilantism, but there is always a tendency for them to overstep their bounds. As they say, "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" Who guards the guardians?

Remember the Michael Douglas movie, "The Star Chamber?"

**rab** · August 17th, 2006 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by niky

It's armed robbery, plain and simple. Armed robbery masquerading as "justice".

korekek. kung talagang masama loob nila sa mga traffic enforcers sana binugbog lang at di na ninakawan.

**tsupermario** · August 17th, 2006 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by bolantoy

Armed men beat up four traffic enforcers

The Philippine Star 08/12/2006

Four traffic enforcers, accused of being mulcters, were beaten up by four armed men in Muntinlupa City last Thursday night.

SPO1 Ricardo Gomez said the incident happened at around 10:15 p.m. along the National Road in Barangay Tunasan while traffic enforcers Bayani Pagkalinawan, Raul Orallo, Noel Catabay and Lydia Voces were on duty.

He said the suspects, armed with handguns, accosted the four enforcers and ordered them to lie face down on the pavement. The gunmen divested the traffic enforcers of their cellular phones, handheld radios and wallets.

The suspects then proceeded to punch and kick the four enforcers.

They then dumped Orallo near a lamppost and placed on his neck a placard with the words "Huwag Pamarisan, Buwaya ng Lansangan." The note was signed "Juan dela Cruz."– Rhodina Villanueva

i think the intention of the suspects would classify the crime done. if the intention was to rob, naturally it would be robbery. but if the victims were beaten because of their corrupt acts as lawmen, then it would something else.. assault most probably.

**niky** · August 17th, 2006 06:29 PM

Intentions?

The comission of the crime is what defines the act. Intentions only come into play when determining the seriousness and appropriate punishment.

The act itself is assault and battery. The obviously planned nature of the assault puts it under pre-meditated assault, which carries a heavier fine than merely aggravated assault, which would occur only if the assailant was taunted or pushed into fighting.

And stealing is still stealing, whatever the intent.

Don't let your distaste or hatred of the victim color your judgement. Like I said, if somebody shot someone for any real or imagined offense, however slight... like, oh say... cutting them off in traffic... would you empathize with the shooter? Or how about if they shot him and took his car? Surely taking the car is just revenge for him denting your own...