March 26, 2010 ATTY. REYNANTE B. ORCEO VS. COMELEC Facts: Atty. Reynante B. Orceo assailed the validity of Resolution No. 8714 insofar as it provides that the term firearm includes airsoft guns and their replicas/imitations, which results in their coverage in the gun ban during the election period. It assailed that the inclusion results to violation of constitutional rights of the airsoft players and strucks down the game promotes, as a family outdoor activity. Issue: Whether or not it is valid to hold airsoft gun included in Section 2 (b) of RA No. 8714. Held: Yes. The Court holds that the COMELEC did not gravely abuse its discretion in including airsoft guns and air guns in the term firearm in Resolution No. 8714 for the purpose of the gun ban during the election period. The COMELECs intent in the inclusion of airsoft guns in the term firearm and their resultant coverage by the election gun ban was because these guns are replicas/imitations of the real one. An ordinary citizen may not be able to distinguish between a real gun and an airsoft gun especially during the election period. These recreational guns could be used in sowing fear, intimidation or terror during the heat of election. Ultimately, what the ban seeks to promote is to ensure the holding of free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible election. With such, the Court ruled to deny the petition for lack of merit.