Who should be allowed to own a gun?

[hvj1]

This thread has been prompted by the one, my good friend, Nagarifle has recently posted – Gun Control Works.

The question uppermost in my mind is – Who should own a gun ? This question is posed in the Indian context.
While I pen down my thoughts, I appeal to my esteemed fellow members to not take umbrage to views spelt out here, which on the face of it, may appear to be in direct contradiction to RKBA. Let us have a free and frank discussion on the subject, keeping in mind the holistic view of the Indian nation and the different type of citizens.

Gun Ownership rights per nation ranges between the most relaxed , such as in the U.S. / Switzerland. On the other extreme end of the spectrum lie countries like China, which absolutely forbids its citizens to own firearms .

In India, we lie somewhere in between.

So, should we strive for the utopian liberalized gun laws of the U.S. or slide even further towards Gun Laws in China, or should we just maintain the status quo in India and off course, fight to maintain the present status quo.

Some of the hard facts apparent to us in India are as follows;

1. The population is increasing, we are set to overtake China by 2020 as the experts would have you to believe.

2. The Police force is inadequate and is still not increasing commensurate to the rising population.

3. The increase in Population is most prominent in the economically under privileged class.

4. Rising affluence in the middle class and above is creating a stronger urge among the lower classes to get 'a piece of the action' without scruples attached.

5. Points 1-4 are contributing to the visible deteriorating law and order situation.

One has to only drive down a road in any city in India, to see the brazen flouting of even the basic traffic rules. Chaps merrily drive the wrong side without a thought to even their own personal safety leave alone others.

Errant drivers when pointed out their error of their ways, grin and show you the bird, accompanied with the choicest of abuse directed at your ancestry.
Heaven forbid if you stop and the other party stops too, you may end up in the central cast of a ’road rage show’ with its accompanied hospital or worse undertaker bills to foot.

So, if we had as liberal gun laws as in the U.S., where guns are available OTC, could you imagine what the situation would be like? We will be witness to O.K.Corrals every day on almost every road of every city in this country.

So lets cut to the chase…

My thinking, is that firearms license MUST be issued to ONLY those who stand to LOOSE everything they have striven for all their natural life, Personal liberty and freedom being the uppermost.

(To take a case in point - Mannu Chabra, despite his affluence and connections is rotting in Jail, losing his cherished freedom due to one heinous irresponsible act.)

So, if you desire to own a firearm are you prepared to take that responsibility?

The responsibility of issuing you a firearm license rests with the DM and the Police Dept. Most DMs are reasonably intelligent people, vested with the responsibility to ensure that firearms are not misused.

Most of them realize the fact that the applicant 9/10 does not even KNOW how to handle or keep the weapon safe. If you want a license, it is your job to CONVINCE the DM/ Police Commissioner that your are a RESPONSIBLE citizen.

And even after issue of the license and subsequently a firearm, there is no point in cribbing that you have to get a NOC at the time of renewal.
When I was asked for my NOC, I waved my State Award under the nose of the officer in charge.

His reply was simple, Your Award is no GUARANTEE that you will not act irresponsibly in the future. Highly chastened, I agree to that logic.

So, if you are determined to get yourself a firearm license, the best avenue to achieve your objective is through joining a Shooting Club. Learn to shoot, learn to be a responsible gun user, learn to shoot well enough to get a medal or two. Attach the certificate with your application and convince the authorities concerned.

(Now let the fireworks begin….)

[pran80]

HVJ1,

My two questions -

"Most of them realize the fact that the applicant 9/10 does not even KNOW how to handle or keep the weapon safe. If you want a license, it is your job to CONVINCE the DM/ Police Commissioner that your are a RESPONSIBLE citizen."

So how do you plan to convince them that you are a Responsible citizen? What parameters are we talking about here - tax returns/no civil/criminal cases against you/your class 10th teacher recalling that you were indeed very responisible in your class/neighbours views about you/character certificate from University/gazetted officer/being a family man/Volunteer and some NGO etc?


"His reply was simple, Your Award is no GUARANTEE that you will not act irresponsibly in the future. Highly chastened, I agree to that logic".

So does an NOC guarantee that you will act responsibly in the Future?

[hvj1]

Pran80

1. May I present my personal example (instead of getting into a hypothetical one). In the year 1996, I obtained my Renown Shot Certificate. According to the GR issued by the Govt. of Maharashtra (which incidentally allows my category of shooter to own a total of 8 weapons and 10,000 rounds of ammo).

I then put up my rather unique application, which was routed through the Tehsildar's office tot he Police Commissioner's Office. There I met the Additional District S.P. Mr. Surrinder Singh (IPS). In my interview, I showed him all my Shooting Sports achievements (Both state & National).

He had only one query at that time- Where will you keep the weapons (safely)? I had made a 'strong room', which was inspected by the local Police Station, a report of the adequateness of the same was forwarded to Mr. Surrinder Singh, who recommended my case to the District Collector.

I then met Mr. Bijoy Kumar (IAS) and I distinctly remember that day, he was off for a meeting somewhere and I was forced to present my case, while he was getting ready to get into his car. He called for my file, signed it with a flourish , shook my hand and wished me all the best, before rushing off for his meeting.

2. To address your second question, the NOC issued by the local Police Station, obviously does not guarantee what you may or may not do in the future, BUT it does vouch for your charachter, if you have had no criminal case and or complaint filed against you in the recent past.

[nagarifle]

in regards to NOC AND future action, i have been checking out the UK arms licence situation, alone side the application one is required to have two referees to give a personal statement about the applicant mental and other behavioral state, on the form its points out that the statement made today is not applicable to what the person may do in the future and does not hold the one giving character reference etc accountable.

[goodboy_mentor]

nagarifle has got the point. Precisely for this reason in Arms Act 1959, Section 40 we have clause of "good faith". It says:

"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."

In other words everything that is done under Arms Act 1959, including the issuance of licenses is done on good faith. In other words the hue and cry raised by anti gun activists(read them as inherently undemocratic minds who want to ruthlessly control people) is just an eyewash since a-z about gun ownership is based on good faith. Real motive behind all these bureaucratic hoops is to make the process so arbitrary and difficult, so that most of the applicants get intimidated and discouraged even before applying. Since everything about gun ownership is based on good faith, it is not difficult to understand why dictators and undemocratic governments and people behind them do not have "good faith" about gun ownership in their citizens.

[fantumfan2003]

hvj1,

One option is to have checks similar to the ones in the aviation world where pilots undergo proficiency checks on a bi-annual or annual basis including simulator checks.

These checks should be implemented FIRST for vehicle drivers which will help weed out bad (unsafe ?) drivers from our roads and will also help the others fall in line by following traffic rules etc. Driving License renewals should be subject to passing proficiency checks with a passing score of 95 or even 100 %

THEN they can think of having proficiency checks for firearm owners.

The downside of this option is, it would be a small bunch of brainless baboons checking out a largely intelligent human population. Possibly even giving rise to one more avenue for corrupt practices.

Just my two paisa....

M.

[Vikram]

HVJ,

The first and foremost use of a firearm is self-protection.Then come sport and where legal hunting.

How do you come to the conclusion that my life is not in danger?Especially given the socio-economic-political assessment of our present society given by you?

How do you get a medal or two without access to expensive shooting equipment and ammunition?How do you familiarise yourself with a gun in the first place without one?How many people can have access to a club where there is none?

Please do not get me wrong,good sir, but do you represent the common man? I mean in terms of your access to shooting facilities and access to guns early in your life?

Best-
Vikram

[hvj1]

GBM
What you say is true, but the moot point is 'to whom should we extend this 'good faith'. If the local paan wallah, wishes to apply for an arms license, do you seriously think that the 'powers that be' will be willing to extend this good faith to accomodate him? I doubt it.
Slowly but gradually, as this discussion matures, an underlying school of thought will emerge, which may not be too palatable to the socialist mindset.
BR

[captrakshitsharma]

So if u r a paan waala and not a renowned shot then you don ot have the right to self defense ??

[Vikram]

GBM
What you say is true, but the moot point is 'to whom should we extend this 'good faith'. If the local paan wallah, wishes to apply for an arms license, do you seriously think that the 'powers that be' will be willing to extend this good faith to accomodate him? I doubt it.
Slowly but gradually, as this discussion matures, an underlying school of thought will emerge, which may not be too palatable to the socialist mindset.
BR

Socialist mindset? What is that?As opposed to elitist? Please educate us.

I wish you would like to explain that to two of our Eminent IFGians. Pran and Inder.Young,educated,upright engineers and gainfully employed. They went to apply for arms license. They were scarred so much from that experience that they almost quit on the motherland.They did not,however.The details of their experience can be found on this forum.

Best-
Vikram

[jonahpach]

Should'nt this post read.. "Who should be NOT ALLOWED" to own guns??

[nagarifle]

as per the MHA 2010 Arms policy, OCI (over sea citizen of India or as known as duel citizens)ARE not allow to protect them selves. now this goes against the Art.. 21 of the Constitution of India.

so the question is are OCI criminal proof? that is no harm can be done to them?

[full_circle]

HVJ1, भाई, क्यों? (brother, why?) What prompted you to open this particular Pandora's box? nothing but trouble...

My (bordering on the utopian) opinion about the querry - everyone who is above a certain age (18+ ?) (with a few exceptions) should be allowed to own, posess and operate licenced firearms, atleast long guns. Possibly more requirements for handgun licences, such as a history of safe and responsible use with the long gun. Mandatory firearms training (before licence application, including renewal), automatic approval for licence applications, periodical renewal requirement for the licence, coupled with strict (and enforced) penalty (including jail time?) for licence violations and unlicenced posession.

Those who should not be allowed to own / posess / operate firearms in India:
> Those who are not citizens of India
> Citizens of India with cognitive / intellectual impairments
> Citizens of India who are convicted of crimes (any crime, gun related or not, violent or otherwise)
Very unfortunate to lump the above together, but there you are.

[jonahpach]

Just for the sake of argument, dont criminals have rights too?? Does it mean if somebody has been convicted of.. lets say shop lifting during his juvenile years, he is not allowed to protect himself throughout his entire life?? That's the problem with us indians! The more we talk about RKBA, the more it feels like just changing the rules so that it includes or excludes a certain class of individuals. I feel it's more about extensions of exclusivity and not about rights of free citizens! If that's what we are fighting for, I'll quit.
That pan walla has every right to own a gun just like the farmer or dudhwalla in UP or Mizoram.

[hvj1]

hvj1,

One option is to have checks similar to the ones in the aviation world where pilots undergo proficiency checks on a bi-annual or annual basis including simulator checks.

The idea may sound good, but it would entail roping in specialised manpower to engage effectively with each and every firearm owner. If you were a govt. Employee, you would probably cringe at the extra paper work and leg work involved. Its far easier (from the govt. Point of view to put hurdles and restriction in the way of a firearm applicant rather than go through with all the trouble.