Few months ago I had tried registering on that website, for some reason it was not accepting the publicly available email ids like from yahoo, hotmail etc. Anyways following are my observations:
The self defense prohibitionists of every type(it includes the corrupt or tyrants everywhere around the world) go by the following undeclared premises:
1) The State and its citizens(usually called the public or public interest) are separate and at conflict with each other.(It needs to be be noted that this premise is very true and suitable for the corrupt or tyrants when they have State power in their hands. For example the colonial British rule in India and its subsequent after effects).
2) Since State and all its citizens are at conflict with each other, when State has arms, they are for its self defense only, but when its citizens(sorry slaves!) have arms, they have it for crime only.(Very true and suitable for the corrupt or tyrants when they have State power in their hands.)
3) Exercising the natural, basic fundamental and human right of self defense and keeping arms for self defense are two separate things because self defense by the citizens(sorry slaves!) is expected to be done with bare hands only. But the same right of self defense by the State can be done with help of arms only.(Very true and suitable for the corrupt or tyrants when they have State power in their hands.)
The Constitutional or legal position about the same in India is the following:
1) The State and its citizens are
not separate or at conflict with each other. Rather they are equal and the equality is guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
2) Because of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, the arms are acknowledged as fundamental right of
both for the State and its citizens under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution(more can be read at
http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 64#p147708). In other words both Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India are equally applicable to the State and its citizens because of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Moreover fundamental rights and fundamental duties are two sides of the same coin, i.e. rights cannot exist without duties and duties cannot exist without rights. Therefore surely fundamental duties under Article 51A(b),(c),(d),(i) are not expected do be done with bare hands only.
3) Because of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, both the State and its citizens have
equal right for self defense as well as arms and their use for the same(within the limits of laws). Corollary to this we have the law enforcement machinery of State i.e. police etc., as well the law enforcement machinery of citizens in their personal capacity. When any person acts in self defense as defined under Section 96 to 106 IPC(which is nothing but corollary to Article 21 of the Constitution of India), he is doing nothing but
enforcing the law(Sections 96 to 106 IPC) by acting as law enforcement machinery in personal capacity.
In light of the above facts, what is the modus operandi that self defense prohibitionists of all kinds can employ? Nothing except that do not discuss the above facts and truth so that people may not know the same, instead keep on harping around meaningless nonsense, start portraying rights as crime and crime as rights, so that ultimately a confusion can be created, with aim of preventing the facts and truth from reaching the people.
I hope to see more IFGian there, I can see spin_drift but it would be good if more of them joins. A healthy debate is always good and I hope to see atleast one without the "India is not USA, USA gun laws won't work there" mentality.