Wishlist - what would you like the Arms Act to be?

[psm]

The point wise suggestions are as under:
1: The new licenses should be issued after proper enquiry of an individual. Now a days people are getting licenses by bribing. Go to DM office and just spare time to watch persons standing in long queue arms license related window. About 99% of them you see will be property dealers, druggys etc.. They are having surplus money spinned due to appreciation of land prices. These type of people get licenses easily by virtue of money as well as muscle(political) power. But a Class 1 Govt. officer gets license issued with great great difficulty. The credentials of officer in Govt service can be easily verified than these so called license seekers. OK leave it its just an example.
The issuance of new license should be after police verification which should be time bound which has already been done.
2: Regarding All India validity, it should be at State Home Ministry level because at National Level it is beyond common man's reach. There should be no review of all india validity once it is granted.
3: Addition of 03 number NPB weapons should be made easy.
4: Quota of ammunition per annum should be done away.
5: License copy should be of plastic like credit card.
6: Life time validity of license is a sensible idea/suggestion with extra fees.

[jonahpach]

How about including the lifting the restrictions on small arms manufacture...

Jonah

[MoA]

1. membership of a shooting club should be sufficient to buy weapons for all majors. Doc's cert etc should apply.
2. No criminal background.
3. No restriction on the number of weapons, caliber or amount of ammunition.
4. Full Auto weapons require a permit, which is based on someone who is a.) a member of the club, b.) has been shooting regularly i.e. three verifications with at least two months between them.
5. No restrictions on silencers/suppressors et al.
6. All weapons should .50 cal or under.
7. No restrictions by state etc.

One can dream..

[shooter]

All weapons should .50 cal or under.

I want a .577 t-rex,.600 NE or .700NE

[eaglesharp10]

dream laws lol

[m24]

dream laws lol

No dreams, my friend. We will get there.

Regards

[shooter]

No dreams, my friend. We will get there.

Hear hear

[xl_target]

dream laws lol

No dreams, my friend. We will get there.

Regards

Exactly!

If you don't set your goals high, you won't accomplish much.

If we dismiss these goals as "dream laws" and don't try to achieve them, obviously, we won't achieve much.

[goodboy_mentor]

Guys I am trying to figure out the sections of arms act that are the problem, against Constitution and hence need to go. Please help find such sections. I am attaching the copy of Arms Act with this post. This is just rough post to give idea, I will keep it editing.

The Supreme Court has held in its landmark judgment in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [(1978) 1 SCC 248] that the procedure contemplated by Article 21 must answer the test of reasonableness. The Court further held that the procedure should also be in conformity with the principles of natural justice. This example is given to demonstrate an instance of expansive interpretation of a fundamental right. The expression 'life' in Article 21 does not connote merely physical or animal existence. The right to life includes right to live with human dignity. This Court has in numerous cases deduced fundamental features which are not specifically mentioned in Part-III on the principle that certain unarticulated rights are implicit in the enumerated guarantees. Thus the Right to Self Defense is guaranteed by Constitution and corollary to it we have Sections 96 to 106 IPC. Courts have held that interpretation of the Constitution has to be such as to enable the citizens to enjoy the rights guaranteed by Part III to the fullest measure. Hence it cannot be expected from any person to exercise his Right of Self defense to the fullest measure unless he is allowed to keep and bear arms to the fullest measure. Hence the Right to Keep and bear Arms is clearly embedded in Right to Life guaranteed under Article 21. It also follows ALL PERSONS are allowed to keep arms unless anyone is disqualified as per clear procedure laid down by the law.

The right to keep and bear arms is at the forefront of various emotional issues that confront all upright, law abiding, patriotic and freedom loving citizens of our country. Legislature have an obligation to interpret the Constitution, irrespective of their personal feelings. Hence if we ever put in our wishes before any Constitutional representative/body we should examine the present Arms Act in force to see if it has given arbitrary powers to executive violating the Fundamental Rights guaranteed in it. If yes, then what sections that give arbitrary power to executive? Accordingly we should put forth our suggestions so that corrective steps can be taken to make Arms Act in confirmation Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Constitution. Also we need to examine the objectives and reasons for repealimg Arms Act 1878 and replacing it with Arms Act 1959. Are the reasons not the same when the need was felt to replace Arms Act 1878 with Arms Act 1959? Yes the reasons are same. Reason is the excessive delegation of powers.

REASONS: Post-independence, the law makers felt that the rigours of the Indian Arms Act, 1878 and the Rules made thereunder continued to make it difficult for law abiding citizens to possess firearms for selfdefence; whereas terrorists, dacoit-gangs and other anti-social or anti-national elements were using not only civilian weapons but also bombs, hand-grenades, Bren-guns, Sten-guns, 303 bore service rifles and revolvers of military type for perpetrating heinous crimes against society and the State. The Indian Arms (Amendment) Bill (No.49 of 1953) was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27-11-1953, which was discussed in the House on 26-3-1954 and circulated for public opinion. After receiving the opinions the Bill was introduced with the following OBJECTIVES:-

(a) to exclude knives, spears, bows and arrows and the like from the definition of ‘arms’.
(b) to classify firearms and other prohibited weapons so as to ensure –
(i) (i) that dangerous weapons of military patterns are not available to civilians, particularly anti-social elements;
(ii) (ii) that weapons for self-defence are available for all citizens under license unless their antecedents or propensities do not entitle them for the privilege; and
(iii)(iii) that firearms required for training purposes and ordinary civilian use are made more easily available on permits;
(c) to co-ordinate the rights of the citizen with the necessity of maintaining law and order and avoiding fifth-column activities in the country;
(d) to recognize the right of the State to requisition the services of every citizen in national emergencies. The licensees and permit holders for firearms, shikaris, target shooters and rifle-men in general (in appropriate age groups) will be of great service to the country in emergencies, if the Government can properly mobilize and utilize
them.
The Bill was passed by the Parliament and was made into an Act, which came into force with effect 1-10-1962.

But various sections of Arms Act 1959 gives executive sweeping powers to violate the fundamental rights of citizens at their own personal prejudice/bias/discreetion. To further protect the executive to indulge in violations of fundamental rights under cover of Arms Act 1959, there is section 40 under CHAPTER VI – MISCELLANEOUS which says: 40. Protection of action taken in good faith: "No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act." Why there is the need to protect the executive from implementing the law itself if the law is free and fair? Hence executive has practically gone berserk violating fundamental rights. Arms Act atleast violates 5 fundamental rights. It violates at Article 13(2), 14, 19(a) & (d), 21

Violation of Article 13(2): Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights.—
(2) The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.
(3) In this article, unless the context otherwise requires,—
(a) “law” includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law;

LAWS INCONSISTENT WITH OR IN DEROGATION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS: Below observation of violation of articles 14, 19(a) & (d), 21 clearly establishes violation of Article 13 in the sense Arms Act 1959 is a law inconsistent or in derogation of fundamental rights.

Violation of Article 14: Equality before law.—The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

Non Prohibited Bore and Prohibited Bore has no justification. It started because the British were afraid that the public would be supplied with ammunition by mutinous soldiers. Now we are not a colony but a free and democratic nation were the people themselves are the rulers, hence no question of mutiny by soldiers or by public. Police, paramilitary etc. are given firearms only for self defense to the fullest measure as per protection by Article 21 of Constitution just like the rest of the persons. Hence citizens are eligible to keep similar arms for same right. Therefore the arms used by Police, paramilitary need to be removed from Prohibited Arms and Prohibited Bore list so that they can also be possessed by citizens as well. Creation of different set of laws and unequal protection for the same right is nothing but violation of Article 14.

Violation of Article 19(a) & (d): Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.—(1) All citizens shall have the right—
(a) to freedom of speech and expression;
(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India;

RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION: Various sections of Arms Act gives arbitary/discretionary powers to create denials, delays, restrictions that renders citizens defenseless against violent crime clearly has its effect on Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression since citizens are not able to openly speak or express opinions against various kinds of criminals in society as they are defenseless against violent revenge attacks by those criminals for speaking against them. Those who dare to express, they are killed by them because victims have no means to excercise their fundamental right of self defense. Example: recent killings of various RTI activists and whistleblowers who expose corruption.

RIGHT TO MOVE FREELY THROUGHT THE TERRITORY OF INDIA: Various sections of Arms Act gives arbitary/discretionary powers to create denials, delays, restrictions of area validity that renders citizens defenseless against violent crime clearly has its effect on Right to Freedom of Movement as citizens are not able to travel anywhere within territory of India, unless they decide to risk their lives, where they think fit of moving in armed condition to safeguard themselves. Sine it is my fundamental right, I can be a person on constant travel throught India all the time of my free will. Hence licenses have to be All India.

Violation of Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty.—No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

RIGHT TO LIFE AND PERSONAL LIBERTY: Interpretation of the Constitution has to be such as to enable the citizens to enjoy the rights guaranteed by Part III to the fullest measure. Hence it cannot be expected from any person to exercise his Right of Self defense to the fullest measure unless he is allowed to keep and bear arms to the fullest measure. Hence the Right to Keep and bear Arms is clearly embedded in Right to Life guaranteed under Article 21. Various sections of Arms Act gives arbitary/discretionary powers to create denials, delays, restrictions that renders citizens defenseless against violent crime clearly violates Right to Life and Personal Liberty.

EXAMPLES OF PROBLEM SECTIONS:
CHAPTER III 13. Grant of licences.-
(3) The licensing authority shall grant--
(a) a licence under section 3 where the licence is required-
(i) by a citizen of India in respect of a smooth bore gun having a barrel of not less than twenty inches in length to be used for protection or sport or in respect of a muzzle loading gun to be used for bona fide crop protection:
Why only smooth bore or muzzle loading? Instead it should be smooth or rifled bore gun. Why twenty inches why not less? Hence it should go. Instead of "used for protection or sport or crop protection" it should be "all lawful purposes".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 (1) (b): A licence in any other case under Chapter II,--
(i) where such licence is required by a person whom the licensing authority has reason to
believe –
(3) to be for any reason unfit for a licence under this Act, or
(ii) where the licensing authority deems it necessary for the security of the public peace
or for public safety to refuse to grant such licence”.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 40 under CHAPTER VI – MISCELLANEOUS which says: 40. Protection of action taken in good faith: "No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under this Act." Reading of all sections of Arms Act make it clear that this section is nothing but a clever way to protect the executive for misuse of excessive powers derived from various sections. Why there is the need to protect the executive for doing "anything"(implementing the law) if the law is free, fair & Constitutional? Hence violation of Article 13(2) and 14 under Chapter III of Constitution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 41the powers to exempt on basis of classes....................Violation of Article 13(2) and 14 under Chapter III of Constitution.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since as per Constitution the rights guaranteed by Article 21 it follows ALL PERSONS are allowed to keep arms unless anyone is disqualified as per clear procedure laid down by the law the penal sections(which are relic of Arms Act 1878)related to 7 years imprisonment etc. must go for all, except for anyone who is disqualified as per clear procedure laid down by the law . If anyone is found without license and is not disqualified, he should be issued a license instead of sending him to prison unless he is disqualified to keep firearms as per clear procedure laid down by the law. It becomes clear from reading penal sections along with Section 40 under CHAPTER VI – MISCELLANEOUS that executive has been fully protected for for doing "anything" including violation of fundamental rights but all citizens are assumed of criminal intent and handed over prison terms for keeping weapons of self defense. Hence violation of Article 13(2) and 14 under Chapter III of Constitution.

[Katana]

Mundaire and Anand have virtually covered just about everything that could be thought of in a concise manner. However, the matter of police verification and vetting should be given a serious thought. Knowing the knowledge level of the general constubulary and even the judicial people as far as firearms are concerned, I suggest that the DM/ Collector/ Commisioner select a group of knowledgable people from the area concerned and let them verify the antecedents of the license applicant, his place of work/ residence, storage of the firearm, knowledge of it's functioning, it's application/ use, and the most important, the knowledge and degree of safety practiced by the applicant. The second phase would be the actual inspection of the firearm and a thorough trace of it initiated.

This way corruption will be rooted out and a precise history of the firearm maintained. Once this action is carried out, the group/ committee etc. can recommend the applicant for the license.

As far as unlicensed weapons are concerned, the govt. ought to give a general amnesty to bring them above aboard, and licenses issued with no questioned asked, save for assualt weapons and such. The catch here is for people to be legally safe. No person should try to go against the law, no matter how draconian, impractical or idiotic.

[Virendra S Rathore]

All covered here but yes on technical front (apart from liberalizing on rubbish gun control) this quoted one and increasing the quota from 50 rounds a year to at least 200 (will do for now even if it is in pieces of 50 per quarter).

1.Make every person applying for a license get training in the safe handling of firearms.

Training should include at least few scenario based demonstrations to mentally and tactically prepare applicants for high probability and highly critical situations - ones like 26/11. Would do better; than just training on how to load, aim and pull the trigger.

[goodboy_mentor]

However, the matter of police verification and vetting should be given a serious thought. Knowing the knowledge level of the general constubulary and even the judicial people as far as firearms are concerned, I suggest that the DM/ Collector/ Commisioner select a group of knowledgable people from the area concerned and let them verify the antecedents of the license applicant, his place of work/ residence, storage of the firearm, knowledge of it's functioning, it's application/ use,

This matter of Police verification is given such a serious thought that it takes minimum from few months extending upto years, all depending upon the political or monetary influence of bribes one can exert. And this delay/harrasment in itself is violation of fundamental rights. I seriously doubt if DM/Collector/Commissioner are pious/corruption free people. If we make DM/Collector/Commissioner etc. to do personally do verification, they are already overloaded with work, thousands of license applications are pending before almost every licensing authourity, it will take even more longer and may also mean higher bribes. As I have already demonstrated in my post above that as per Article 21 every person has RKBA(hence the license) vested in it except those who are disqualified. The main hurdle in issuing is to legally define such individuals and find such disqualified individuals. Courts have already given rulings that only those persons are disqualified, who are convicted of heinous crimes like murder, dacoity, kidnapping, rape etc. Such people can be simply found out by anyone by RTI application to concerned public authourity within 30 days. Hence police verification also becomes needless and pointless exercise. Or list of such people can be shared regularly with Licensing Authourity. Ideally issue of license should be a matter of minutes than months and years.

The second phase would be the actual inspection of the firearm and a thorough trace of it initiated.

What is history of the firearm going to achieve? Are the crimes done by legal arms? Instead they are done by cheap, illegal, disposable arms of all manner.

The catch here is for people to be legally safe.

Legally we are already safe with so many procedures and bureaucratic hurdles. But the crime graph is rising and people are unsafe, have no self defense. All over the world it has shown, more strict gun control more crime.

No person should try to go against the law, no matter how draconian, impractical or idiotic.

Under no circumstances any law should be violative of fundamental rights or give any leverage to the babus to violate fundamental rights of citizens.
Some members are of opinion that training etc. should be made part of the law etc. I disagree because it will be another excuse for babus to delay grant of license. Instead government should be opening ranges where people can go for practice and training.
I would like to add, people in BPL list should be exempt from any license fees. People in rural areas should be charged only 50% of license fees.
Also the licenses for manufacture be granted to any individual/companies unless there is evidence for disqualification. The purpose is to have competitors to IOF and reduced prices/better quality.

(apart from liberalizing on rubbish gun control)

Gun control is absolute rubbish no doubt about it. But we do not want liberalization, we want rationalization, we want our Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom. ~Dwight D. Eisenhower

[kanwar76]

Rightly said GBM. I don't think we should add more hurdles in already complicated procedure and adding DM/Collector will do exactly same.

-Inder

[eaglesharp10]

6) And rather creating a national data for gun owners, creat data for unlicenced weapons...

Very nice thread...)))cheers!!![/quote]

i like ur 6th point

[shooter]

Rightly said GBM. I don't think we should add more hurdles in already complicated procedure and adding DM/Collector will do exactly same.

-Inder