Days numbered for ‘Frank Sinatras’ in Davao City

BY ROGER M. BALANZA

    The days are numbered for ‘Frank Sinatras’ who torture neighbors with their loud, lousy singing on audio components or videoke machines.

I DID IT MY WAYYYYYY!!

Vice Mayor Rodrigo Duterte said he is refining his proposed anti-nuisance ordinance to include loud singing, a perennial object of complaints against videoke bars.

Duterte earlier proposed his anti-noise ordinance following complaints against “bora-bora,” motorcycles whose mufflers bark loud, ear-splitting roars.
The vice mayor said he is putting stronger teeth to his proposal to include loud singing even in housing subdivisions.
I am warning those who say they can do anything inside their house who will challenge the ordinance, he said at the Ato Ni Bay television program on Skycable on Tuesday.
The right to freedom of hapiness is subject to the right of others, he said, meaning that neighborhood calm should be amply protected against lousy, loud singing that torture the ears.

inFRONTPAGE

PUBLISHED IN THE DURIAN POST NO.79, Sept 26-Oct. 2, 2011

9 thoughts on “Days numbered for ‘Frank Sinatras’ in Davao City”

  1. I hope this really pushes through. Aside from the loud singing, my neighbors play the drums and electric guitar without considering others schedule. I work at night, so I hope to get ample rest during the day. But it’s impossible to do this because I have all sorts of neighbors who make noise in all possible ways you can think of. It’s as if they are allergic to peaceful environment.

    Like

  2. I respectfully disagree (though I will defend your right to think and speak your mind). We must be VERY CAREFUL when mixing terms such as “individual” and “population” as it relates to rights.

    Individual rights are not to be infringed. A person’s “sphere of influence/privilege/right” should not overlap that of another. What Duterte said was correct, “The right to freedom of happiness is subject to the right of others.”

    Rights of the population, however, can be interpreted to fit any agenda. I see this happening in the U.S. where individual rights are stripped in the name of national security or for the “greater good”…population vs. individual.

    No one individual’s pursuit of happiness should reduce another’s pursuit of happiness within a framework of laws. There is no need for thousands upon thousands of laws and ordinances. There are only ten good laws I can think of that are true and pure, and these can be summed-up into just two: 1) Love God and 2) Love neighbor.

    If what you are doing violates either of these…stop it.

    Like

  3. Jade,

    I understand your intent. The point being made is the preservation of individual rights as opposed to the removal of rights in the name of the “greater good.”

    In this case, no “right” exists to disturb his/her neighbor with loud, obnoxious, intoxicated singing in the middle of the night.

    Like

  4. yup it is in the anti-noise ordinance. but before you call 911, pick the biggest stone and hurl it at your noisy neighbor’s house. this is illegal but the other neighbors will cheer you for it!

    Like

  5. I have two more questions:

    Is there a difference between anti-nuisance and anti-noise ordinances or one simply means the other?

    Where can I get a copy of the ordinance?

    Like

  6. I almost forgot, Has the local government informed all policemen in this city about this ordinance? Actually, before I read this article, I had already consulted some Policemen about noisy neighbors and none of them mentioned about such ordinance.

    Like

  7. God Bless Mr Duterte for his protecting the rights of society from the freaks and wackos that insist on disturbing others. I live in Cebu City and I am surrounded with boom box freaks and terrible singing on both sides of me constantly. Enforcement maybe after 10PM upon complaint is rarely carried out. Currently putting up with 36 hours of noise that rattles off my concrete walls.

    Like

Leave a reply to David Rogers