ARMS AMENDMENT RULES 2012

[mundaire]

The centralised database is flawed at a several levels-

A) as rightly pointed out, there is serious potential for abuse of such data/ infringement of citizens rig to privacy etc.

B) as of today there is no centralised database of convicted violent criminals. Are arms license holders a greater potential thread to law & order than convicted criminals?

C) no one is talking about the Cost to the taxpayer for setting up and maintaining such a database. And what do we gain return for this wasteful expense? Is there any evidence that having such a database will help curb crime or make citizens any safer? If so it should be placed in the public domain. If not, then why is public money being squandered away on yet another project without any thought towards public benefit?

I could go on, but I think you get the drift...

[winnie_the_pooh]

Looks like the making of another scam...... and a serious cause for concern for people who own firearms and live in areas troubled by naxalites/anti-national elements.

[Anand]

The generally accepted reason for creating such databases,is reduction in crime and ease of enforcement. Were it that such could not be misused, then it would be okay I guess. But in a situation where there may be an attack on the country by it's neighbours, then such databases would make it extremely easy for the enemy to disarm the citizens by going to their homes.

Not only that, in the event such database comes into the public domain, then it would be very easy for the criminal element to attack the homes of gun owners. If the only reason to create a database is for the purposes of law enforcement and prevention of fraudulent licenses, what is wrong with the current system of a decentralised network of multiple small databases, that are easily accessible to the Government at any time.

Fraudulent licenses can be prevented by simply issuing licenses in the form of smart cards with a memory chip in it that can be swiped at arms dealers to purchase ammo, and swiped to make any endorsements or changes in the license or for renewals at the LA office. While I cannot say that this will completely solve all the problems associated with licensing Arms, it will make it very hard to counterfeit licenses, it is far better than just creating a database.
Regards,
Anand

[xl_target]

The generally accepted reason for creating such databases,is reduction in crime and ease of enforcement.

That is the general answer given by any regulatory body that wants these databases but that is the biggest bunch of BS. that there is. All it does is create additional bureaucracy and use already scarce resources that could be used more productively elsewhere.

Keep in mind that Canada recently removed its long gun registry for some of the following reasons:
1. It was very expensive to keep and maintain and consumed a lot of scarce law enforcement resources.
2. No crimes were solved using the registry even after many many years of the registry being active.

If Canada couldn't use it to solve any crimes, I seriously doubt that Indian authorities will be able to.

What is wrong in the centralised data base issue ? At least we can know whether the licence is genuine or not ?

The only people who are targeted by these types of databases are law abiding citizens. By definition criminals don't follow the law, so how many would register themselves on this database? As you pointed out, the cops already figured out that those licences were fake without a database. So why would we need to pass more laws to do the same thing that they can already do.

[miroflex]

All centralised data bases have inherent risks of leakage, misuse etc. The move should be opposed.

Regards.

[spin_drift]

Is NAGRI going to oppose it?

[rabepobemababe]

Let mine be the voice of dissent in this forum.

Centralized database on its citizens is the need of the hour under present circumstances in India, where lakhs of illegal immigrants, some posing serious security threat to the nation, continue to thrive in the country. Aadhar (Unified Identity Management System) under Hon'ble Sri. Nandan Nilekani is all about creating a useful centralized database on Indian Citizens. In another two years, no one is going to get even a gas-cylinder, not to speak of a firearm licence, without a valid Aadhar Card.

It is necessary for a Government to know who is its citizen and who is not, and which citizen does what. For example, Israel was the accused nation over a film that reportedly made derogatory remarks about the Prophet (in the context of recent riots that rocked several nations in the Middle East, and caused the death of American Ambassador and three others in Libya). An Israeli citizen was accused of being the producer of the film. It took only twenty minutes for Government of Israel to clear its name, by looking at the centralized data base of its citizens. It took another twenty minutes for the American Government to identify the delinquent, his antecendents and his criminal background, by looking at its own database. The fellow turned out to be an Egyptian immigrant in the end.

Remember, even in the U.S. where you can buy a firearm over the counter, you need to provide your Social Security Number and other details, which are cross-checked with the online database by the seller before selling you the gun. They are going to do something similar with your automobile in India once the HSNP system for the automobiles (which is as per the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court) is in place.

Creating a centralized database on firearm licence holders is certainly not an invasion of privacy. Obtaining of a firearm licence by one, is not his / her private business, especially when the State, the licence granting authority, is involved in the process. Rather, one follows a statutory process to obtain a firearm licence, and the State is fully empowered to keep a track of the licences granted in any manner it wants. You cannot legally question it. Under no Constitution in the world, freedom of citizens is unfettered.

Presently, the number of legal firearms existing within a given State Government's jurisdiction is pure guess work (forget about the illegal ones). A few obtain All India Licences for firearms from one State Government, to use the same within the jurisdiction of another State Government. When a crime with a firearm is committed, it takes quite a long time to determine whether the said firearm is legal or illegal. This process will become quite easy with a centralized database on licence holders. It will also make the process of issuing All India Licences for firearms more rational.

I also think there is a need for clarity on this forum on the difference between a Policy, an Act, and a Rule. A policy is a statement of objective, and is not legally enforceable. An Act can cover whole or part of the objectives laid down by a Policy, and is legally enforceable. A Rule is part of the delegated legislation, and comes into existence by virtue of an enabling clause under the Act (which exists in every Act). Rules are passed by the Central and State Government to take care of the nitty-gritty of the enforcement of the Act. Depending on the requirement, further clarity is brought about in the Rules through Government Orders, Circular Memos, Guidelines etc. Thus, the argument that the amendment in the Arms Rules goes beyond the ambit of the Arms Act itself, sans merit.

[surajshuresh]

Guys lets take this positive there is nothing wrong in keeping a data base... It helps the government to keep track, maintain and search and have easy access to information... No harm in that for us ah... My only concern is if they can do this why cant they do a better renewal system, open import have it controlled... Here in Australia the rules are 1000 times stricter but its not next to imposable to get a gun or import it like India... And good news got my handgun license will we firing off glocks,1911,sigs... finally...

[rabepobemababe]

Here in Australia the rules are 1000 times stricter but its not next to imposable to get a gun or import it like India

@surajshuresh,

That's precisely my point. A better tracking system would facilitate a more liberal attitude in granting arms licences by the Indian Government (and may perhaps result in liberalizing the import policy). At present, the Indian Government is paranoid, and is groping in the dark. It does not know how many firearms are there in the country, what types, whether legal or illegal, what number of fake licences etc.

Congratulations on your new handgun licence!

[goodboy_mentor]

Centralized database on its citizens is the need of the hour under present circumstances in India, where lakhs of illegal immigrants, some posing serious security threat to the nation, continue to thrive in the country.

How centralized database is going to solve the problem of illegal immigrants crossing the borders illegally? They will get themselves enrolled in the database if required. Most of them already have ration cards and so many other documents.

Aadhar (Unified Identity Management System) under Hon'ble Sri. Nandan Nilekani is all about creating a useful centralized database on Indian Citizens. In another two years, no one is going to get even a gas-cylinder, not to speak of a firearm licence, without a valid Aadhar Card.

This is a highly controversial thing. Many democratic countries have rejected this UID thing for various reasons including violation of privacy. There is also one Supreme Court judgment of one country where it was held to be unconstitutional. One thing is sure Nandan Nilekani & Co. will surely make a lot of money out of this grand scam to fool the people.

Remember, even in the U.S. where you can buy a firearm over the counter, you need to provide your Social Security Number and other details, which are cross-checked with the online database by the seller before selling you the gun. They are going to do with the same with HSNP system for the automobile (which is as per the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court).

Anything done in USA does not make it automatically correct and desirable. It is not always necessary we have to follow whatever is done in USA. The main question is has all this really prevented any crime from taking place in USA? And track record of our Supreme Court also shows it is not infalliable and uninfluenceable.

Creating a centralized database on licence holders is certainly not an invasion of privacy.

This is certainly an attack on freedom and liberty. Why the government is so keen on creating database, how that data is going to be used and misused in future, what is the cost/benefit of this database are certainly a very big and serious questions.

Presently, the number of legal firearms existing within a given State Government's jurisdiction is pure guess work.

Where is the problem? Instead of database, the provision for census of firearms in Section 42 of Arms Act 1959 was done due to very good reasons. What prevents the government from doing census of firearms as per Section 42 of Arms Act 1959? It can also do it along with the population census every ten years. What prevents the government from doing so?

A few obtain All India Licences for firearms from one State Government, to use the same within the jurisdiction of another State Government. When a crime with a firearm is committed, it takes quite a long time to determine whether the said firearm is legal or illegal. This process will become quite easy with a centralized database on licence holders.

This idea is the most misplaced and ignorant with no connection with facts. How many crimes/percentage of crimes have been done in jurisdiction of another State with All India Licenses? Also how will this database help identify that firearm used in crime is legal or illegal? If someone is bent on committing a crime, will buy a cheap country made desi katta, or use country made barrel and cartridges, do the crime and then throw it away.

It will also make the process of issuing All India Licences for firearms more rational.

How will it make "more rational"? Are the license rejections done in a rational way now?

At present, the Indian Government is paranoid, and is groping in the dark. It does not know how many firearms are there in the country, what types, whether legal or illegal, what number of fake licences etc.

Arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 of Constitution, theoretically it means each and every citizen can possess arms. So why is government paranoid about the number of legal firearms? If government is paranoid about the number of legal firearms, it shows the intentions of the government are suspect and ulterior because it is suspecting law abiding citizens. Also how will creating a database unearth illegal firearms?

[Hammerhead]

Guys lets take this positive there is nothing wrong in keeping a data base... It helps the government to keep track, maintain and search and have easy access to information. And CONFISCATE AT WILL .. No harm in that for us ah YOU KIDDING, RIGHT ... ? ... My only concern is if they can do this why cant they do a better renewal system, open import have it controlled... Here in Australia the rules are 1000 times stricter but its not next to imposable to get a gun or import it like India... And good news got my handgun license will we firing off glocks,1911,sigs... finally...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Look

\/
\/
We just got rid off this registry by fighting 17 years to date and you want it........

BRAVO TO ALL THE AUSTRALIAN GUN LOBBYIST GROUPS - Rebecca Peters must be proud of you.

[YouTube]youtu.be/JVKvyYqtJ1w[/YouTube]

Keep in mind that Canada recently removed its long gun registry for some of the following reasons:
1. It was very expensive to keep and maintain and consumed a lot of scarce law enforcement resources.
2. No crimes were solved using the registry even after many many years of the registry being active.

If Canada couldn't use it to solve any crimes, I seriously doubt that Indian authorities will be able to.

[rabepobemababe]

@goodboy_mentor,

1. Not all the illegal immigrants have ration-cards. Those who have, have already become part of the demography of this country, and we cannot do much about them. The others are in the process of becoming the part of the nation's demography, and the Government can exercise due diligence, provided the political will is there, in their context. UID, or any other centralized database, is a tool that can be put to productive use, so that Governments (and private individuals) can act (if they want to) on the basis of concrete data rather than assumptions. I have already given one example.

2. Several PILs have been filed in Hon'ble Supreme Court of India with the contention that Aadhar is an invasion of privacy of Indian citizens. None succeeded so far. As far as India is concerned, what Hon'ble Supreme Court of India settles, is the law of the land. The ones who do not like it, can again approach Hon'ble Supreme Court of India for a review. Do you have proof that Mr. Nandan Nilekani is making money from Aadhar?

3. Agreed. But as a country where citizens enjoy the right to bear firearms, the United States has got much more experience with connected issues, and in its wisdom, has opted for some sort of tracking system. I think there is no harm to draw from the wisdom of others. Insinuating at Hon'ble Supreme Court of India amounts to Contempt of Court.

4. Every record that is maintained by Government is a database, and need not be digital. What is now sought to be done with the firearm licences in India is merely the digitization of the data, its centralization, and cross-access. It tremendously reduces the paper-correspondence between statutory authorities located at different places, each of whom holds bits and pieces of this data. Pradyumna, in a post of his, has already cited one example of fake-licences, and authorities not having a clue about them.

5. What makes you think that creation of a centralized database of bonafide firearm licences across the nation, is not a form of census? In amending the Arms Rules, Government is clearly referring to Sections of the Arms Act. Please refer to those enabling Sections.

6. Refer to Pradyumna's post for an example of the problem. The centralized database is for identifying the legal owners of firearms. The rest become illegal owners of firearms. It will also immediately make it clear as to whether a crime is committed with a legal firearm or an illegal firearm, and will answer your question as to how many crimes are committed with legal firearms.

7. It will prevent folks from suppressing the details about the firearms they already hold licences for, issued by other licencing authorites, while approaching a new licencing authority with an application for fresh arms licence. It will prevent folks from getting away with fake fire-arm licences, because their claims for renewals are centrally and immediately tallied with the licence issuing authority's records. Decisions will be more data-based and less surmise-based (if the licencing authority wants to take decisions that way).

8. Government is paranoid about 'legal' arms because it does not know as of now, as to how many of them are really 'legal', what type, who issued licences for them, and where do they exist. It is not mentioned anywhere in Article 19 or 21 of Constitution of India, that right to bear arms is a Fundamental Right. That assumption is the subject of a legal debate in which you represent one side. Unless the Supreme Court of India holds so, it does not become law of the land.

[mundaire]

It will also immediately make it clear as to whether a crime is committed with a legal firearm or an illegal firearm

How exactly is this magic going to work? Scenarios:

a) Someone is carjacked/ mugged/ molested/ raped/ murdered etc. by a bunch of gun toting criminals, the crime is investigated by the cops. How do the cops use this magical database to identify the criminals/ determine whether or not the guns used in commission of the crime were legal/ illegal?

b) A riot takes place in a locality. How do the cops use this magical database to identify the rioters/ determine whether the guns used by the miscreants were legal / illegal?

c) A terrorist attack (similar to 20/11) takes place in a big city. Once again, same questions?

You can go on in a similar vein ad infinitum. The only scenario in which the database may actually help identify the perpetrator(s)/ the legality of the gun, is if the gun is recovered by the cops AND happens to be a legal licensed gun. How often does this happen? And when it does happen, how useful is a centralised database of arms license holders in solving the crime?

BTW, since even top cops from all over the country have repeatedly on record admitted that crimes are committed using illegal guns and that licensed firearms are used in an insignificant number of crimes - once again, how does society benefit by maintaining a centralised database of these individuals? Why is this money not being spent on the (long overdue) centralised database of violent offenders/ criminals?

As to the UID scheme, the less said the better. Since this is not a platform for non-gun related political debate, I'll refrain from adding my detailed thoughts on UID

I apologise if I come across as combative, that is not my intent. Whether you agree with me or not, the fact remains that any such database will be a colossal waste of time, money & our (meagre) law enforcement resources along with opening up arms license holders to all sorts of potential harassment.

Cheers!
Abhijeet

[Skyman]

I mentioned on the forum a while back, in Andhra an Aadhar card was issued in the name of Mr Pulao and Mrs Coriander.Tell me, if food can be issued an aadhar card, what makes you think people cannot get them on the sly? No one bent on committing crime will take the trouble to register.When a foolproof system is thought of, let them implement it.After all, if legal guns are not used to commit crime, then imports must be allowed.

If Governments serious about fighting crime failed to use the registry, what will our government need it for? Scams.

They don't care who dies as long as it is not someone important to them.

[goodboy_mentor]

1. Not all the illegal immigrants have ration-cards. Those who have, have already become part of the demography of this country, and we cannot do much about them. The others are in the process of becoming the part of the nation's demography, and the Government can exercise due diligence, provided the political will is there, in their context. UID, or any other centralized database, is a tool that can be put to productive use, so that Governments (and private individuals) can act (if they want to) on the basis of concrete data rather than assumptions. I have already given one example.

UIDs and databases do not prevent illegal immigration. Since you are mentioning about USA, they already have all these databases etc. but that has not prevented illegal immigrants into that country. They certainly have the destructive potential to create a surveillance police state changing drastically the relation between the citizen and State.

Many countries after trying similar projects, have abandoned them because they were found to be incapable of achieving the projected objectives and posed very high security risks. For example a study was conducted by the London School of Economics on the UK Government's National ID card scheme, it was found that it would not achieve the objective of preventing illegal immigration and further that such a central database would itself become a target for terrorists. The new elected UK government scrapped the project in June 2010.

2. Several PILs have been filed in Hon'ble Supreme Court of India with the contention that Aadhar is an invasion of privacy of Indian citizens. None succeeded so far. As far as India is concerned, what Hon'ble Supreme Court of India settles, is the law of the land. The ones who do not like it, can again approach Hon'ble Supreme Court of India for a review. Do you have proof that Mr. Nandan Nilekani is making money from Aadhar?

What to say about the banana republic that does not even have a statute to protect data and privacy of its citizens even after almost 66 years of its existence? And less I speak about the Supreme Courts in the banana republics, the better it is. Are you aware that CIA and FBI computers have access to servers of NADRA, Pakistan? Now don't ask me proof of this since every government will publicly deny this kind of thing. But there is no smoke without fire, you may read this link to get an idea http://archives.dawn.com/2007/11/01/top7.htm. What is going to prevent the same from happening in India? There is another interesting reading in this link http://bargad.org/2011/07/03/nandan-man ... -pakistan/

Oh yes Mr. Nandan Nilekani is doing philanthropy for a noble cause. Is there is no difference between "Mr. Nandan Nilekani" and "Nandan Nilekani & Co."?

3. Agreed. But as a country where citizens enjoy the right to bear firearms, the United States has got much more experience with connected issues, and in its wisdom, has opted for some sort of tracking system. I think there is no harm to draw from the wisdom of others.

But that "wisdom" has not done any good. Same is the case with Canada that has recently dismantled gun registry because it was very expensive to keep and maintain and consumed a lot of scarce law enforcement resources. And no crimes were solved using the registry even after many many years of the registry being active. So what kind of wisdom we are following?

Insinuating at Hon'ble Supreme Court of India amounts to Contempt of Court.

Well then Supreme Court itself did its own contempt number of times by acknowledging the fact that it had errored in the past and thus is not infalliable! And many judges have also done contempt of courts by saying in interviews that courts do get influenced by the media hype. Friend, talking about courts or criticizing them in a reasonable manner is not a contempt of court. Sometimes contempt of court is blown out of proportion and context. I am attaching below with this post, a very fine essay explaining the contempt of court by Justice Markandey Katju.

4. Every record that is maintained by Government is a database, and need not be digital. What is now sought to be done with the firearm licences in India is merely the digitization of the data, its centralization, and cross-access. It tremendously reduces the paper-correspondence between statutory authorities located at different places, each of whom holds bits and pieces of this data. Pradyumna, in a post of his, has already cited one example of fake-licences, and authorities not having a clue about them.

Agree that every record that is maintained by government is a database but the problem is digitization of the data, its centralization, and cross-access. It tremendously increases the security risks and misuse. All kinds of profiling and tracking can be done by a police state. Are we building a police state? Also truck load of information can be stolen on a pen drive or hacked. There exists no data protection law but government wants to digitize everything without securing it.

About fake license, why people are going for fake licenses? One of the major reason it has been made extremely difficult for people to obtain arms licenses. And fake licenses were found out even without a database.

5. What makes you think that creation of a centralized database of bonafide firearm licences across the nation, is not a form of census? In amending the Arms Rules, Government is clearly referring to Sections of the Arms Act. Please refer to those enabling Sections.

Oh yes there is no difference between doing a census and creating a centralized database whose practical benefits are almost nil and costs are high and also without any data protection or privacy laws.

6. Refer to Pradyumna's post for an example of the problem. The centralized database is for identifying the legal owners of firearms. The rest become illegal owners of firearms. It will also immediately make it clear as to whether a crime is committed with a legal firearm or an illegal firearm, and will answer your question as to how many crimes are committed with legal firearms.

Are legal firearm owners unidentifiable now or illegal firearm owners unidentifiable now? As to whether a crime is committed with a legal firearm or an illegal firearm has already been well explained by mundaire. And also Canada was not able to use the gun database to solve a single crime in many decades, what magic is going to happen in our country? Apply your logical part of mind.

7. It will prevent folks from suppressing the details about the firearms they already hold licences for, issued by other licencing authorites, while approaching a new licencing authority with an application for fresh arms licence.

Why people are compelled to suppress the details about firearms they hold, issued by other licensing authorities? Because of the unreasonable and unconstitutional three firearm limit and making it next to impossible to get an all India license.

It will prevent folks from getting away with fake fire-arm licences, because their claims for renewals are centrally and immediately tallied with the licence issuing authority's records. Decisions will be more data-based and less surmise-based (if the licencing authority wants to take decisions that way).

Are you contending that licensing authorities are presently renewing the licenses blindly by not following the due process of law for renewal? And for this lapse by licensing authorities, the government wants to reward them by further increasing the expenditure by creating centralized database? A brilliant idea.

8. Government is paranoid about 'legal' arms because it does not know as of now, as to how many of them are really 'legal', what type, who issued licences for them, and where do they exist.

Are you contending that licensing authorities themselves are not aware how many licenses they are issuing, what type they are issuing, who is issuing etc.?

It is not mentioned anywhere in Article 19 or 21 of Constitution of India, that right to bear arms is a Fundamental Right. That assumption is the subject of a legal debate in which you represent one side. Unless the Supreme Court of India holds so, it does not become law of the land.

It is not mentioned anywhere in Article 19 or 21 of Constitution of India, that right to information and self defense are fundamental rights. Then how are they fundamental rights? From where in the Constitution the RTI Act 2005 is flowing from? From where in the Constitution, the Sections 96 to 106 IPC are flowing from?

Is the Article 21 in the Constitution saying that self defense has to be done with bare hands only? If yes, then since the State and Citizens/persons are equal before Article 14 of the Constitution, State should also be doing its self defense with bare hands only. Is this absurd proposition acceptable to the State as defined under Article 12 of the Constitution?

From where in the Constitution, the Arms Act 1959 is flowing from? Why is Article 19(1)(b) acknowledging arms when there exists Article 19(3)?

Anything that is an offense under Part III of the Constitution, even the State is not exempt from that offense because of equality before law as per Article 14. For example murder, kidnapping etc. are offenses under Part III, thus no exemption under law for State for these offenses. Surely arms are not an offense under Part III of the Constitution that is why the State is exempt from the Arms Act 1959. Since arms are not an offense under Part III, then what are arms for Article 19(1)(b) when there exists Article 19(3)?

If you are still not able to get the clue or understand, please search this website, I have explained this matter at number of places in detail.