Pulis 'di kailangang mag-warning shot --Supreme Court

[BoEinG_747]

HINDI na kinakailangang magpaputok muna ng warning shot ang isang pulis dahil may karapatan itong agarang barilin ang isang suspect sa krimen kung kinakailangan itong gawin para lang maisalba ang ibang tao sa kapahamakan.

Ito ang nilalaman ng ibinabang desisyon ka-makailan ng Korte Su-prema matapos nitong ba-liktarin ang naunang desisyon ng Sandiganbayan na sibakin sa serbisyo ang isang pulis sa Nueva Ecija na nakabaril ng isang tu-matakas na magnanakaw.

Sa kautusan ng SC First Division na pinamumu-nuan ni Chief Justice Hilario Davide, inatasan rin nito ang Sandigan-bayan na pawalan sa kulungan si SPO2 Ruperto Cabanlig na dating naka-talaga sa pulisya ng bayan ng Peñaranda dahil sa absuwelto na ito sa pa-mamaril na ikinamatay ng robbery suspect na si Jimmy Valisno na nang-agaw ng baril ng kaniyang mga bantay noong Set-yembre 18, 1992.

"The duty to issue a warning is not absolutely mandated at all times and at all cost, to the detriment of the life of law enfor-cers," anang SC.

Ayon sa Kataastaasang Hukuman, sa pagkaka-taong nakaumang ang banta sa buhay ng isang alagad ng batas at wala nang ibang paraan para magapi ang isang suspect, maaaring palampasin ang kabiguan nitong magpaputok ng warning shot.

Sa record ng kaso, lulan ng isang sasakyan ang arestadong suspect na si Valisno upang samahan ang mga pulis sa pagbawi ng kaniyang mga ninakaw nang madisarmahan nito ang kaniyang escort ng dalang ripleng M-16. Dahil dito, agad na binunot ni SPO1 Cabanlig ang kani-yang baril at pinutukan ang suspect.

Kinampihan naman ng SC ang ginawang hakbang ng pulis. Ayon sa SC, tama ang ginawa nitong barilin agad ang suspect dahil sa maaaring ubusin ng sus-pect ang lahat ng pulis dahil sa uri ng baril na naagaw nito.

"For what is the purpose of a warning? A warning is issued when policemen have to identify themselves as such and to give opportunity to an offender to surrender. A warning in this case was dispensable. Valino knew that he was in the custody of policemen," anang SC.

Bagama't absuwelto na si SPO1 Cabanlig sa kasong homicide, hindi pa rin ito lusot kasama ang iba pang pulis sa kasong gross negligence dahil sa hindi nila pinosasan ang suspect kung kaya't nakapang-agaw ito ng baril. Hindi binili ng SC ang dahilan ng mga pulis na wala silang posas kung kaya't hindi nila pinosasan ang suspect.

Ayon sa SC, kung wala silang posas, dapat sana'y iginapos nila ang suspect upang hindi ito nakapalag.

[docpete]

hostage situation doesnt merit a warning shot.

[yebo]

kahit sa gun safety seminar, definitely sinasabi no more need for warning shot. 2 reasons:
1. pag nag-warning shot ka baka may ibang tamaan.
2. pwede ka pa kasuhan ng illegal discharge of weapon.

if you are going to fire your gun make sure you are shooting a criminal. better the criminal dead than you or someone else dead.

[Bogeyman]

kahit sa gun safety seminar, definitely sinasabi no more need for warning shot. 2 reasons:
1. pag nag-warning shot ka baka may ibang tamaan.
2. pwede ka pa kasuhan ng illegal discharge of weapon.

Exactly. 'Yan din ang tinuro sa ROTC; there's no such thing as a warning shot. Kalokohan lang 'yan, baka nga sa iyo pa bumalik yung bala mo.

Dahil may tatamaan pa rin naman kahit saan mo pa iputok, better make it count and strike the perpetrator directly than risk hitting innocent people.

[BoEinG_747]

im in favor on this ...


but just to be sure...

na sharp shooter mga policeman natin

at mabilis humabol sa mga masasamang loob

para wala madamay na mga inosente na mamamayan

[mrpink]

at mabilis humabol sa mga masasamang loob

.. kaya gusto nalang nila barilin .. para di na sila kelangan humabol .. laki kasi ng tiyan ..

[NightRock]

diba ganon ginagawa ng ibang pulis .. Putok muna sa tao. una tapos warning shot kasunod hehehehe

[vicoyski]

The first shot yata is always a warning shot... Kaso nakatutok na sa target yung baril...

[RedHorse]

dutch national buong pagmamalaki na sinabi sa akin: in netherdalands, you are not even allowed to shoot a robber inside your house.

ako nakangisi: you, mean... you will beg to the robber just to go away?

dutch national: that's the right thing to do!

[yebo]

dutch national buong pagmamalaki na sinabi sa akin: in netherdalands, you are not even allowed to shoot a robber inside your house.

ako nakangisi: you, mean... you will beg to the robber just to go away?

dutch national: that's the right thing to do!

hehehe, i would not be surprised if they even invite the robber to have ***! what do you expect from a country where protitution is legal, where 13 years is the age of consent, where there are reserved park benches where drug addicts can inject morphine and snort cocaine in broad daylight, and where the government protects the most vicious criminals from extradition. only in the netherlands!

[NightRock]

hehehe, i would not be surprised if they even invite the robber to have ***! what do you expect from a country where protitution is legal, where 13 years is the age of consent, where there are reserved park benches where drug addicts can inject morphine and snort cocaine in broad daylight, and where the government protects the most vicious criminals from extradition. only in the netherlands!

Kaya don ang tatago si Joma Sison hahaha

[j_avonni]

Ang alam ko, you give warning shot if the suspect is running away. Pero kung harapan, wala ng warning shot. As mentioned in the previous posts, the danger in warning shot is that the bullet will eventually come down and may hit somebody.

[empy]

the ruling makes sense to me

[nugundam93]

true. shempre if a crazed person's already heading for you with a bladed weapon, do you still fire a warning shot? good luck if you're given the second chance to really fire at him after your warning shot.

that goes without saying na the shot should be to bring down the attacker, pero in those cases, nothing's for sure.

[RedHorse]

true. shempre if a crazed person's already heading for you with a bladed weapon, do you still fire a warning shot? good luck if you're given the second chance to really fire at him after your warning shot.

that goes without saying na the shot should be to bring down the attacker, pero in those cases, nothing's for sure.

no sir...

lalo kung crazed person.... remember yong sharp shooter na pulis? Sabi ng mga taga human rights: exhaust all means to disarm the person, kung nag-naglabas pa lang ng bolo, at wala pang tinamaan na tao, di pa raw pwede barilin.

heard this on a policeman, who responded a call -- madedemanda pa ako, tigil pa sweldo ko... they just followed the crazy bolo-welding person, hanggang napagod at sumuko.

[espeago]

true. shempre if a crazed person's already heading for you with a bladed weapon, do you still fire a warning shot? good luck if you're given the second chance to really fire at him after your warning shot.

that goes without saying na the shot should be to bring down the attacker, pero in those cases, nothing's for sure.

The irony to this is that you probably would have been justified in using lethal force if you shoot in the direction of the perpetrators (instead of intentionally shooting into the air), when they started to advance on you with a weapon.

[oldblue]

pano kung riot? d na pede mag-warning shot.

[backbone]

kailangan maging detalyado ang rule nato at briefing sa mga otoridad,,4 mos. ago dyan sa proj. 6 tinamaan pinsan ko ng stray bullet -dead on spot from pulis naghahabol ng magnanakaw, ang tanong gaano ba kadelikado un magnanakaw bat ganto ang response ng pulis, o kaya kulang sa kaalaman sa kanyang profession....we need justice.

[mikey177]

....we need justice.

We need justice, and law enforcers who are competent in all aspects of their chosen profession.

They should be excellent shooters, above average martial artists, physically fit, and thoroughly proficient in legal matters so that crooks cannot escape prosecution just because of some technicality like not being read their Miranda rights. Did I mention that they should be men and women of integrity too who are highly incorruptible --for all this to happen we really need to raise our cops' salaries, they have families too you know.

[111prez]

all supreme court decisions have to be read and understood in its entirety. you cannot just isolate the dispositive portion (the part that gives the ruling on the case) and then take this as the general rule

as always, all supreme court decisions are made with the particular facts of the case on hand.

in this case, the supreme court, rightly or wrongly, made a judgement as to the lack of the need of a warning shot.

i would be interested in reading the full text of this decision and find out more. paki post naman ang title ng case and date of the decision