Let me start by objecting to your precondition that I must reduce the number of words I use to what is demanded by you.timmy wrote:Again, sir, I am not asking about what you want for yourself. It seems there is a great need to play word games in this thread.bennedose wrote:No. The right already exists. What I want is the ability to exercise the right.timmy wrote: So, Mr. Bennedose, please stop beating around the bush, come right out and tell me plainly, without obfuscation: Do you believe that the right to keep and bear arms is a right for all citizens of India that should be granted immediately, or not?
The question is, do you want every law abiding citizen in India to be able to exercise this right? And may I hear just a simple "yes" or "no" please?
Having got that out of the way, the answer is a resounding yes. No doubt about it.
To get back to my penchant for saying much. The fact that every citizen's right is suppressed (in India) is itself a symptom of deep malaise which I suspect will be cured by everyone being allowed to own guns legally like the elite few. And by elite few I don't mean the law abiding types who might become members of this forum. But from my viewpoint, living in India, I see a solid brick wall in front of me that deprives me of my right, while the argument I am given is that I should consider myself lucky, because people don't have food and water and other things which are fundamental rights and that I should stop slobbering after guns (not Gandhian?) and should busy myself agreeing with all the excuses given to me as to why i should not own a (real) firearm.
My big complaint is that "legalities" have been used to suppress rights in India. That is what bothers me most. I believe that this only encourages those who wish to break the law, rather than encourage people who stay within the law.