Girl shot dead in Bangalore School

[timmy]

"country made weapon with license" is the one where the licensing authority acknowledges it on license that it is a country made weapon. Possession of such a weapon is legal but might be extremely unsafe to use. If I am able to recall correctly, someone had posted that there have been some instances where government had indeed issued licenses for country made firearms. Since it is legal to possess a country made firearm with license, that is exactly why in Schedule II of Arms Rules 1962, there is provision for issue of arms license for country made firearm in entry 23. It can be read at http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms/india ... le_II.html

When I read that Item 23, it says in full that:

Acquiring, possessing during the course of his stay in (but not use and carrying in, and export out of India by bona fide tourist

I am noting that this, then, applies to the "bona fide tourist" "during the course of his stay" in India.

[dev]

The scary part is every small time hood in the North now opens fire at the slightest provocation, due to these pistols. One just has to step out of the Delhi border and know that you are now unsafe. So if anyone faces a carjacking or mugging just don't get into an argument, the hoods have nothing to loose.

[Vikram]

The country made weapons that are legitimate/legal are invariably muzzle loading shotguns.They are made in registered and licensed factories. Then there are breech loading shotguns which are legally manufactured with strict quota restrictions in place. No rifle or handgun manufacturing licenses are given to any private manufacturer in India. Period.Also, every single firearm legally produced in India must go through the proof test at IOF facilities and every single gun sold must be of proved provenance. If these illegal "country made" guns are sold as genuine articles on licenses by a dealer and the licensing authorities register them, it is a crime. Unless there is a racket going on with collusion between dealers and licensing authorities, these illegal guns cannot be sold as legal articles.

[sumanngon]

You are dot right about it Vikram!

[goodboy_mentor]

"country made weapon with license" is the one where the licensing authority acknowledges it on license that it is a country made weapon. Possession of such a weapon is legal but might be extremely unsafe to use. If I am able to recall correctly, someone had posted that there have been some instances where government had indeed issued licenses for country made firearms. Since it is legal to possess a country made firearm with license, that is exactly why in Schedule II of Arms Rules 1962, there is provision for issue of arms license for country made firearm in entry 23. It can be read at http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms/india ... le_II.html

When I read that Item 23, it says in full that:

Acquiring, possessing during the course of his stay in (but not use and carrying in, and export out of India by bona fide tourist

I am noting that this, then, applies to the "bona fide tourist" "during the course of his stay" in India.

Yes I am fully aware of this. If you note I have also said the following

Having said all this, I would very strongly tell every reader of this forum to desist from possessing any country made firearm, besides being very unsafe, it is completely illegal to possess such firearm without license.

Now the details for discussion only. It is a well settled matter that the Fundamental Laws of Indian Constitution are based on Common Law. RKBA is part and parcel of Common law. Equality before law is of paramount importance in Common Law. Since there is something called equality before law, if "bona fide tourist" can get license for country made weapon, technically locals can also get license for it it too. But how can they get license unless they are able to possess it in the first place or the State is willing to sell them? As per Arms Act they cannot possess a firearm without license. Rather Arms Act is self incriminating the person who would go with country made firearm to get license. The matter is similar to Haynes v. United States •; 1968; 390 U.S. 85; 326. You may read its summary here http://www.gunlaws.com/Supreme%20Court%20Summaries.htm

Now there are three possible possibilities -

1. Do not possess country made firearm. It will not violate Arms Act.

2. The State sells them or announces kind of amnesty scheme wherein those in possession of country made firearms can come and get license. It will not violate Arms Act.

3. The Parliament amends Arms Act so that it does not self incriminate. Or any High Court or Supreme Court declares it to be self incriminating. It will not violate Arms Act.

Any thing other than from the above three options is illegal. Long and short practical moral of the story - desist from possessing any country made firearm.

The country made weapons that are legitimate/legal are invariably muzzle loading shotguns.They are made in registered and licensed factories. Then there are breech loading shotguns which are legally manufactured with strict quota restrictions in place.

I disagree because of the following reasons -

1. Parliament has taken great pains to classify the above firearms separately in sub categories under Schedule I of Arms Rules. What is the purpose to club them all together under "country made" which has not been defined anywhere in Arms Act or its Rules. But "country made" does have a meaning under common usage in English. It is (especially of a weapon) manufactured by an illegal cottage industry.

2. Parliament has taken great pains to list entry number 6 under Schedule II for "bona fide travelers visiting India" to get arms license for categories I(c), III, V. What is the purpose to repeat category III firearms in entry 23 unless country made weapons of category III are in some manner different from those mentioned in entry 6 or mean what it really means in common English usage? That is (especially of a weapon) manufactured by an illegal cottage industry.

No rifle or handgun manufacturing licenses are given to any private manufacturer in India. Period.

I would like to replace "are given" with "have been given" because "are given" no doubt is a "fact" or rather a "political fact" but not a "legal fact". Why? Because Parliament has taken great pains to lay down clear procedure under Arms Act to issue commercial manufacturing licenses without any discrimination to private manufacturers.

Also, every single firearm legally produced in India must go through the proof test at IOF facilities and every single gun sold must be of proved provenance.

This is exact legal reason why those having license for country made gun issued under entry 23 of Schedule II of Arms Rules are not allowed to use them.

If these illegal "country made" guns are sold as genuine articles on licenses by a dealer and the licensing authorities register them, it is a crime. Unless there is a racket going on with collusion between dealers and licensing authorities, these illegal guns cannot be sold as legal articles.

Fully agree. But it will be difficult to prove the nexus between dealers and licensing authorities.