Permit to Carry rules in the Philippines... [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Permit to Carry rules in the Philippines...


meowr
07-17-2009, 02:56
I'm searching for rules of where you can and can't carry a firearm in the Philippines.
And I stumbled onto this set of rules:

1.) This Permit is non-transferable.
2.) The firearm must not be displayed or exposed to public view.
3.) The firearm shall not be brought inside public drinking and amusement places and all other commercial establishments; and
4.) The unexpired license or authority to posses the firearm must always be carried with this permit. Expired license must be renewed.

Numbers 1, 2 and 4 makes perfect sense...

Umm.... can you guys explain what number 3 means?
The way I'm reading it, it seems as if you can NOT bring it anywhere?

Can some of you list where you CAN bring a concealed firearm (with a PTC of course)?

Office building?
Hospital?
Malls?
7-11?

Did I just waste 10k pesos on applying for a PTC?

Thanks in advance for any info....

edtf
07-17-2009, 03:03
btw, Versoza wants - concealed carry by bag only - no more IWB. Why??? Choose any illogical reason you can think of :steamed:

jimbullet
07-17-2009, 04:57
Those 4 rules have long been at the back of the PTCFOR's and believe these were a result of a crime long ago, cant recall what it was that was high profile then. Was it the Rolito Go?

Anyway, rule 3 does put the holder in a precarious position and I can speculate that it may be intentional for the PNP to have the upper hand should they decide to charge an individual.

On the clutch bag issue, that may be a rule that the PNP wants to put in place to identify someone who may be in violation (i.e. someone without a permit would tuck it in the waist). The intention may be there but practicality says it is not possible.

This is now a gray area of the rules subject to interpretation caused by FED for such remarks that are not supported by any implementing rules or law.

akula
07-17-2009, 06:42
Another reason for #3 is that alcohol and guns are not supposed to mix.

meowr
07-17-2009, 08:33
so....

are you guys saying that WITH a PTC, I can NOT carry a handgun anywhere...?

MERCMADE
07-17-2009, 09:07
so....

are you guys saying that WITH a PTC, I can NOT carry a handgun anywhere...?

worry not. like most of all the laws in the philippines, no 3 is also subject to "interpretation", if your logic doesnt save you, hope to god that your money does

MERCMADE
07-17-2009, 09:10
so....

are you guys saying that WITH a PTC, I can NOT carry a handgun anywhere...?

worry not. like most of all the laws in the philippines, no 3 is also subject to "interpretation", if your logic doesnt save you, hope to god that your money does (very sarcastic tone).

meowr
07-17-2009, 17:43
worry not. like most of all the laws in the philippines, no 3 is also subject to "interpretation", if your logic doesnt save you, hope to god that your money does (very sarcastic tone).


Heh... nice... :whistling:

Well... no one has given me an example of where you can carry yet...
Is PTC in malls a no-no?

9MX
07-17-2009, 17:56
Heh... nice... :whistling:

Well... no one has given me an example of where you can carry yet...
Is PTC in malls a no-no?


yep, you can't carry in malls, that violates rule # 3. the conservative interpretation is, you can carry your piece:

1. while walking in public places
2. in public transport
3. while driving

for most buildings here, FAs need to be deposited prior to entry, and that includes cops

Allegra
07-17-2009, 18:10
Just dont wave it around threatening people and you'll be fine
Cumtotinkofit, City boys lang may problema
Kaming mga promdi , cocked and locked kahit san
Wala nga lang kami pambayad sa ptc

glock26ph
07-17-2009, 18:20
The inclusion of "commercial or public establishments" in condition 3 of the ptcfor started 3 or 4 years ago if i remember correctly, prior to that it only specified "public drinking and amusement places, political and religious gatherings" i still have my old ptcfor's which had these conditions. They should just change the name of the permit to PTCFIV - permit to carry firearm inside vehicle

nrmcolt
07-17-2009, 20:05
Just dont wave it around threatening people and you'll be fine
Cumtotinkofit, City boys lang may problema
Kaming mga promdi , cocked and locked kahit san
Wala nga lang kami pambayad sa ptc

Very true master A
:thumbsup:

armorpiercing
07-17-2009, 20:28
The inclusion of "commercial or public establishments" in condition 3 of the ptcfor started 3 or 4 years ago if i remember correctly, prior to that it only specified "public drinking and amusement places, political and religious gatherings" i still have my old ptcfor's which had these conditions. They should just change the name of the permit to PTCFIV - permit to carry firearm inside vehicle




sad but true :upeyes:

egoy
07-17-2009, 20:39
I was once asked by a guard to deposit my firearm upon entering their establishment. I asked "May lock ba yan drawer mo?" He just scratched his head and said "Sige boss, dalhin nyo na lang sa loob. D naman halata na may dala kayo."

Kung meron restrictions sa civilian, I think meron din guidelines ang mga security guards/agencies.

Sa dami ng bukas kotse nowadays, will you leave your FA in unmanned parking spaces? And will you feel any safer leaving your FA sa mga guards with unsecured drawers who often leave their posts to guide parking vehicles?

atmarcella
07-17-2009, 23:37
Wala nga lang kami pambayad sa ptc


very true hehehe.

jimbullet
07-18-2009, 03:50
Does this mean that if you were say walking in a public place with your FA then had to eat lunch in a mall or happen to passby, they can refuse you entry? If at all you need to deposit your FA with the security guard? In a practical sense would you even consider surrendering your FA to a non-LEO? Lets face it, security guards in malls, which may run shifts are not the best authorities (if at all) to leave your FA.

My experience has been that 99% of the time I had carried my FA, in a concealed manner which has not been found. The other 1% admittedly was noticed but I reasoned that I was going back into the mall to get my car which was parked in their carpark in the first place. So why prohibit me from entering now?

z_e_n
07-18-2009, 05:44
Use an ankle holster. :supergrin: so far, haven't seen them frisk that low.

deenoh
07-18-2009, 18:35
Use an ankle holster. :supergrin: so far, haven't seen them frisk that low.

99% of the time they don't but during gun shows they frisk until sa ankle :)

deenoh
07-18-2009, 18:38
Use an ankle holster. :supergrin: so far, haven't seen them frisk that low.

Or you can use a man bag like the Fatboy

MERCMADE
07-18-2009, 20:58
problem lang with the fatboy, or any maxpedition, or any similar bags is para mo na ring inadvertise na me dala kang baril.
nawawala tuloy ung advantage, isa pa sabi nga dito, paano kung maisnatch he he.

anticentipede
07-18-2009, 21:08
depends on the mall, some malls, ayala owned, don't allow FAs

some like sm allow provided you have a ptc and you log in first, i've done it before.

strange thing is, when i logged in a number of times, i noticed i was the only civilian who logged in ,all the other names before me were either policemen or govt agents of some kind.


sarap pala sa provinces, but then again, you have npa problems in some provinces , so i guess that's why the govt allows concealed carry without a ptc.

sana ganyan nalang dito sa metro.

jimbullet
07-19-2009, 00:24
strange thing is, when i logged in a number of times, i noticed i was the only civilian who logged in ,all the other names before me were either policemen or govt agents of some kind.



Dont be deceived. My uncle, who is not an LEO logged in Megamall as a PSG operative:supergrin:

jimbullet
07-19-2009, 00:25
Oh, he did so since he said there was a space that needed to be filled out..

Allegra
07-19-2009, 07:25
depends on the mall, some malls, ayala owned, don't allow FAs

some like sm allow provided you have a ptc and you log in first, i've done it before.

strange thing is, when i logged in a number of times, i noticed i was the only civilian who logged in ,all the other names before me were either policemen or govt agents of some kind.


sarap pala sa provinces, but then again, you have npa problems in some provinces , so i guess that's why the govt allows concealed carry without a ptc.

sana ganyan nalang dito sa metro.


Teka, the govt does not allow carrying w/out a ptc, kahit nasa boondocks
What I meant was , a ptc is too expensive for us in the provinces
Kelangan pa namin mag sanla ng kalabaw

flyboy 1
07-19-2009, 09:48
depends on the mall, some malls, ayala owned, don't allow FAs

some like sm allow provided you have a ptc and you log in first, i've done it before.

strange thing is, when i logged in a number of times, i noticed i was the only civilian who logged in ,all the other names before me were either policemen or govt agents of some kind.
Technically you are NOT allowed as a civilian to bring your firearm, even with a PTC, inside malls. The malls that allow firearms, under regular times (exception are gunshows) do so only for bonafide law enforcement / military personnel and assets. That is why you see spaces in their logbook where you are required to indicate rank and unit assignment. The only reason some civilians think it is ok is that the guards themselves are simply not familiar with these guidelines. Notice that most of the time they do not even check for any documentation on the part of the person signing the logbook. They simply assume, out of sheer ignorance or outright fear, that the person signing is a police or military operative. But if you are chanced upon by any law enforcement personnel familiar with these regulations at a mall entrance (they are present at times), you might end up on the wrong side of the law, with dire consequences.....:shocked:

toxic
07-20-2009, 10:51
Technically you are NOT allowed as a civilian to bring your firearm, even with a PTC, inside malls. The malls that allow firearms, under regular times (exception are gunshows) do so only for bonafide law enforcement / military personnel and assets. That is why you see spaces in their logbook where you are required to indicate rank and unit assignment. The only reason some civilians think it is ok is that the guards themselves are simply not familiar with these guidelines. Notice that most of the time they do not even check for any documentation on the part of the person signing the logbook. They simply assume, out of sheer ignorance or outright fear, that the person signing is a police or military operative. But if you are chanced upon by any law enforcement personnel familiar with these regulations at a mall entrance (they are present at times), you might end up on the wrong side of the law, with dire consequences.....:shocked:

correct ka dyan flyboy 1 , lang alam yung mga guards as long as you voluntarily present yourself to log in the book no questions asked and yung iba na well informed nakamonitor every moves ng civies na may dala kaya ingat na lang tayo.

flyboy 1
07-20-2009, 19:27
For the sake of argument you do enter a commercial mall such as the one mentioned before, as a civilian with a PTC who THINKS he is allowed to do so, you are immediately faced with a multitude of problems. If a situation develops that involves criminal elements with firearms within the mall premises, all those who signed in the logbook (including you) will be scrutinized as possible suspects. From there it will be discovered that you are an unathorized individual carrying a firearm inside a commercial establishment and the appropriate charges will be leveled against you (even if you had nothing to do with the aforementioned event).

If you are involved in an incident inside the mall wherein you had to deploy your firearm, responding law enforcement will immediately take note that you are an unathorized individual with a firearm within a commercial establishment. You cannot justify that you were allowed entry by representatives of the mall (the guards), they will immediately wash their hands of you. This will leave you fending for yourself as the responding authorities decide whether to charge you or not (if you have no credible connections or affiliations most likely you WILL be charged).

Of course there are others who will argue that you can always talk your way out of such a situation, either with padrinos or financial motivation, but that is a different matter entirely. :whistling:

toxic
07-21-2009, 01:50
Of course there are others who will argue that you can always talk your way out of such a situation, either with padrinos or financial motivation, but that is a different matter entirely. :whistling:


sus sa Pilipinas pa..everybody knows somebody :innocent:

PMMA97
07-23-2009, 18:25
Let's say you deposit your FA to the guard on duty so as not to violate the PTC rule. And your FA gets "lost" for some reason, I mean most of this security guys are not the sharpest pencils, paano na?

atmarcella
07-23-2009, 23:15
sorry?

jimbullet
07-24-2009, 00:39
Not that I am distrustful, but as I mentioned in an earlier post to this thread, leaving your FA to a security guard, more particularly in a mall would in my opinion, carry with it a higher risk of being lost. Lets face it, they dont have the level of responsibility, perhaps one reason being, its not part of their duties.

saki1611
07-24-2009, 01:06
IMHO, if you have the guts to posses a gun and might expect to use it in the future for self defense why worry about this regulations. if you think the threat against your life is imminent then carry it the way you are comfortable and safe in bringing it. better to explain your side rather than your loved ones stand as complainant. i am not encouraging anyone, but for as long as the the gun tucked in your waist is not inviting attentions there's no worry at all. but if you're a kinda "show-off" guy, i feel sorry for you because the regualtion is exactly for you. just my 2cents...

jimbullet
07-24-2009, 01:25
Agree Saki, this is an eye opener for those who are merely carrying an FA for show off. Its time to change ways. It is a reminder for all lawfully carrying their guns to observe the most basic rule, which is to carry concealed. No matter what point of view one takes, concealed carry to the point that no one knows you have one, provides you with the greatest advantage. Staying low profile as practicably possible, disappearing from the crowd improves the chances of being the least to be a targeted by BG's.

toxic
07-24-2009, 02:56
Agree Saki, this is an eye opener for those who are merely carrying an FA for show off. Its time to change ways. It is a reminder for all lawfully carrying their guns to observe the most basic rule, which is to carry concealed. No matter what point of view one takes, concealed carry to the point that no one knows you have one, provides you with the greatest advantage. Staying low profile as practicably possible, disappearing from the crowd improves the chances of being the least to be a targeted by BG's.


+100 on the stealth mode , but now we all have to use bags to conceal our FA's..guards will definitely search it..pag nakita questions will be ask..better pa din siguro show the PTC ,log in and out at least if something happens inside the mall thats a good defense on my part that tells them i dont have any bad intention just carrying for my own safety , i may have violated the PTC guidelines i can live with that (bahala na lawyer ko dun), penalty and hassle would be less (i supposed) than by not declaring at all ..ill become as suspect pa pag may gulo sa loob plus i dont also like the idea of leaving the firearm sa guard, iwan ko man like in banks , i always carry a trigger lock and an extra pad lock.

nrmcolt
07-24-2009, 03:12
Kelangan pa namin mag sanla ng kalabaw

:laughabove:

MAJINKONG
07-29-2009, 05:21
Pareparehas na lang. Pati off duty cops na may dala gamit ay dapat nasa clutch bag na rin...

saki1611
07-29-2009, 12:26
Pareparehas na lang. Pati off duty cops na may dala gamit ay dapat nasa clutch bag na rin...

the usual crab mentality... :whistling:

FYI, even on-duty cops in plain clothes are not allowed to tuck pistols on their waists.

kcboy
07-29-2009, 17:19
the usual crab mentality... :whistling:

FYI, even on-duty cops in plain clothes are not allowed to tuck pistols on their waists.


sir saki,

off-guty cops with proper ptcs, are they allowed to have gubs tucked in their waists???

saki1611
07-29-2009, 20:13
sir saki,

off-guty cops with proper ptcs, are they allowed to have gubs tucked in their waists???

with this new implementing rules we're not. you might ask how can they be caught, the higher office also put ways how but i don't want to put this into details baka mahuli pa ako.:supergrin:

Wp.22
07-29-2009, 23:26
kailangan magpataba pa ako para matago ko in between my "bilbil" yung baril

jimbullet
07-30-2009, 04:16
the usual crab mentality... :whistling:

FYI, even on-duty cops in plain clothes are not allowed to tuck pistols on their waists.

Surely they would have to tuck a pistol IWB or some sort or else how will they be able to carry out their duty...

saki1611
07-30-2009, 05:09
Surely they would have to tuck a pistol IWB or some sort or else how will they be able to carry out their duty...

actually the only exemption is when cops are on actual operations...

MAJINKONG
07-30-2009, 06:00
the usual crab mentality... :whistling:

FYI, even on-duty cops in plain clothes are not allowed to tuck pistols on their waists.

sir, hinde crab mentality yon. Im just telling that WE ARE ALL EQUAL sa eyes ng law.. Hinde lang sa civi yan clutch bag, kundi pati na rin sa mga off duty cops.. Im sure nakita at nabasa mo na memo ni CHF PNP.

saki1611
07-30-2009, 07:25
sir, hinde crab mentality yon. Im just telling that WE ARE ALL EQUAL sa eyes ng law.. Hinde lang sa civi yan clutch bag, kundi pati na rin sa mga off duty cops.. Im sure nakita at nabasa mo na memo ni CHF PNP.

yes i read it that's why i put FYI on my reply. if you were stating a fact, yes it is not and my apology. but if you were suggesting that cops should also be subjected into this rules in fairness with the civilian, it's the "bad attitude". i agree with you that WE ARE ALL EQUAL IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, but cops though off duty, doesn't mean they're not policemen anymore. we are 24/7, anytime in case there is trouble, our neighbors can knock in our door and ask for assistance and we can not answer them we're off duty. i can say that the risk of being in danger is more likely to happen to an off-duty cop than a civilian. plus the threat of the criminals that they were able to put in jail while on or off duty. technically, civilians who have PTC were given because of the alleged threat in their lives, which we all know that it is a fact that not all who have PTC's have threats, and we all know too how some if not most, got their PTC's, while policemen have special permit when it comes to owning a gun, to which they can use the licensed FA to their line of work. basically, base on our Philipine Law, to civilians having a gun is a privilege, not a right, while on policemen is part of their profession.

i am not saying i'm in favor with this set-up, i have already commented on this issue.:wavey:

PMMA97
07-30-2009, 17:39
FYI, even on-duty cops in plain clothes are not allowed to tuck pistols on their waists.

Pati naka duty na pulis bawal pala? Tsk. Kawawa ang mga plainclothes LEO.

May Task Force na ba ang PNP regarding this?

Any Implementing Rules na pwede namin mabasa?

Thanks Sir.

saki1611
07-30-2009, 18:16
Pati naka duty na pulis bawal pala? Tsk. Kawawa ang mga plainclothes LEO.

May Task Force na ba ang PNP regarding this?

Any Implementing Rules na pwede namin mabasa?

Thanks Sir.

it is printed at the back of the latest issued PTC.

PMMA97
07-30-2009, 19:45
What I meant was an IRR concerning LEOs. Well most of my friends in the PNP bluntly stated that they will not follow any ruling that may endanger their lives. PNP din naman lang daw ang sisita sa kanila baka madaan daw sa pakiusap.

PMMA97
07-30-2009, 22:53
http://i437.photobucket.com/albums/qq95/rylan_45/image.jpg

jimbullet
07-31-2009, 01:34
Waist naman pala e...so lets all carry like sonny crocket...or perhaps put it on the thigh or ankle. hehehe

Paggawa tayo improvised clutch bag that can be worn on the thigh. Good as gold na!

jimbullet
07-31-2009, 01:51
yes i read it that's why i put FYI on my reply. if you were stating a fact, yes it is not and my apology. but if you were suggesting that cops should also be subjected into this rules in fairness with the civilian, it's the "bad attitude". i agree with you that WE ARE ALL EQUAL IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, but cops though off duty, doesn't mean they're not policemen anymore. we are 24/7, anytime in case there is trouble, our neighbors can knock in our door and ask for assistance and we can not answer them we're off duty. i can say that the risk of being in danger is more likely to happen to an off-duty cop than a civilian. plus the threat of the criminals that they were able to put in jail while on or off duty. technically, civilians who have PTC were given because of the alleged threat in their lives, which we all know that it is a fact that not all who have PTC's have threats, and we all know too how some if not most, got their PTC's, while policemen have special permit when it comes to owning a gun, to which they can use the licensed FA to their line of work. basically, base on our Philipine Law, to civilians having a gun is a privilege, not a right, while on policemen is part of their profession.

i am not saying i'm in favor with this set-up, i have already commented on this issue.:wavey:

I am mindful that this is a different issue altogether and that is the law that somehow has been adopted long before, which is unfortunate in the sense that gun ownership is not a constitutional right. However having said that, I wouldnt want every single unqualified person to be toting one in the streets. Obviously a balance must be reached. Note that "unqualified person" is not pertaining to civilians alone. We all know some (not all) that may have badges dont necessarily fall into the qualification of having a firearm.

Not diverting too much, all I can say is that civilians who has a PTC, who goes through all the trouble to acquire one legitimately/ legally are those (mostly) are those who wish to protect their love ones including themselves. The rule of necessarily having a threat to oneself is subjective and should remain as such. If a law abiding person feels he is threatened due to stature, profession (not necessarily LEO, i.e. bank executive) without necessarily having an attempt to life (why would you want this to happen to yourself prior to owning a gun - unahan mo na - arm yourself before the possibility of such happening), then I believe responsible gun ownership -permit to carry be rightfully given.

Saki,

Pardon for my ranting here and I suppose all of us have opinions and views.

I suppose having been through every FED chief for the last 16 years had to work my way through obtaining a PTC legally on my own (even all the way to Comelec for a gun ban exemption, which I obtained then, pinag antay ako to talk with one of their directors for 2 hours) feel that if at all possible, it would be more pragmatic to change some points of view where gun ownership should be a right in some respect.

saki1611
07-31-2009, 05:54
I am mindful that this is a different issue altogether and that is the law that somehow has been adopted long before, which is unfortunate in the sense that gun ownership is not a constitutional right. However having said that, I wouldnt want every single unqualified person to be toting one in the streets. Obviously a balance must be reached. Note that "unqualified person" is not pertaining to civilians alone. We all know some (not all) that may have badges dont necessarily fall into the qualification of having a firearm.

Not diverting too much, all I can say is that civilians who has a PTC, who goes through all the trouble to acquire one legitimately/ legally are those (mostly) are those who wish to protect their love ones including themselves. The rule of necessarily having a threat to oneself is subjective and should remain as such. If a law abiding person feels he is threatened due to stature, profession (not necessarily LEO, i.e. bank executive) without necessarily having an attempt to life (why would you want this to happen to yourself prior to owning a gun - unahan mo na - arm yourself before the possibility of such happening), then I believe responsible gun ownership -permit to carry be rightfully given.

Saki,

Pardon for my ranting here and I suppose all of us have opinions and views.

I suppose having been through every FED chief for the last 16 years had to work my way through obtaining a PTC legally on my own (even all the way to Comelec for a gun ban exemption, which I obtained then, pinag antay ako to talk with one of their directors for 2 hours) feel that if at all possible, it would be more pragmatic to change some points of view where gun ownership should be a right in some respect.

jim, no problem at all. i am not against civilians in owning a gun, i respect their right to protect themselves from any harm or danger, unfortunately our law is not giving our people an absolute right to possess a firearm as an instrument to protect oneself. when it comes to PNP personnel as to the qualification of handling or carrying FA's, i would say that even though they are not good as the gun enthusiasts expect from them, i can say that they are qualified enough since all PNP personnel gone through a 6 month police basic training which includes firearm proficiency. compare with civilians, we know for a fact that many, if not most, who acquired firearms did not go to the legitimate process which includes seminars in gun safety that can only be taken for less than a day. many of us here observed that many policemen don't know the range safety rules, but i can assure you most of them can be reliable in real shooting engagements. my point is, which i think many egos will be hurt, base on our present law PNP personnel has the greater privilege in carrying FA's. and because of this we can not say that civilians and policemen whether off-duty or not, must have the same guidelines in carrying FA's.

i want to reiterate that i am not against civilians to carry their guns tucked in their waist for as long as it is concealed. what i don't agree with is the mentality of "kami ganito dapat kayo din".:whistling:

Tejeron
07-31-2009, 07:53
it specifically mentioned to use clutch bag so the interpretation is bawal din ang belt bag, etc...?

MERCMADE
08-03-2009, 04:14
sadly a ptc is a privalge and not a right in the philippines and we are subject to the whims of the powers that be, those bastards.

Poodle
08-03-2009, 16:23
it specifically mentioned to use clutch bag so the interpretation is bawal din ang belt bag, etc...?

Maybe we can just clutch the belt bag? Madaling malaglag o ma-snatch ang clutch bag.

gundog
08-03-2009, 20:55
saki , pede ba mag belt bag?

jasonub
08-03-2009, 22:56
ang baduy ninyo pag nag belt bag hahahha!

saki1611
08-03-2009, 23:32
saki , pede ba mag belt bag?

ji, i agree with poodle. clutch the beltbag. clutch bag is a bag or purse that carried or grasp by hand, eh nagkataon na yun clutch bag mo eh pwede ilagay sa bewang, wag lang sinlaki ng maleta.:supergrin: in my opinion depende sa galing ng abugado mo how he will convince the police or the judge that your belt bag is in fact a clutch bag. :whistling:

i_am_infinity
08-04-2009, 00:16
bro saki u have PM.

Tejeron
08-05-2009, 08:28
nakaka aliw, baka especially clutch bag pa ang kailangan dalhin at hindi basta any bag na nasa labas ng katawan naka lagay, gaya ng back pack, shoulder bag, etc...

9MX
08-05-2009, 08:30
ang baduy ninyo pag nag belt bag hahahha!


palibhasa yung isa diyan naka LV na handbag:tongueout:

Allegra
08-05-2009, 09:54
nakaka aliw, baka especially clutch bag pa ang kailangan dalhin at hindi basta any bag na nasa labas ng katawan naka lagay, gaya ng back pack, shoulder bag, etc...

galing ako sa FED kanina
required na rin naka pamada , bracelet at kwintas na makapal...

seriously , nuon pa daw naman bawal nakasakbit sa waist ang baril pag civilian
wala lang sumusunod kasi di alam na bawal

bibili nalang ako ng clutchbag kahit walang baril
ganun na rin yun

jerrytrini
08-05-2009, 12:54
Ankle holster is the perfect carrier. Much faster than drawing from a clutch bag. Wouldn't it be telegraphing everybody that you are packing heat when you have a clutch bag?

isuzu
08-05-2009, 16:34
Those 4 rules have long been at the back of the PTCFOR's and believe these were a result of a crime long ago, cant recall what it was that was high profile then. Was it the Rolito Go?

Anyway, rule 3 does put the holder in a precarious position and I can speculate that it may be intentional for the PNP to have the upper hand should they decide to charge an individual.

On the clutch bag issue, that may be a rule that the PNP wants to put in place to identify someone who may be in violation (i.e. someone without a permit would tuck it in the waist). The intention may be there but practicality says it is not possible.

This is now a gray area of the rules subject to interpretation caused by FED for such remarks that are not supported by any implementing rules or law.

Those four rules were already in place since the '80's when the PTC was issued by the Provincial Commander and was issued for free! :)

The old PTC provisions, however, did not include commercial establishments.

Kaiser Soze
08-05-2009, 18:59
galing ako sa FED kanina
required na rin naka pamada , bracelet at kwintas na makapal...

seriously , nuon pa daw naman bawal nakasakbit sa waist ang baril pag civilian
wala lang sumusunod kasi di alam na bawal

bibili nalang ako ng clutchbag kahit walang baril
ganun na rin yun

Really? Because I saw on the FED website before that they advocated on-body carry. I'll try to find a link.

Allegra
08-05-2009, 19:21
Really? Because I saw on the FED website before that they advocated on-body carry. I'll try to find a link.

ngee!
yup. that's what i was told
taga fed din yung kausap ko

plus i remeber being told din nuon , when I could afford a ptc that bawal daw isakbit

jasonub
08-05-2009, 22:06
palibhasa yung isa diyan naka LV na handbag:tongueout:

I use a rudy project clutch bag.

Only my wife carries LV that she buys cheap according to her sa honolulu. well if you can say $500 dollars is cheap for a bag:wow:

darwin25
08-05-2009, 22:31
gone are the days (relatively short days) that one can use a fatboy versipak without people knowing that you are packing a gun. I stopped using mine a long time ago. I just keep it as a grab and go bag for home defense.

st. matthew
08-05-2009, 22:39
bayong na lang kaya
:supergrin::supergrin:

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b143/ibadoy/bayong.gif

st. matthew
08-05-2009, 22:41
pag gusto nyo class na bayong , eto maganda :rofl::supergrin:



http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b143/ibadoy/lvshoppingbag.jpg

9MX
08-06-2009, 08:16
gone are the days (relatively short days) that one can use a fatboy versipak without people knowing that you are packing a gun. I stopped using mine a long time ago. I just keep it as a grab and go bag for home defense.
that's why i sold mine.. bought a cartier purse instead...chos!:rofl:

9MX
08-06-2009, 08:17
I use a rudy project clutch bag.

Only my wife carries LV that she buys cheap according to her sa honolulu. well if you can say $500 dollars is cheap for a bag:wow:

defensive!:rofl:

don't believe the USD 500 LV, its way more than that:cool:

edtf
08-06-2009, 08:26
pag gusto nyo class na bayong , eto maganda :rofl::supergrin:



http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b143/ibadoy/lvshoppingbag.jpg

WOW:wow: I just came from Divi a few weeks ago ang got something like that just bigger and it was 280 bucks lang :supergrin:

edtf
08-06-2009, 08:28
gone are the days (relatively short days) that one can use a fatboy versipak without people knowing that you are packing a gun. I stopped using mine a long time ago. I just keep it as a grab and go bag for home defense.

Funny thing there is with the proliferation of fakes and look alikes I have seen 2-3 UST students using similar/same type of bags. It might turn out to be soooo popular that people will think of is as a "he" bag instead of a gun bag

9MX
08-06-2009, 08:37
Funny thing there is with the proliferation of fakes and look alikes I have seen 2-3 UST students using similar/same type of bags. It might turn out to be soooo popular that people will think of is as a "he" bag instead of a gun bag


pards super kalat na..as in nawala yung status ng fatboy

MERCMADE
08-06-2009, 11:43
magandang business op to, lets make make beltbags na ang tatak ay "clutch bag" kikita tyo.

PMMA97
08-06-2009, 16:56
Mahirap mag clucth bag kapag umuulan. May dala kang clutch bag. Payong. Pinamalengke. Pwede naman yung belt bag basta gunbag. Ang gulo. Isukbit ko na lang.

PMMA97
08-06-2009, 16:57
bayong na lang kaya
:supergrin::supergrin:

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b143/ibadoy/bayong.gif


:supergrin: Siguradong walang mang snatch nito. Baka bigyan ka pa ng limos.:supergrin:

JBJ16
08-07-2009, 03:21
:supergrin: Siguradong walang mang snatch nito. Baka bigyan ka pa ng limos.:supergrin:

Pag yan ang bag mo, dapat sabayan mo na rin ng gulay saka 45ACP Thompson

submachinegun naka PTC mo. He he he

edtf
08-07-2009, 07:19
pards super kalat na..as in nawala yung status ng fatboy

ah then you are a regular joe carrying a body bag not anymore a gun bag. so your not advertising your gun :)

jimbullet
08-07-2009, 07:28
The mandatory carry of a firearm in a bag may actually present an opportunity. Baka nga maganda na dalhin e duffel bag para carry for defense na yun m4, galil, steyr AUG. Ilabas na mga full auto high powered rifles. Di na uso pistol.

edtf
08-07-2009, 07:47
The mandatory carry of a firearm in a bag may actually present an opportunity. Baka nga maganda na dalhin e duffel bag para carry for defense na yun m4, galil, steyr AUG. Ilabas na mga full auto high powered rifles. Di na uso pistol.


I had those same thoughts too - or puwede din SMG :D

JBJ16
08-08-2009, 21:04
Sobra naman kayo, si Jack Bauer nga nag dadala lang ng SMG pag may sure intel at krokis ng i-a assault sa PDA nya. Talo nyo pa siya. Kung lakad lang naman para kumain sa Dads o Saisaki, pwede na yung 9mm XDM with extended 100rnd. Mag. He he he.

zorkd
08-27-2009, 06:45
Having pondered the many considerations related to this issue:

I think that there may be some difficulty in seeing (or rather, proving) that there is a distinction between a non threatening gesture that inadvertently signals to people around you of your capability to inflict injury (by way of using a firearm) and an actual threatening gesture (again by way of using said firearm) when said object is carried on one's waist.

said gesture could be as simple as allowing one's piece to "print".

in short, it is very easy to move in a manner which can threaten someone whom you wish to threaten while appearing quite innocent to everyone else in the vicinity.

it is most likely this train of thought that gave rise to this new regulation, a gun carried in a bag will have to be brandished and exposed for it to have any real intimidating effect, in which case the threatening motive is clear.


CPNP is not an idiot, I refuse to believe that someone incapable of understanding possible consequences of certain actions (rulings) could reach such a high office, existence of certain elected officials notwithstanding.

While I do not necessarily agree with this new rule, I shall follow it for it is the law.

The sensible thing in my mind, is to help those who are responsible for crafting our laws and rules to come to the realization that perhaps there is yet a better alternative to the current state of this issue.

choi_tan2000
08-27-2009, 20:32
The mandatory carry of a firearm in a bag may actually present an opportunity. Baka nga maganda na dalhin e duffel bag para carry for defense na yun m4, galil, steyr AUG. Ilabas na mga full auto high powered rifles. Di na uso pistol.

sama ako dito kay bro jim

hahahahahah:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: