So, it’s here…

First off: 15-year-old Chris Lorenz Fabian should be awarded pronto with the highest honor that the Boy Scouts of the Philippines/Girl Scouts of the Philippines (BSP/GSP) can give — provided that investigations confirm that he was indeed a member and did save lives (singlehandedly, if we are to believe initial accounts, and at the cost of his own) in that June 22 morning mass shooting at San Jose National High School in Tacloban City.

That would be the Gallantry and Heroism Award (the BSP/GSP equivalent of the military and the police Medal of Valor), which is given “to a Scout who has demonstrated heroism in saving or attempting to save life which requires courage, high sense of duty and the practical application of his/her Scouting training… The National Court of Honor determines and approves the awards on the basis of the degree of risk involved in the incident.”¹

That is the one piece of silver lining we can glean from this tragedy — that, despite much focus on what drove the two teen suspects to plan and commit this crime, this one fellow reminds us of the heroes hidden in our midst. He embodies the spirit of selflessness and community consciousness which the country needs to rise above its many problems.

A WAR OF IDEAS
We can never have enough of such exemplars, who shine periodically, e.g., at the height of the pandemic, during natural disasters, accidents, etc. (Every now and then, broadsheets would tell the story, at the bottom of an inside page, of a kid who lost his/her life while rescuing drowning friends.)

Their inspiration could add body to the highly theoretical “good manners and right conduct” modules — which I suspect are taught in a perfunctory manner by many of the teachers of our elementary and high school students — in order to make sure that these real-world examples are emulated not only by members of specialized organizations like the BSP/GSP, civil society, and faith-based groups, but by wider circles of the general youth population. Not all students may take to such examples, but at least the seeds of good citizenship are planted constantly and more effectively from an early age.

And this is important, especially as youth nowadays — tomorrow’s nation builders — are bombarded 24/7 by harmful ideas that spread through online games and social media. Admittedly, our youngsters face added risks — besides information on more opportunities here and abroad — to those which our generation dealt with in our teens.

This is not the first time that we have had a shooting in a school. Note that a shooting did take place at the Ateneo de Manila University campus in Quezon City in July 2022 that left three people dead and three others wounded. In that case, however, the assailant was an adult — a doctor — who targeted a former mayor of Lamitan, Basilan who was attending her daughter’s graduation.²

It is still unclear how much of an influence US school shootings had on the two minors involved in the Tacloban case. But Monday’s incident shattered any illusion we had till then that “it can’t happen here” since “it is not the Pinoy way.”

There was a time when some of us may have thought that restricting kids’ access to the internet (instead of actively guiding them, while respecting their freedom) was some kind of a magic pill to shield them from harmful influences online. But then, that is also the world in which their generation lives, and we parents need to be in that medium for and with them, starting with understanding the platforms they use.

GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION?
For now, investigations into the Tacloban school shooting are being carried out separately by the police, the Education and the Justice departments, as well as the Commission on Human Rights and the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center.

But perhaps this is a sign of bigger troubles down the road as more and more of our youth wade deeper into the Net, where extremists and other criminals increasingly sharpen their skills at baiting unsuspecting, still highly impressionable youngsters.

It is time to nip this menace in the bud.

Hence the need for a more comprehensive probe that involves other departments like that of Information and Communications Technology and agencies like the National Privacy Commission, as well as lawmakers from both legislative chambers, with the help of experts from civil society and the academe.

Questions to be addressed include loopholes in laws — such as clear definition and delineation of the responsibilities of line departments and agencies in dealing with emerging digital threats, as well as enforcement when it comes to platforms and perpetrators operating offshore — and the glaring lack of competent counselling support for students nationwide (even if just virtual), among many other systemic flaws.

The result of such a probe should be more proactive in protecting our youth and even guiding them in best practices for maximizing social media for productive uses, like upgrading and gaining more skills.

Is it time for the government to step in, for example, by restricting minors’ access to social media the way Australia as well as some European and Asian states have done or are planning to do? ³

I don’t know how effective this measure would be, especially since kids may simply find a way to circumvent such restrictions and, in doing so, land in more opaque, shadowy platforms that would be even more difficult to monitor.

But with so many countries experimenting with this extreme idea, it will be worth studying the pros and cons of taking such a step. As with many technologies, our being a laggard in this field is not necessarily a flaw since it will give us a precious vantage point for seeing what works and what does not work in the policies of those who have gone ahead in their attempt to solve this problem.

Not that I am opposed to banning online games designed solely or primarily to cash in on the fascination with violence and other base instincts. Platforms that are so designed — thus, with no redeeming value — have no valid reason to exist, especially around our kids.

True, our children might still be able to access such games through other means, but the government would be remiss if it did not crack down on these dangerous influences on the ground of safeguarding freedom of expression, which is not absolute. Otherwise, the government had better be able to always clean up the resulting mess promptly and effectively.

Should the age of criminal liability be reduced? A tricky question there, as any parent can easily identify with those of the shooting victims. How does one serve justice that is acceptable to the victims’ families while recognizing that criminals, especially minors, always have the potential to turn their lives around for reparation and to become productive members of society?

I am not a lawyer, but perhaps there are certain aggravating circumstances in which this step may be considered (I have heard human rights lawyer Akbayan Partylist Rep. Jose Manuel “Chel” I. Diokno say that current law provides that criminal punishment kicks in should a minor detained for a crime show no remorse once he reaches the age of discernment).

Another question here pertains to the responsibility which parents or legal guardians bear for their children’s crimes. What is clear to me is that such parents/guardians should be penalized should investigations show they might have influenced or even encouraged their children to commit crimes, or else have been negligent in advising their kids against such acts (with mitigating circumstances including the state of being a solo parent, for instance). In this way, parents who are not inclined to be responsible for their kids will be forced to be so.

GUN OWNERSHIP RESTRICTIONS
Many of these remedial steps entail long-term measures that will hopefully yield long-term results.

But if you want an immediate partial solution, here’s one: tighten gun ownership restrictions.

Don’t get me wrong: I have friends and acquaintances (and some are columnists here) who are legitimate gun enthusiasts, and I have nothing but respect for their sense of responsibility (not to mention their skill). From the looks of it, they should have nothing to worry about should the government tighten enforcement in this matter.

The Philippines may not have made it to the top of the list in the Small Arms Survey 2025 Annual Report that was published on June 12⁴ (surprisingly, right?), but it is widely known that we had just enough guns going around — especially illegally — to have armed nearly 200 private armed groups across the archipelago in 2023.⁵ When I was a junior reporter covering the rise of the Abu Sayyaf (back when it was not yet known by that name), I recall a joke then that in one part of the south, that one would know that a family spat was ensuing when hearing a sporadic exchange of small arms fire (i.e., pistols, shotguns, and rifles), and that a full clan war was under way when bazookas and handheld rocket launchers were used.

There seems to be a lack of methodical studies on the long-running disease of firearm proliferation, but it is always troubling to read or watch the news on the latest case of gun violence in a traffic altercation (sometimes involving even foreign nationals), or that a single politician had over 100 guns licensed to his name alone. (Man, that would be enough to arm an entire army company consisting of two to four platoons!)

Hence, the need to first net as many loose firearms as possible. Perhaps this can be achieved by a gun amnesty like the last one implemented nearly 17 years ago, in October 2009, via Executive Order No. 817.⁶ This reprieve should include a provision that would prevent political clans from merely registering the unlicensed firearms they already have — it should strictly enforce gun ownership limitations for private individuals.

And, yes, we may already have a law regulating gun ownership in Republic Act No. 10591, or the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act.⁷ But the crimes that reveal the flaws in this law or its enforcement should be enough to inspire work to plug such loopholes. (Should one instance wherein a minor was able to get a firearm that should otherwise have been kept under lock and key in a safe, be enough to revoke the gun owner’s license? Methinks it should.)

I believe we have enough cases of gun violence to warrant amendments to this 13-year-old law and/or its implementing rules and regulations.

It will be wise for us to recognize warning signs from the get-go in this case. It is clearly an urgent matter to address, hopefully before copycats emerge.

¹ https://tinyurl.com/kz3s4zfr

² https://tinyurl.com/yrp65zpz

³ https://tinyurl.com/2n3s4u8b

⁴ https://tinyurl.com/5n7w9utj

⁵ https://tinyurl.com/4wufzjt4

⁶ https://tinyurl.com/yfa64t67

⁷ https://tinyurl.com/3c6umhzz

Wilfredo G. Reyes was editor-in-chief of BusinessWorld from 2020 through 2023.