Practice question
During a private fraud transaction, an offender keeps a loose firearm locked elsewhere and does not use it in committing the fraud. No rebellion, insurrection or attempted coup connection exists. He argues that every criminal charge automatically absorbs the firearm violation. Which is correct under section 29?
- Any crime automatically absorbs every firearm offense
- Only violent crimes may be prosecuted if a firearm exists elsewhere
- Unlawful possession can never be separately prosecuted
- Where the crime is committed without using the loose firearm, the Act treats its violation as a distinct and separate offense
- The fraud is converted into rebellion because a firearm exists
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10591_2013.html — RA 10591, section 3(v), (w) and (y), and sections 28–31, 38, 40–41, definitions and relevant firearm offenses.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.