Jesse M. Robredo Was Anti-Tambay Too

It's time to reveal something that maybe, not everybody knew about good old Jesse Robredo -- he was pretty much anti-tambay or anti-vagrant. Don't believe me? Well Naga City's anti-vagrancy city ordinance was pretty much anti-vagrancy which was SIGNED by approval by none other than good old Jesse. If you don't believe me -- you can read the whole document here.

Here's how the Naga City Ordinance defined vagrants or tambays -- this is more or less the same way President Duterte would define those tambays he wants to be dealt with and this is a #NagaLeaks that you can't afford to miss:

SECTION 5. VAGRANT. – The word “vagrant” used for purposes of this Ordinance shall be penalized under Section 5 hereof and shall mean:

(a) any person who, having no visible lawful means of support and has the physical ability or capability to work, but neglects to apply himself/herself to some lawful calling;

(b) any person not being physically able to earn but is seen loitering or wandering about public or semi-public building or places or tramping or wandering about the streets without visible means of support;

(c) any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame, ruffians or pimps and those who habitually associate with prostitutes;

(d) any person who, without any lawful purpose, shall be found loitering around the school campus and school premises;

(e) any person who, not being included in the provisions of the Revised Penal Code, shall be found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable purpose;

(f) any person who, having no visible lawful means of support or insufficient lawful means, does not, on being charged before a court, give to its satisfaction a good account of his/her means of support;

(g) any person occupying a house frequented by reputed thieves or persons who have no visible lawful means of support;

(h) any person who is a drunkard, and behaves in a riotous, disorderly, or indecent manner in any public place;

(i) any person who habitually consorts with reputed criminals or known prostitutes;

(j) any person who, without lawful excuse or purpose (the proof of which shall be upon the person)-

i) is found in any dwelling house, warehouse, or in any enclosed yard, garden, lot or area;

ii) has in his/her custody or possession any picklock or false key, crow, jack, bit, or other tools of housebreaking, or any dangerous or explosive substance; 

iii) has in the person’s custody or possession any instrument of gambling or any instrument which, in the opinion of the court, is constructed or kept or used as a means of gambling or cheating;

iv) willfully exposes his or her private part in plain view of any person in any public place;

(k) any person who, by his overt acts, shows intent to commit any indictable offense and -

i) has in his/her custody any deleterious drug, firearm, sword, bludgeon, or other
offensive weapon or instrument; or

ii) is found by night having his/her face masked, or being dressed in disguise;

(l) any person who is found armed with any firearm, sword, bludgeon or other offensive or deadly weapon or instrument, and does not, on being charged before a court, give to its satisfaction a good account of his lawful means of support and a valid reason for his being so armed;

(m) any person who loiters or places himself or herself in a public place to beg or gather alms, or solicits, gathers, or collects subscriptions or contributions;

(n) any person who causes, procures, or encourages any child to loiter or place himself or herself in a public place to beg or gather alms;

(o) any person who solicits, gathers or collects alms, subscriptions or contributions under any false pretense;

(p) any person who pretends or professes to tell fortunes for gain or payment of any kind;

(q) any person who, without lawful excuse (the proof of which shall be upon the person), by
himself/herself or together with others, enters or remains in or upon any part of an inhabited or uninhabited place, building or structure belonging to another, whether public or private, or any occupied or unoccupied land or lot.

So why is Leni Loud Robredo whining about the anti-vagrant policies that President Duterte is putting when in fact that they are NO DIFFERENT than what her late husband did. President Duterte also said that abusive cops will also be dismissed should they cross the line. Bum Aquino better review the anti-tambay ordinance because it's definitely part of good old Jesse's policies.

Hmmm... shouldn't Jesse's museum also include a display of the anti-vagrancy policy?