Rights and nuisances

It seems that double standards are the in-thing nowadays. First, Pro-Gun issues a statement that they are against arming MMDA traffic enforcers, because they only deal with traffic violators and not violent crimes. I guess the shooting of one such traffic enforcer only strengthens the right of the citizenry to arm themselves, and not traffic enforcers. I assume they see the shooting of the traffic enforcer as a non-violent crime. The last time I checked, traffic rules are laws, and those who break the law must be punished, not the law enforcers! I just hope the shooter doesn’t get away with this crime. Yes, it is a crime to shoot a person, a law enforcer no less, no matter what rights one thinks he has in owning a gun!

Now, in the light of the recent transport strike/ “tigil-pasada”, exactly whose right has more weight? Whose right is more important? The right to freely protest what is perceived as utter greediness of the oil companies, or those who just want to get on with their daily lives? Apparently, the strikers/protesters took offense to the word nuisance or “perwisyo” in the vernacular, being used on them. Can you blame those who see it that way? Is it their right to protest and cause traffic and inconveniences by lying on the roads blocking traffic, but those who simply want to go to school or work don not have that right? Hello?

There is a proper forum and venue for such protests. I totally agree that there should be an explanation from the oil companies as to why prices are very high. I also believe that a cartel exists between petroleum companies here in the Philippines. I agree that oil companies should open their books to the public, and show that their pricing is justified. To protest on the streets does highlight the plight of those who must use fuel to eke out a living. But to lie down on public, main thoroughfares is just trampling on the rights of others, many in fact, to go on with life.

Why not lie down in front of the buildings of the very companies they are protesting? Why does it have to be EDSA, España? Why does it have to be the ordinary Juan who gets inconvenienced, and not the head honchos of the “Big 3”? If the protesters wanted to drive a point, that’s the way to do it. And why should they threaten those who do not want to participate in their protest actions? Those who just want to ply their routes because they want to earn a living. They too have rights that have to be respected. In my honest opinion, mobs do not have rights.

We have a new government. A new administration that has been in place for only a year. One that still enjoys the trust and confidence of the people. It was not that way in the past. There were so many reasons to go on protests and become street parliamentarians. Injustice, corruption, scam after scam after scam. Right now, we can be assured that this administration will do everything for the benefit of everyone, and not just a few. Right now, we can be assured that corruption will be dealt with. That those behind the scams and anomalies will be exposed and tried. In the case of fuel prices, we can be assured that we will find out if they are just and fair.

So the next time these groups carry out another protest, perhaps they should think of not inconveniencing others as well. Otherwise, they will really be labeled as nuisances, “perwisyo”.