Indians For Guns

The Government is planning to table a new Arms Act Amendment Bill during this parliament session. The object of the bill is to amend a provision of the law which makes a death penalty mandatory for death caused by use of Prohibited Arms & Ammunition (as described in Section 2 sub-sections (h) & (i) ). The amendment seeks to provide for an option of life sentence along with death penalty for such offences.

The details of this amendment bill have not yet been published, this is the limit of information we have been able to acquire through our sources.

Cheers!
Abhijeet

Absolutely not bad,it's welcome but then the issue of use of illegal arms in crimes should be acknowledged and govt. authorities must go easy on law abiding license holders and not club them with these illegal arms holders because of these clowns license holder also face that contempt from anti-gun idiots and citizens who think guns always equal violent people.

if so,
pb bores are used mostly army and police,very few pb licencee's are seen.i hope they donot sentence the army for using these bores.most crimes are done using illegal firearms,i don't know how it will help in reducing crimes.
this law will only stop civilians from acquiring pb firearms thats all.criminals will continue using illegal guns whatsoever.
regards

What are commonly termed as "Prohibited Bore" firearms are NOT "Prohibited Arms" as classified under Section 2(i) of the Arms Act. Please look up relevant sticky thread under the Legal Eagle section here.

Cheers!
Abhijeet

This clause again opens a hope and a pandora's box."" Prohibited arms "" should be reclassified as ''Govt bores''' and nobody except govt forces should be having them and vise versa i.e. no civilian bores in the hands of govt forces.This will aid in crime detection, ballistics, insider jobs,and will put an end to fake killings and act as a deter ant for outlaw- lawmen. Secondly VIPS whose life is most precious than the average "" Indian DOG '' will not be able to posses them any more and at a dirt prices made available to them for their "" Priceless lives""

The amendment seeks to provide for an option of life sentence along with death penalty for such offences.

Seems to be some kind of positive development. But what is the real significance of this amendment? Supreme Court has already held that death sentence is to be provided only in "rarest of rare" cases of murder. So the punishment of death sentence under Section 27(3) of Arms Act 1959 is already diluted unless it is a "rarest of rare" case of murder.

"" Prohibited arms "" should be reclassified as ''Govt bores''' and nobody except govt forces should be having them and vise versa i.e. no civilian bores in the hands of govt forces.

I humbly disagree with this opinion. This is a free and democratic country, the government and people are not at war with each other like it was during British period. Or something like cold war is going on between government and people, like the one between NATO and Warsaw Pact nations where both adopted different bores so that one could not use the captured arms or ammunition.

This will aid in crime detection, ballistics, insider jobs,and will put an end to fake killings and act as a deter ant for outlaw- lawmen.

I do not think so because there are countless work arounds and loopholes to this. On the contrary may mean more troubles for "ordinary" people like you and me.

As usual there seems to be confusion regarding legally defined "prohibited arms" and the so called "prohibited bore" firearms. As suggested in my previous post, please refer to the correct thread under legal eagle section for disambiguation.

@ GBM - the reasons seem to be entirely political. The automatic death penalty clause was added during the Punjab insurgency, however it would seem that these days the Govt. would rather not be forced to invoke the mandatory death penalty for terrorists (who along with a few Mafiaso types are the ones usually convicted under this Section). While any amendment which seeks to temper the draconian Arms Act is a positive development, the reasons behind it seem to be all the wrong ones - so to be quite blunt, I'm not quite sure whether to hail this development for what it is and hope for more to come or to condemn the reasons behind it...

Cheers!
Abhijeet

FIRSTLY VERY INFORMATORY SUBJCT POSTED THANX SIR ABHIJIT.AS OTHERS ARE ANXIOUS ENOUGH TO KNOW THE FALLOUT OF THE ACTUALL SCENERIO.

On the face of it, it looks like a change for the better, but any change in law must be scrutinized to the extreme so that there are no problems later. There may be any number of scenarios that a Prohibited weapon may be used (in self defense) which, if resulting in the death of the aggressor, would result in unfair execution of the law simply on the merit that this law exists. This law, if originally formulated due to either a knee jerk reaction or some such, must be questioned and repealed.

For instance:(I know this is an extreme example but:) If a Prohibited Arm like an AK 47 was wrenched away from one of the 26/11 terrorists, and used against them, then would this automatic death penalty be a good idea??

On the other hand, any action resulting in the death of another person due to what ever reason is subject to detailed investigation and on its own merits be subject to the death penalty.

Consider this, the death penalty is to be used in "only the rarest of rare cases", now does it mean if terrorists attack civilians with enough frequency it ceases to be rare and so now they are not subject to the death penalty??
Any law, especially, when it concerns the taking away the life of a person which is an irreversible thing and can not be compensated must be framed with the utmost care and caution.

Regards,
Anand

Anand makes some good points here. once upon a time owning a car was rare not so now.

what worrys me is that the MHA might do underhand and change some other aspect of the arms law at the sitting. at the last minute.

You ( Gov't ) gotta be kidding

You The Gun Owners will be first ones to pay the price

Edit : " Consider this, the death penalty is to be used in "only the rarest of rare cases", now does it mean if terrorists attack civilians with enough frequency it ceases to be rare and so now they are not subject to the death penalty??
Any law, especially, when it concerns the taking away the life of a person which is an irreversible thing and can not be compensated must be framed with the utmost care and caution.

Regards,
Anand

^^^ - Anand this rare case is almost always apply to Gun Owners who will be called Gun Maniacs in the court of the Law. If there was terrorist attack on any where in the world , the fre%^king Gov't fails at the first place and should be blamed for if not hanged ; because THEY unarmed me and told to trust them with my own safety and security

On a Second note --------Will come later here .......

2 days back Third anniversary of Mumbai attack passed like almost ordinary day ( accept mumbians showed their condolences) ( most of the news channels gave limited importance of that horrible crime committed )

I hate to say that one of those attackers is still enjoying holidays on Tax-payers expenses

Govt. is in urgent need of strict bill against such crimes before they passes any of confusing bills

As you all know there is a distinction between Prohibited Arms and Prohibited bore Arns. The present amendment is aimed at those persons who face trial for causing death by the use of Prohibited Arms.At present it is mandatory to award the death sentence, in all cases where Proh ibited Arms are used by the accused for killing any person.
In recent years, considerable amount of Prohibited Arms like AK-47, INSAS,LMG,9mm Carbine etc have been looted by insurgents by conducting raids on police stations or by ambushing police and pare military personnel in the Maoist infested areas of the country. Earlier this problem was confined only in J&K and in the North Eastern States. However, during the last five years looting of such arms have also taken place in Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa and West Bengal etc. In course of retaliatory action by the State forces, now we have a number of Maoist and other insurgents have been apprehended by the State forces. Some of them will soon be Court facing trial for killing of members of the security forces or of civilians.
The proposed amendment to the Act will give discretion to the Court in deciding whether Death Sentence or Life sentence should be awarded to a particular person.

I see. So either the provision of death sentence has been a failure or for some unknown reasons(probably for the quantum of votes at stake), for the same crime, the government wants to change the scale of justice and go soft now.

indiaone wrote:As you all know there is a distinction between Prohibited Arms and Prohibited bore Arns. The present amendment is aimed at those persons who face trial for causing death by the use of Prohibited Arms.At present it is mandatory to award the death sentence, in all cases where Proh ibited Arms are used by the accused for killing any person.
In recent years, considerable amount of Prohibited Arms like AK-47, INSAS,LMG,9mm Carbine etc have been looted by insurgents by conducting raids on police stations or by ambushing police and pare military personnel in the Maoist infested areas of the country. Earlier this problem was confined only in J&K and in the North Eastern States. However, during the last five years looting of such arms have also taken place in Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa and West Bengal etc. In course of retaliatory action by the State forces, now we have a number of Maoist and other insurgents have been apprehended by the State forces. Some of them will soon be Court facing trial for killing of members of the security forces or of civilians.
The proposed amendment to the Act will give discretion to the Court in deciding whether Death Sentence or Life sentence should be awarded to a particular person.

the Maoists of Nepal were using G36 assault rifles (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... -Inventory)... if our (indian) Maoists need good quality weapons they can always reach out to their fellow comrades in Nepal ..... if you can get a G36 why the hell would you need an INSAS? ... we seriously need to get more detail on what the amendment contains before its too late