List of PB and NPB guns in India?

[goodboy_mentor]

But it is not written in Arms Act 1959! Also where it is written that it is "prohibited bore" or "Prohibited" to own or use by civilians?

[surajshuresh]

I was not specific its in the Arms Act 1959 but its still the rules... I said its prohibited to civilians unless they have the specific license... "where it is written that it is prohibited bore" This is specified in the schedule 1 the words and expressions not defined in these rules but defined in the Act shall have the same meanings respectively assigned to them in the Act.Prohibited arms as defined in Section 2 (1) which means its prohibited...I am no lawyer but this is from my understanding...

[goodboy_mentor]

I was not specific its in the Arms Act 1959 but its still the rules... I said its prohibited to civilians unless they have the specific license

Isn't it same even with Non Prohibited Bores, they are also prohibited unless one has the specific license. So where is the difference?

This is specified in the schedule 1 the words and expressions not defined in these rules but defined in the Act shall have the same meanings respectively assigned to them in the Act.Prohibited arms as defined in Section 2 (1) which means its prohibited

If you refer the definition of prohibited arms in Section 2 of Arms Act 1959, prohibited arms refers to automatic firearms only. Thus meaning of prohibited arms is very different from meaning of prohibited bore. They are totally unconnected. Prohibited arms(automatic firearms) may or may not be of prohibited bore. Similarly prohibited bore arms may or may not be prohibited arms(automatic firearms).

In order to implement Arms Act 1959, Arms Rules 1962 have been created under Section 44 of of Arms Act 1959. Therefore every rule flows from Arms Act 1959. Thus question still remains, from where in Arms Act 1959 the idea of prohibited bores is coming into Arms Rules 1962? In other words where in Arms Act 1959 it is mentioned about prohibited bores?

[surajshuresh]

"Isn't it same even with Non Prohibited Bores, they are also prohibited unless one has the specific license. So where is the difference?"
1: everyone knows without license any firearm is prohibited so there is no point taking about it. The difference is what can be owned by civilians and what can not be owned...

2: Yes i understand the difference between prohibited arms and prohibited bore. In Section 2 of Arms Act 1959 is about automatic firearms which is prohibited arms and prohibited bore is mentioned in Schedule I - categories I(b), I(c) of Arms Rules 1962.. In the arms rule 8 says about restrictions which are specified in categories I (b), I (c) and I (d). Even though the right term to describe these bores mentions in I (c) is to be considered as restricted bore because restriction mean an act of limiting or restricting as by regulation and prohibited means forbidden and forbid means to hinder or prevent or make impossible. There is nothing as such prohibited bore mentioned in India Arms Act and the rules other than prohibited arms and restricted bore(prohibited bore). prohibited bores is a term used to describe these bore in general because its next to impossible to get license to these bores... The right term to describe these bore would be restricted bore... I am guessing your a lawyer

[goodboy_mentor]

The difference is what can be owned by civilians and what can not be owned...

Non prohibited bore can be owned by civillians if they have license. Prohibited bore can be owned by civillians if they have license. Where is the difference in Arms Act 1959?

Yes i understand prohibited arms in Section 2 of Arms Act 1959 is about automatic firearms.

Since prohibited arms are not equal to prohibited bore arms, you cannot say that concept of prohibited bores in Arms Rules 1962 is flowing from concept of prohibited arms of Arms Act 1959.

because there is nothing as such prohibited mentioned in India Arms Act and the rules other than full auto.

Exactly there is no concept of prohibited bore in Arms Act 1959. But Arms Rules 1962 is flowing from Arms Act 1959. Therefore every Rule under Arms Rules 1962 should have its corresponding mandate in Arms Rule 1959. If you note the following said above:

In order to implement Arms Act 1959, Arms Rules 1962 have been created under Section 44 of of Arms Act 1959. Therefore every rule flows from Arms Act 1959. Thus question still remains, from where in Arms Act 1959 the idea of prohibited bores is coming into Arms Rules 1962? In other words where in Arms Act 1959 it is mentioned about prohibited bores?

[surajshuresh]

Yes i understand the difference between prohibited arms and prohibited bore. In Section 2 of Arms Act 1959 is about automatic firearms which is prohibited arms and prohibited bore is mentioned in Schedule I - categories I(b), I(c) of Arms Rules 1962.. In the arms rule 8 says about restrictions which are specified in categories I (b), I (c) and I (d). Even though the right term to describe these bores mentions in I (c) is to be considered as restricted bore because restriction mean an act of limiting or restricting as by regulation and prohibited means forbidden and forbid means to hinder or prevent or make impossible. There is nothing as such prohibited bore mentioned in India Arms Act and the rules other than prohibited arms and restricted bore(prohibited bore). prohibited bores is a term used to describe these bore in general because its next to impossible to get license to these bores... The right term to describe these bore would be restricted bore...what do you say mate which should we use??? prohibited bore or restricted bore...I am guessing your a lawyer???

[goodboy_mentor]

What you are saying is fine. I understand what you are trying to say. In reality nothing is really prohibited in Arms Act 1959 provided you fulfill the relevant conditions. If you read Section 7 of Arms Act 1959, if one has "permission" from Central Government, even prohibited arms are not prohibited under Arms Act 1959. But you are not getting my question. From where in Arms Act 1959, the Arms Rule 8 is flowing? Following is the question:

In order to implement Arms Act 1959, Arms Rules 1962 have been created under Section 44 of of Arms Act 1959. Therefore every rule flows from Arms Act 1959. Thus question still remains, from where in Arms Act 1959 the idea of prohibited bores is flowing into Arms Rules 1962? In other words where in Arms Act 1959 it is mentioned about prohibited bores? If there is no concept of prohibited bores in Arms Act 1959 then concept of prohibited bores(whatever you call it, higher restricted bore or whatever) also cannot exist in Arms Rules 1962.

[surajshuresh]

[quote="surajshuresh"]Yes i understand the difference between prohibited arms and prohibited bore. In Section 2 of Arms Act 1959 is about automatic firearms which is prohibited arms and prohibited bore is mentioned in Schedule I - categories I(b), I(c) of Arms Rules 1962.. In the arms rule 8 says about restrictions which are specified in categories I (b), I (c) and I (d). Even though the right term to describe these bores mentions in I (c) is to be considered as restricted bore because restriction mean an act of limiting or restricting as by regulation and prohibited means forbidden and forbid means to hinder or prevent or make impossible. There is nothing as such prohibited bore mentioned in India Arms Act and the rules other than prohibited arms and restricted bore(prohibited bore). prohibited bores is a term used to describe these bore in general because its next to impossible to get license to these bores... The right term to describe these bore would be restricted bore...

"Non prohibited bore can be owned by civillians if they have license. Prohibited bore can be owned by civillians if they have license. Where is the difference in Arms Act 1959?"
The difference is restrictions thats all..

[goodboy_mentor]

The difference is restrictions thats all..

That "difference" in restrictions exists where?

The difference in restrictions exists in which of the following:

1. in Arms Act 1959 only
2. in Arms Rules 1962 only
3. in both Arms Act 1959 and Arms Rules 1962

[surajshuresh]

there is restrictions in both and they are different types of restrictions like restriction in number of firearms section 3 even that can be considered as a restriction. mate i know your saying according to law civilians can get license for restricted bore also but in real do you they will approve a license for a nato round ??? lol...hahaha...

[goodboy_mentor]

Please do not think that I am trying to put you in a spot. I am also trying to find answer to these questions.

there is restrictions in both

Since you are saying concept of prohibited bore exists in both, then it exists in which Section of Arms Act 1959?

your saying according to law civilians can get license for restricted bore also but in real do you they will approve a license for a nato round ???

We are discussing only from legal angle. In real many things are happening and not happening including those related to issue of NPB and PB licenses.

[surajshuresh]

"there is restrictions in both" i did not there is bore restrictions is mentioned in both (act and rules) it is only mentioned in schedule I... I said "there is restrictions in both i.e (act and rules) and they are different types of restrictions" eg ristrictions in number of firearms in the act and restriction on bore in the rules.restriction mean an act of limiting or restricting as by regulation. Restriction meaning is totally different prohibited. Even here in Australia there is prohibited license the word used in the interpretation of law is prohibited here for restricted firearms and bore. My range master told dont even think of apply for prohibited license because the commissioner will look at it and laugh at it "why does this guy need a snub nose" and throw it on your face that is what here told me...lol...hahaha...Nothing wrong in a friendly debate i guess...

[goodboy_mentor]

If you are saying the bore restriction does not exist in Arms Act 1959 and it exists only in Arms Rules 1962, then it is on legally shaky grounds, since Arms Rules 1962 cannot override Arms Act 1959. Then in other words the legal level of restriction for NPB and PB will be equal.

[surajshuresh]

" legal level of restriction for NPB and PB will be equal."i agree with you but what to do the authorities don't understand this... Hi goodboy_mentor i have a question should you mention the bore when applying for a license...can you explain me these questions asked in form a part c:
12: The form in which the licence is required:

13: Description of arms/ammunition :
how do you describe arms/ammunition...

[goodboy_mentor]

Yes authorities will not understand this until the matter is taken up in proper forum.

The form is usually Form III. Please refer Rule 52 and Schedule III of Arms Rules 1962.

The description is usually like "NPB shotgun" etc.