India's largest guns, shooting & outdoors community!
https://indiansforguns.com/
I think the word ‘toad’ here means ‘tod’ which is ‘to break’ in Hindi… suggesting eating or crudely put ‘hogging’ in this contextOFB restructuring is progressive, but reforming the rules on civilian gun ownership makes sense too
All crime statistics underline the fact that licenced firearms do not contribute to crime; if anything, they most often help prevent heinous crimes by offering citizens a real chance to defend themselves
Abhijeet Singh
October 03, 2021 15:04:55 IST
The Government of India has finally decided to dissolve the Ordnance Factory Board (OFB), making way for seven new (wholly government-owned) corporate entities, who shall now take over the running of the ordnance factories and other facilities.
The move is meant to help improve the abysmal quality of products that OFB has become notorious for. It has been consistently supplying overpriced sub-standard products to both its government buyers (military, para-military, police forces, etc.) as well as to ordinary Indian civilian customers.
Most of the buzz is around the corporatisation of the OFB and focussed on how this may impact military supplies and job security of workers, but few people are discussing the products they sell in the civilian market and how this move may impact potential civilian customers.
As many readers would not be conversant with the status of civilian gun ownership in India, a little background may be appropriate here.
Civilian gun ownership in India
Prior to the advent of colonial rule in India, arms of all manner and types were freely owned and carried by all sections of society. In those times, it was unusual for anyone to venture out of their homes without being armed in some manner.
The British rulers, with an ingrained distrust of their Indian subjects, had passed numerous stringent laws with the sole objective of disarming and subjugating the Indian population. These laws exempted all Europeans, while placing strict controls and penalties on Indians owning any type of weapon.
Post-Independence, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms was recognised as a Legal Right through the Arms Act of 1959, which allows any Indian citizen, not previously convicted of a violent crime or with any history of mental health issues, to apply for and acquire an arms licence.
Like any other government-issued licence, this process is highly subjective, corrupt and humiliating, and obviously geared towards dissuading ordinary applicants. The process ensures that unless the applicant is well-connected or willing to grease the right palms the application will invariably be turned down.
The only times when an ordinary citizen usually has any chance of getting a firearm license is if the applicant has inherited a firearm, or has achievements to show in shooting sports. As a result, in India it is rare for an ordinary middle-class citizen to have an arms licence.
OFB and civilian firearms
OFB has a long history of manufacturing firearms and ammunition specifically meant for sale to civilians in India. Initially starting out with the manufacture of sporting rifles chambered for the .315 cartridge (8x50R), these were the sporting version of the same Lee Enfield rifles being supplied to the government in .303 British and later in 7.62x51 calibres. Later on they also started supplying 12-bore double-barrel shotguns which were a copy of a Birmingham Small Arms design.
Till 1986, when the civilian import of all firearms was banned, these OFB products were usually of acceptable quality and priced much lower than the imported firearms, which were being sold here for up to three times their overseas price, largely because of import duties and dealer profits. This direct competition with global manufacturers ensured that the OFB maintained a certain level of quality and price.
A few years ago, a friend found some OFB made 12-bore cartridges in his store, dating from the early 1980s. We took them to the range and tried them against those currently manufactured by OFB: the older lot was far superior in performance, despite lying in storage for almost half a century!
After the 1986 ban on imports, OFB got a virtual monopoly on the manufacture and sale of civilian firearms and ammunition in India. Monopolies are usually never good for customers or the market. This OFB monopoly led to a massive deterioration in quality as well as steady upward price increases of the weapons for civilian sale. The buyer had no other choice.
In the late 1980s the OFB began producing a copy of the Enfield No. 2 revolver (a simplified version of the century-old Webley design) chambered for the .32 S&W Long cartridge. Later on they also added to their product line a semi-automatic pistol, a mish-mash copy of the Browning 1910 and Colt 1903 models. Both of these are currently priced at about a lakh rupees.
By comparison, similar products, made by any of the global manufacturers and of much superior quality, retail overseas for a third or even less – this would include the profit margin of the manufacturer, distributor as well as the retailer.
Take a long look
Will reforming the OFB make a difference? Before we begin to explore if and how corporatisation could help improve the quality of OFB’s products, we should consider another big policy change that came into effect in 2016.
Beginning in 2016, the Government of India began accepting applications for licences for the manufacture of arms and ammunition from private companies. Prior to this, only a few small-scale units had been allowed to manufacture small quantities of shotguns and antiquated muzzle-loaders, and fresh licences for these had not been issued for several decades either.
Several Indian companies have been granted licence to manufacture arms and ammunition in India. However, the focus of almost all of these companies is on government sales, as that is where the big sales volumes lie. Most of these companies have tied up with foreign collaborators and are looking at bringing in their product lines here in order to bid for big military and police contracts.
The vision of the government is a vibrant eco-system of domestic manufacturers who should eventually be able to compete in global markets. The point to consider is that while all of these companies set up facilities in India and compete for a few government tenders, what would happen to the huge investments of those that are unable to win the tender bids?
In countries with a vibrant firearms manufacturing industry, a large part of the industry is sustained by (domestic and export) civilian sales. So, even if a company loses one tender, it continues research and development, all the while staying in business with the support of civilian customers.
When OFB had a monopoly on government orders and a marginal business of civilian sales, these considerations didn’t really matter. But with multiple companies setting up shop in India, the government needs to also take a long and hard look at the policies being followed for the issuance of arms licences to ordinary law-abiding citizens.
All crime statistics underline the fact that licenced firearms do not contribute to crime; if anything, they most often help prevent heinous crimes by offering citizens a real chance to defend themselves.
Without the support of a vibrant civilian firearms market, it is hard to imagine how we can ever hope to become a hub for manufacturing or innovation in this field.
I can't thank you enough 
, on behalf of everyone of us who is genuinely concerned about the state of affairs. You have covered all the important points and I hope someone at the top is listening.