Reality of Gun Ownership in India.The Flawed Draconian, Colo

[captrakshitsharma]

 Dear friends yesterday was my weekly off.. I started rewriting the following and got a little too engrossed before I realised it had become rather long. Request all of you to be patient while reading and Please do help me correct and edit this and make changes where required.
Thanks...

Reality of Gun Ownership in India.The Flawed Draconian, Colonial Arms Act & Restrictive Policies of the Indian Government


News papers report crime against women and say every woman working late at night and travelling home afterwards in public or private transport has a high degree of risk exposure to crime. A leading National daily goes on further to say even men are not safe. Delhi has the highest number of murders and crime against men in the country. A few weeks back 2 senior citizens were murdered and cars were snatched at gun point. Yesterday mid afternoon at 1430 hrs a car full of ladies was way laid and their valuables looted . All this on Golf Course road in Gurgaon . This was in broad daylight and those who are unfamiliar with the location, this is a very busy road that always has a lot of traffic . The 2  looters prevailed and got away , as they were armed and no one including the victims and passersby were in a position to counter their threat or tried to give a chase as they were unarmed. I would go further and say they were disarmed, they may have wanted to be armed but they were Disarmed by the government's civil disarmament policy.People waiting at crowded metro stations in the thick of traffic get violated and looted at gun point. Yet the home ministry (under Mr. Chidambram)wants to deny ordinary law abiding citizens the tools to self defence. When a law abiding citizen applies for an arms license to defend himself and his loved ones against perpetrators his application is denied citing the dictatorial personal opinion of the former Home Minister that" proliferation of Arms whether legal or illegal promotes violence". This is far from the truth. Legal guns are almost never used in crimes and legal gun owners are law abiding and accountable.No country with strict gun laws or even gun bans has been able to bring down violent crime numbers or rates or even unrelated crimes. Why? That is because the Bad Guys somehow always have guns.  Prime examples being Australia, UK, Germany and even Norway. On the other hand The Swiss by law have an assault rifle in every home and yet have some of the lowest crime rates. Hmm.. so does restricting and denying law abiding citizens from owning guns really brings down crime or does it increase crime? To me it looks like gun ownership amongst law abiding populous seems to be a deterrent  against crime and those criminally inclined.
In Todays  India a gun license  applicant is asked to show proof that there is a threat to his life. How would a common citizen prove this?The mere fact that he may have no perceived threats does not mean that he will never be the victim of a violent crime and so he should not own a gun if he decides to make that choice for himself. The nanny state now wants to take away the freedom of choice from him, how very socialist and democratic.Regardless what other proof is required than what the news paper reports state or the fear in which the common Indian Man and Woman lives?

So lets look at some factual data. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has enough statistics and data to prove that ordinary citizens pursuing their livelihood and day to day activities are at risk from criminals. It also states that legal licensed guns are used in 0.1% of all gun related crimes in India. One can safely assume that legal gun owners are law abiding and commit negligible number of crimes and most of these 0.1% of crimes also majorly are crimes of passion. It also states that 99.9% percent of all gun related crimes are committed by Criminals using Illegal and Unlicensed Guns. This data comes from a Government Owned and Run Agency's Web Site and not cooked by me.  Not to mention the reality of  crime rates not getting affected by strict gun control laws this holds true across the world.The US has a lot of crime but also a lot of guns ,in fact the highest number of civilian gun ownership. It is also a fact that for the number of guns it has the number of violent crime or gun related crime is not exponentially higher than other countries who have strict gun control laws or complete bans in place. Norway's strict gun laws could neither avert the tragedy nor stop a determined criminal. Similar stories of violence , despite strict laws and bans can be quoted about Germany, UK and Australia. If So then why restrict a person who comes to the authorities to legally exercise his rights and privileges unless he disqualifies on the laid down guidelines and prerequisites in the Arms Act? 
The Gun is not the problem the problem is who's hands is it in .The cause of the problem is criminals and the Illegal and Unlicensed guns they own. Problems are never caused by licensed firearm seeking law-abiding citizens. The focus should be on eradicating criminals and controlling illegal guns used by the criminals and not on taking away guns from the honest law abiding citizens. Since the government fails to counter the criminals they impose restrictions on us to show to the media and the uninitiated that "some thing"is being done. The moment a gun related crime gets highlighted the government says " We will impose stricter Gun Licensing Laws". This is just to distract public and media. They hide the fact that the criminals committed the crime with illegally procured guns . That is because the government has very little powers in controlling proliferation of illegal arms and stopping the determined criminal from getting a gun. They fool us by making gun licensing laws strict. Controlling gun ownership among the already law abiding citizens when you cannot control outlaws makes no sense and leads to a weaker society and increases crime rate and victimisation of the average man and woman. 

Restrictions such as this unknowingly but actively support the criminal elements of the society. They make disarmed or unarmed citizens easy prey for the criminals. On the other hand criminals will think twice prior to preying on innocent populous if they know more and more common citizens are legally armed and trained to use those weapons. Statistics show firearms restrictions and bans only affect citizens and do nothing to drop violent crime, UK is a prime example of this. Take the previously quoted example of Switzerland( legal gun in every house) and compare it with the crime rate of UK which has pretty much banned all guns. The discovery will be startling. As they say truth is always stranger than fiction , because fiction has to make sense.It is common sense that the criminals don't go to the authorities and apply for licenses, the law abiding citizen does as he wants to follow and abide by the rules . Does the definition of criminal not mean he is a law breaker and an outlaw and thereby does not care to follow the laid down rules and regulations? Would you imagine such people applying for and seeking the governmental nod for a license? A legal gun is difficult and expensive to procure an illegal gun ist easier and cheaper. You decide what the criminal prefers? I have stated earlier and again quote the NCRB data , stating 99.9% of firearm related crimes were committed using illegal gun. We have always had strict gun licensing regulations where the background of the applicant is thoroughly checked. The regulations are already in place and adequate. Gun licenses have never been granted easily . The licensing laws have never been lenient. Then what is the motive and logic behind changing an existingly adequate strict measure to a even stricter regulation that will make it Impossible for an ordinary citizen to obtain a license . Now you are asking an average citizen to prove that he faces a threat to his life. He has no means to do so but is the government blind and does not see the high rate of violent crimes in our country? Are the news paper reports not enough? Logic has to be the primary goal and driving force behind regulations unless we want to live in the dark ages and follow draconian laws. There seems to be no logic behind this other than anti gun sentiments and personal opinions of those who are in power. It was and has always been tough to get a license for a firearm and instead of amendments to make it logical,objective and free of prejudice what the Government wants to do is to make it impossible. Why?
What the government should do is to check criminals and illegal gun trade . They have failed to do so and as an eyewash the ordinary law abiding citizen is being penalised and restricted. This only makes the criminals stronger and confident that they can never be countered with deadly force by the people they victimise. They prey upon the innocents with greater power and confidence knowing well that very few people in the country posses firearms (ratio of armed vs unarmed citizens)and the government policies are only going to ensure that scales tip in their favour in the future.

 Perhaps we should also turn back the pages of history books. Indians were always armed and had a proud Martial tradition of owning weapons. All our Gods and Goddesses have some weapon associated with them. Indians were free to own Arms and weapons as  free citizens in their respective kingdoms and princely states.  The  Arms Act was introduced as a countermeasure against Indians and their ability to resist the excesses of  the British  East India Company after the revolt of 1857. The British had faced stiff resistance from Armed Indian Citizens and suffered huge losses in terms of life and property.The British Parliament took over governance of India from the British East India Company as a face saving measure and started enacting Laws that would ensure that such revolts would never happen again. Mind you the first Law was the Arms Act quickly followed by the Police Act and many more pro British laws. The arms act prohibited anyone from owning any arms including swords and knives without a license. The British civil service officers were the sole licensing authority and they did not grant licenses to any ordinary Indian citizen unless they were proven British loyalists. This meant no licenses for the average Indian. In effect citizens who had weapons became criminals overnight. Since getting an arms license was near impossible , An Indian who owned arms of any kind was an outlaw unless he  had deposited the weapons he or she owned . This was only to aid the British (who were beaten badly and hence were vengeful)so they could rule with a free hand .On basis of this law they raided homes and forcibly disarmed Indians . This made our society weak and took away their Tools for self defence. The British continued oppressing us and committing excesses. The result was unopposed undisputed freehand british rule for next 100 years. The Police Act and policing of state also was for their own benefit . Prior to this the country had no regular policing. The Act gave the Right of offence to all British and British loyalist Indian officers. Which in essence meant if a police man were to beat you or someone else for no reason and you try to defend yourself or the other person and later take it up with the court of law , he would not be charged and you could be charged with interfering with him in carrying out his duties. Sadly a lot of these rules remain unchanged even today after independence.One can understand why you would make such harsh unfair laws when you are a coloniser and want to rule people who do not want to be suppressed and ruled by a foreign tyrant . One fails to understand why would our own administration and government which are basically own own people do the same and not trust it's own citizens?  

All visionaries and great leaders have acknowledged the right of a citizen to defend himself  and to keep and bear arms. Mr.Motilal Nehru  a leading Barrister and Father of India's First PM Jawaharlal Nehru compiled a Report in 1928 which introduced a Bill of Rights and it included, besides some other basic rights of a citizen, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.The Indian National Congress in it’s Karachi Resolution of 1931 had also laid down a list of Fundamental Rights that it proposed and suggested they should be included and be a part of the future Constitution of a Free and United India. This Resolution included the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. The resolution stated “Every Citizen has the right to keep and bear arms in accordance with regulations and reservations made in that behalf”. Mahatma Gandhi stated in his autobiography,“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest". One of our great  and utmost respected leader ,former Prime Minister Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee wrote down a note of dissent in reference to the Arms Act of 1959 that “ The right to bear and carry arms is an inviolable and sacred right of every free citizen”. The Dalai Lama, apostle of peace when asked what would be an appropriate response,If someone pulls a gun , points it at you and starts shooting ? He stated  ,“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun”. History shows that tyrants have preferred unarmed subjects and disarmed those who were armed.It is also been said that a well regulated citizens militia is of great help and can come the the aid of a country in times of need. This is validated by the fact the USA won it freedom from British by virtue of the fact that they were armed. Why go far ,coming back to present day this is a standard government practice . In  India where ever the Red Maoist corridors exist and Naxalism is rampantly creating lawlessness ,the Paramilitary/Armed forces and Government themselves encourage villagers and common citizens to procure and train with firearms. When things go out of hands they even let the local village population own prohibited bore weapons. Why wait for it to get that bad and wake up when it's too late? This is also discriminatory towards the urban dweller and the residents of so called less crime prone area. We all know how far from the truth that is and how safe are our cities for the common man and woman.  As per the current policy one must have a grave and imminent threat issued for ransom or should have been victimised and or had a bad experience to warrant a need for an arms license. Should one be issued a license after being raped, looted , kidnapped or murdered?

The Arms Act of Independent India ie.1957 was re enacted to make ownership of Arms  hassle free,easy and objective for the citizens and not to restrict them. The whole purpose of the Arms act in Independent India was to enable an Indian Citizen to own and possess arms under an unbiased and fair  system unless that particular individual were to be of an unsound mind and a threat to the society. However the administration was full of the British Appointed & trained Civil servants loyal to the British and having the same mind set and ideology. They were now the elite and wanted to keep following the british doctrine and policies of the previous administration. They interpreted the act to their convenience and by the powers vested in them kept denying people this privilege according to their own perceptions and whims and fancies. The fact and ground reality is that the Gora (white)Sahibs have merely been replaced by the Brown Sahibs. The Politicians are the new Royalty and the Bureaucracy are the members of their court who execute policy and govern for them. So despite of the constitution giving equal rights to all citizens we have an unofficially accepted class system of the Ruling Elite and the Ruled Commoners. We unconsciously call ourselves common and acknowledge the polity and bureaucracy as VIP's and elite. The above mentioned issue of arms act / issuance of arms license and many other rules are either not  followed by our elite citizens in practice , do not apply to them or have loop holes designed to benefit them. Somehow the scales always tip in their favour.Even the amendments to the arms act proposed by the home ministry under Mr. Chidambram excludes Politicians and Bureaucrats. I would like to ask why? When will this class system of Elite vs Common , VIP's vs Cattle class system cease to exist in our country and the laws and rules will be practiced and applied fairly and objectively to all citizens without prejudice?Pointing at discrimination and elitist mindset of the government we must question if all citizens are equal than why the restrictive measures do not apply to Politicians and Bureaucrats and their kith and kin. They are clearly exempted from such policies in the executive order passed by the Home-ministry issued to and cited by all Licensing authorities. What can be more discriminatory than to exclude the elite class ie. The Ministers, MP's MLA's and IAS IPS from this order. Even Armed forces personnel who selflessly defend our country are at the mercy of the elite bureaucrats if they seek a license to privately own and keep guns. This order is illegal and not yet tabled and passed in the parliament. The Standing Committee on Home Affairs has adversely remarked upon it. They have strongly opposed it and raised objections stating that it will be unfair and restrictive towards the common citizen.This goes to show how useless are these so called amendments . However the former Home Minister who had the ultimate authority on the matter and he refused to hear all logic and reason . We can only hope the present Incumbent will undo the injustice. It amazes me that the Netas and Babus who drain the existing insufficient human resources of the Police forces to provide for their security details , have a greater need for firearms . The unprotected common citizen of a country , where the ratio of police to citizens is one of the lowest in the world however is assumed to be safe. Crime and criminal don't come with prior announcements and warning to the common man.  The senior citizens who were murdered, the ladies who were way laid did not know this would happen to them. This is undemocratic and last I checked we are a democracy.
Advocates of gun control say that one may learn martial arts and use things like pepper sprays etc. to defend themselves. They can be effective and sometimes work but the effectiveness is situational and person dependent. A skilled martial artist takes ages to hone his skill . He too cannot defend him self against multiple assailants or even a lone armed assailant at distance and out of his arms reach. Pepper sprays have been proven ineffective on criminals under the influence of alcohol and drugs and if the wind is against you they may on the contrary disable you and help the criminal. One pepper spray against two well built criminals?Well now you are having a bad day. In some situations these non lethal means buy you just enough time to flee and get away from the situation .There however will be instances where non lethal force is ineffective, you will not have the option to run away and  pardon my french, the shit will hit the fan. In such situations a firearm is the only effective means to handle the situation at hand.  Question arises how long does it take to train someone with a firearm?Self defence training with a firearm can be easily & safely imparted in weeks to get a person to a fairly acceptable level of skill & competence. Regular practice will ensure proficiency is maintained. The armed forces around the world have always done it that way. The military academies train 17 year olds in handling firearms effectively. Ask any family member or friend who has served how many Years does it take to teach someone acceptable and safe firearm handling & self defence techniques. You will be surprised the answer will be a few days. Rifle/gun clubs can do so for the willing civilian citizen provided we have adequate number of them in the country and the government allocates enough resources and supports them . This should be done at priority considering our shooters are bringing in more medals than any other sporting discipline. Ask a young lady wife how confident she feels when she is home alone while her husband is away travelling for work and she has a gun at hand that she has trained with and is confident to use or a Trader who has to carry large amounts of cash and has to travel with it every day feels more secure against robbers when he is armed.Two criminals with a knife or a gun will not be detered by an old lady or gentleman holding a pepper spray but I bet you they will be when either of them pulls out a small handgun from a pocket or a hand bag. Gangs of the so called "kaccha baniyan " gang break into homes and clobber people to death. They attack in numbers of 6 to 10 and keep breaking in even if the occupants of the house being broken into wake up and raise an alarm. This is because they know well that they have the advantage of numbers and cannot be dealt with effectively by an average family of 4 to 6 including the old , women and children. Even if the near extinct breed of courageous next door neighbour or two comes to the rescue of their victims it doesn't deter them much. The gang knows it has more man power to counter these Samaritans . They are aware of the fact the force and power of numbers they have can not be countered or equalised by unarmed folks. However if an old man discharges a firearm when the gang is breaking into his house and shows them the courage, grit and determination to defend himself and his property . He will definitely make them run for their dear lives. A women who at the confirmed signs & act of attempted molestation or rape pulls out a small pistol from her bag & lets the two rapists know that she is armed, confident, aggressive and will defend herself with her weapon if they don't immediately stop , will most definitely control their instinctive animalistic urge to rape. Which as per them was a result of provocation caused by her inappropriate dressing and demeanour( which the rapist generally claim causes them to rape ) . I am sure the sight of a handgun would work like a cold shower to calm the urges of these poor provoked men. Just imagine if only 10 -15 people were armed adequately at the Taj or Oberoi or CST in bombay at the night when terrorists attacked the city of Mumbai. The fact is no one tried to stop them as most Indians are unarmed and our enemies are well aware of this fact. No citizen returned fire not because they were cowards but because they were unarmed, well disarmed by the government. There were enough who had the courage to take their pictures and video the same people who showed such courage could have also returned fire and stopped them and in effect saved lives.What if a few of the hotel guests or even the hotel's security guards,who were rounded up held hostage and shot like sitting ducks at point blank range had guns on them that day. The fate of the victims and terrorist would have been different. We would had heard a different story and lost fewer lives. If nothing else they would have gone down fighting and surely killed some of the terrorists. This would have also sent a strong message to the terrorists that Indians are not weak and have the ability to fight back. Mr. Amitabh Bacchan ,who also is a legally licensed gunowner, wrote in his blog that he too was concerned for his and his family's safety and slept that night with his revolver under his pillow . His handgun did provide him comfort and reassurance and it did so for many nights to come. Interesting how the much "feared evil firearm " can have a calming reassuring effect and make people sleep peacefully in times of distress &  danger. However advocates of the antigun policies and supporters of the disarmament of civilians school of thought want us to fear and demonise the gun. They would say, "That a girl lying dead in a pool of blood ,raped and then strangled by her own pantyhose ;is some how morally superior and more lady like than a woman who has to later explain to the police and society why she shot her rapists dead. A GUN IN THE RIGHT HANDS IS A FORCE EQUALISER.

The situation is so pathetic that even sports men and sports women who pursue shooting as a sport and bring Laurels to the Nation are being denied licenses despite having shown enough potential. The authorities ask for National level Competition Participation Certificates to issue licenses. How would one train to compete and reach a level required to Qualify at the National level without a gun which he obviously cannot own without a license . Interestingly most gun owners who do have licenses also have a standard ammunition quota of 10 cartridges at a time and 25 in a year. With a 25 cartridges limit in an year any one who has shot will testify one can not even achieve basic marksmanship or in lay mans terms shoot straight. Shooters need to shoot about an average of 1000 cartridges in a week to be proficient enough to compete at any professional level competition. Seems like a chicken and egg story or a catch 22 situation. Some renowned shots loose precious training time due to the red tape involved in importing training weapon and ammunition. Some have gone through so much grief that the have given up the sport. Now what is the logic behind this outwits most shooting sport aspirants. What ever it is, it sure is not fair.

This attitude and such policies will only go on to make our society & nation weaker and the criminals stronger. The days guns get outlawed in any country only the outlaws have guns.... For they have never cared about the law anyway.In a free country gunownership always has been and always should be a matter of choice. Those who would like to exercise that right choose tondo so should not be restricted just because the other school of thought thinks differently. If a person meets and qualifies the prerequisites he should be free to choose and decide for himself. The law holds an individual responsible for the good choices and bad choices they make. You can as easily mow someone down with a car as you can shoot one with a gun. The law will punish and hold you responsible in either case. The law however has enough safeguards and background checks to make sure that gunownership qualifications and prerequisites are stricter compared to car ownership which is logical. Strict measures are alright to screen people as long as the intentions are good,logical and objective. The law and related policies should be fair and not be the Authority's sole discretion , personal views or the person in chair's whims and fancies. The government has the power to amend the laws . This however does not mean the goverment has the right to make an individual's rights and previlages IMPOSSIBLE to exercise. It will be the equivalent of denying a citizen his passport stating that he does not have a job abroad, means & money to travel abroad or some whimsical argument like brain drain from the country. A Passport proves a citizen's Nationality and Identity which is a right and Grants him Privilege to Travel outside the country and is denied or revoked only when it is proven that one is a criminal under prosecution and also a flight risk from the country. Self defence is a Citizen's right and Arms License is a Privilege and means to access tools to exercise his right. The pro self defence school of thought thinks of it as an even more important privilege than a passport for having denied a citizen an arms license is denying him tools to his basic right to self defence that could lead to the loss of his or his loved one's life. , 
Another hastily formed policy with out having given much thought to is the ban on import of small arms in the early 80's citing Terrorism in Punjab. It is common knowledge that even when import was allowed one could only import small non prohibited bore rifles, shotguns and handguns and related ammunitions. These weapons were of no use to the terrorists who used advanced automatic assault rifles like the fabled AK 47 and AK 56. The ban again did not restrict or curb their activities or affect them as they were not legally importing guns as personal checked in baggage items through airports paying custom duties. None of the terrorists had legal valid arms licences. The small caliber NP Bore arms were anyways not of any use to them. This policy did not even put a dent on terrorist activities.What it did was to restrict a citizen from owning quality firearms at affordable prices. It created a monopoly giving advantage to Indian ordnance factory , the only manufacturer of firearms of any kind in India. IOF is now charges anywhere from INR70,000 to 150,000 depending on what you choose from the few limited choice of models they manufacture . The quality of their product is so poor it would hardly fetch a 100 USD in the international market. Their manufacturing is also limited and again creates a premium price in the black market as people try to get them out of turn . This is because one has to book them with IOF and there is a waiting period of 1 to 1 1/2 years after having paid in full ( imagine the interest IOF gains holding taxpayers money in full in advance and delivering after such a long duration) Till a few months back one could not even buy the .32 bore handgun ammunition as IOF had stopped / slowed production. Despite of the fact that this the most common and popular caliber of handguns in the country. This meant that for a fair amount of time a large number of legal licensed gun owner's handguns were as lethal as a stone. The demand for quality and reliable firearms ( IOF products are not of good quality and are not very reliable) has led to escalation in prices of the imported firearms to unbelievable heights. An imported handgun which is priced at about 200 to 300 USD fetches upwards of INR600,000. This has only helped in increasing the profit margins of unscrupulous gun dealers . Please tell me is any policy here favouring you or me?
   
The current executive order issued by the home ministry also discriminates against legal gun owner by Restricting their Ownership Privileges to a Small Area. Licenses issued are being restricted to Districts and States only.  No All India permits are being issued and the existing old permits are being cancelled. This restricts a gun owner from carrying and with him his means of self protection while travelling for work or leisure. Most Indians feel the greatest exposure to risk while travelling by roads and this order  leaves them exposed to the criminals. Crime and criminals don't discriminate and strike anyone anywhere in the country without prior warning.This is a criminal restriction  and prohibits a citizen to live and travel freely and keep or take with him his moveable personal property anywhere in the country which the constitution otherwise guarantees. In some rare cases ( after a lot of persuasion and use of contacts)the maximum area of validity is increased to a total of 3 states including the state where the license was issued( this is also restricted to only the 2states that are adjoining your home state)It is very unpractical in the real world. Say a person domiciled in Uttarakhand , where his license was originally issued were to work in Gurgaon. He will have to pass through UP, Delhi and then finally reach Gurgaon which is in Haryana . As per the regulation his license's area of validity can only be extended and he can only be granted UP and Himachal in addition to Uttrakhand as they happen to be the only adjoining states.Even if he takes a route that takes him from Uttarakhand to Himachal and then gets him straight into Haryana he is again restricted by the clause that only 2 adjoining states can be added and Haryana does not touch Uttarakhand border. This means he can never legally travel with his means of self protection or keep the gun on himself in Gurgaon. Is it not denying him his right to self defence? Interestingly this person is not travelling more than 300 kms on this trip. An Indian citizen is free to travel in and take with him his moveable property and reside anywhere in India. Most gun owning citizens value their guns as prized possessions and hold them dear. The guns are of value in terms of money also and by regulation they cannot be left in anyone's custody other than the license holder. The choice is to surrender and give up one's license or be forced to leave the weapon uncared and unattended with a gun house.  Most gun houses are also generally holding in guns to the limit of the safe custody quota allotted to them. This means safe custody at a police station which in real practice  never take guns in safe custody unless they are confiscating  them or holding them during elections.  Even if they do ,be rest assured your gun will rust and rot there. This order restricts and strips citizens of their rights in so many ways.

An armed society is a safe and polite society. Again gun-ownership may not be appealing or comforting to all . For some this maybe due to the apprehension of never having handled ,owned or seen a gun. This may be addressed by proper agencies like rifle associations and gun and shooting clubs or by other experienced gun owners  in a safe environment. There still  may be some who may absolutely choose to not own and keep guns which is a conscious choice and they are free to do so. I totally respect their choice and opinion.However the people who choose to own guns should also be respected for their conscious personal choices. They too have the right to choose and should not be restricted for they too live in a free country and are free to exercise their choices. The constitution guarantees right to self defence as a basic right and need of an individual to live and survive. Question that rises time and again is how does one defend himself without the tools of self defence?The Government must Control crime and criminals and not the law abiding who will only come to the aid of their fellow men and nation ,if they were rightfully ,legally and adequately armed. If any of these points seem valid and make you think then please raise them with your lawmakers and elected representatives. Think hard and choose either to stay secure and confident or be a victim at the mercy of the criminals...choice is yours to make.

Rakshit Sharma.

[veeveeaar]

Well said Mr.Sharma . But who is willing to bell the cat. As i have mentioned in many posts , Gun forums in India are just a pastime for gun enthusiasts and licensees.More is talked about "" not easy to reach by the average INDIAN things '' .They do not voice the actual ground reality thread bare. If a collective sincere effort is taken , these forums can legally challenge the govt, for all the quixotic proposals and amendments,right from licencing to availability of quality arms and ammo. It is indeed in the best interests of national security that the government should look into the not so relevant , ambiguous and loop holed Arms Act and rules, afresh.

I put forth a few hard questions which need sincere thoughtful answers and resolute actions from our patriotic members.

1) Why is there no clear time limit for deciding a Arms licence application from day of submission to order ? Is there a deeming clause ? Is it followed?
2) Why is there no clear unambiguous definition for type or class or weapon ? ( shot gun / handgun/ rifle )
3) Why are prohibited arms licences issued in the first place and why are they called prohibited arms ?
4 ) Why are VIPs and political people issued imported prohibited bore weapons at dirt prices with a large ammo quota and All INDIA VALIDITY? Is is it that the average cattle class Indian so expendable and these babus and netas so precious to India?
5) What is the reason for the need for recommendation or rejection by police / forest / revenue subordinate officers who use this as a tool to their advantage to extort money , when these men are only supposed to be the extra long arms of the licencing authority to only facilitate the licencing authority in ascertaining the background of the applicant with all documentary evidence?
6) What has happened to the .38 revolvers which have now been withdrawn from service?
7)Why is import not allowed?
8)Why are IOF products so expensive than best imported arms, when they are so sub standard? Is there a huge scam behind it ?
9) Do IOF products meet SAAMI standards?
10) Why is that acquiring an IOF product is so cumbersome ? why has it not have a retail outlet in every state?
11) Why does IOF do not have a clear transparent policy of allotment of arms and ammo and prices?
12) Why is there no after sales and service and spare parts availability for IOF JUNK ?
13) why is there no user manual for IOF products ? ( nobody knows how to adjust IOF .22 triger pull . It is claimed by IOF as so but it is a mystery.)
14) When the Govt. contemplates asking for experience in handling fire arms, Has it created facilities for citizens to legally get trained?
15) If gun clubs are a solution , Is their fees and facilities regulated or is there any standard set for their ranges and safety measures in every district?
16 ) THENRAI is a highly secretive organisation who from its inception has a rather highly restrictive setup and not decentralized to the taluk level . It seems to be a house for lords.

[goodboy_mentor]

1) Why is there no clear time limit for deciding a Arms licence application from day of submission to order ? Is there a deeming clause ? Is it followed?

The language of Arms Act 1959 has been written in a manner to confuse and throw off track a layman from the fact that arms are fundamental right of citizens under Article 19 of the Constitution. Due to this reason it is extremely important to have a deeming clause in Arms Act 1959 due to Constitutional reasons, still there is no deeming clause in Arms Act 1959. You have raised a very valid point.

2) Why is there no clear unambiguous definition for type or class or weapon ? ( shot gun / handgun/ rifle )

There is clear unambiguous definition for type or class of firearms in Category I(a),(b),(c),(d) of SCHEDULE - I of Arms Rules 1962. Problem lies with those in babudom who do not know the basic difference between rifle, shotgun and handgun.

3) Why are prohibited arms licences issued in the first place and why are they called prohibited arms ?

Prohibited arms is a misnomer. They are not prohibited. I have tried to explain this matter earlier, please read this http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 28#p174447

4 ) Why are VIPs and political people issued imported prohibited bore weapons at dirt prices with a large ammo quota and All INDIA VALIDITY? Is is it that the average cattle class Indian so expendable and these babus and netas so precious to India?

"average cattle class Indian" is not expendable but they have made themselves expendable due to their ignorance and lack of unity. The term "prohibited bore" does not exist in Arms Act 1959 or its Rules. Arms Act 1959 only differentiates between fully automatic firearms and non fully automatic firearms. Arms Act 1959 does not differentiate level of restriction between semi auto and non auto. Even the authorities are aware of this legal fact, it can be ascertained by reading copy of one of their official letters posted here http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 30#p174125

5) What is the reason for the need for recommendation or rejection by police / forest / revenue subordinate officers who use this as a tool to their advantage to extort money , when these men are only supposed to be the extra long arms of the licencing authority to only facilitate the licencing authority in ascertaining the background of the applicant with all documentary evidence?

There is no reason for such "recommendation" or "rejection" from anybody. If there is any such law it is unconstitutional and should be struck down by courts.

6) What has happened to the .38 revolvers which have now been withdrawn from service?

To ascertain this, RTI can be done with Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Defence. For getting these kind of ideas I had raised a related thread here http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=17553

7)Why is import not allowed?

Because DGFT has put firearms in restricted list of Import Policy. Some related legal questions have been discussed here http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 15#p174834

Why are IOF products so expensive than best imported arms, when they are so sub standard? Is there a huge scam behind it ?

Probably there is a scam. Main question is how to deal with it?

9) Do IOF products meet SAAMI standards?

To ascertain this RTI can be done with IOF.

10) Why is that acquiring an IOF product is so cumbersome ? why has it not have a retail outlet in every state?

Grievance can be raised with Ministry of Defense and also with Ministry of Home Affairs at http://pgportal.gov.in/

11) Why does IOF do not have a clear transparent policy of allotment of arms and ammo and prices?

RTI can be done with IOF. Grievance can also be raised with Ministry of Defense.

12) Why is there no after sales and service and spare parts availability for IOF JUNK ?
13) why is there no user manual for IOF products ? ( nobody knows how to adjust IOF .22 triger pull . It is claimed by IOF as so but it is a mystery.)

Same as above.

14) When the Govt. contemplates asking for experience in handling fire arms, Has it created facilities for citizens to legally get trained?

There is no such provision in Arms Act 1959 and its Rules, therefore such question does not arise.

15) If gun clubs are a solution , Is their fees and facilities regulated or is there any standard set for their ranges and safety measures in every district?

They are not a solution for any problem. Probably they come under Sports Ministry, RTI can be done with it and grievance can also be raised with it.

16 ) THENRAI is a highly secretive organisation who from its inception has a rather highly restrictive setup and not decentralized to the taluk level . It seems to be a house for lords.

I agree. What do you want to do about this? This gentleman appears to be doing RTI with NRAI http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18352, everyone can also join and contribute with their actions and opinions.

[Anand]

Hello captain, I never fail to be impressed by your eloquence, and understandably, your topics are of great interest and concern to me. One suggestion, is that you could touch upon the following points:
1. The fact that all licensees are made to deposit their guns during elections, while the election commissions orders are to focus on those licensees known to be trouble makers.( you have partially covered this already)
2. The fact that there is a limitation on the number of firearms a person can have, except in certain extraordinary situations such as being a renowned shot. And every new weapon inclusion is treated as a new license and thereforevhas all the attendant red tape.
3. The fact that any time a licensee takes his firearm outside his normal jurisdiction, he must within 48 hours let the local police at the place he is visiting, know that he is there with a firearm.
4.Licenses are renewed normally for 3 years, but based on the whim and fancy of the L.A, that period can be reduced, as was recently done in A.P.
These come to mind I am sure others will add,
Regards,
Anand

[Katana]

Gentlemen,

Your points would would do Macchiavelli, Kautilya and Plato proud, as far as disarming an entire nation is concerned! Successive politicians and bureaucrats, in their one up-manship, have neutered the Republic.

The Arms Act is but just one example. Why do we overlook the case of millions of farmers, forest dwellers and just about any decent, law abiding and virtuous citizen? Innumerable Acts can be cited that are so repressive that it stifles freedom and growth. A case in point is Naxalism/ Maoism. It didn't drop from the sky on our shores. That ideology is the last resort of a people pushed against the wall.

The Arms Act as it stands today, is archaic and antagonistic. It needs a drastic change, and fast, lest such elements like the naxals or fifth columnists, organised crime rings or mere thugs run matters to such a point that the common citizen will have to bear the brunt of indiscriminate changes brought forth by the powers that be. However, one must also guard the fact that this time around, the citizens and licensees should not be caught unawares, and any change in the Laws be taken into account with their consent.

Each one of you has a fire in his belly, just as I have. But to negate those pangs, sometimes I silently weep for our Motherland.

PS> Capt., I suggest you edit your writing into a more easily readable and presentable piece. Someday, you might be required to present it front of people who matter.

[captrakshitsharma]

Thanks for the inputs and some other very valid points... @ katana... Pls feel free to elaborate on changes and editing... I will be happy if you can edit it..

[goodboy_mentor]

Saying that arms license is a mere privilege is accepting half defeat even before the battle has begun. Rather arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. We even have High Court judgments that say arms license is not a privilege accorded by government.

Can the Constitution ever say a scandalous and irresponsible thing that self defense has to be done with bare hands only? It needs to be understood that all including government are equal before the Constitution. Even if we assume that Constitution says such a stupid thing that self defense has to be done with bare hands, then it means everybody including the government will have to do self defense with bare hands only. It would mean that Police and armed forces have no right to keep, bear or use arms. Is such an absurd and stupid idea acceptable to any reasonable or sane person?

[Katana]

Rather arms are fundamental right under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. We even have High Court judgments that say arms license is not a privilege accorded by government.

Absolutely agree with you there. I now firmly believe that the LA is only the issuing authority, NOT the granting authority.

Under no circumstance should we grovel before anyone for what is fundamentally ours.

A case in point is my visit to the clerk in the LA branch last. He casually mentioned that I should call up a MLA etc. and make him tell the DM, in which case things would move faster. I immediately admonished him for such a suggestion.

[captrakshitsharma]

Will work on it further , I will be calling you guys up....

[Raptor]

very well written sir, the government which promises us our fundamental right to ' life and property' in the same breath denies us that right by labelling an arms license as a 'privilege'!can anyone enlighten me as to the avenues open to us under the purview of 'legal recourses' in case one's application is thrown out?
As an 'aside' I often wonder how the arms lincenses are arbitrarily granted to sundry bussiness owners whose only claim to the same are that they know somebody in the police force. i had a local gym owner, who carries an imported semiautomatic tucked into his pants' waistband, once ask me if he can use 'sarson ka tel' to clean his gun! I'm still reeling from that one even after a year!

[captrakshitsharma]

Thanks , we need our members to sensitise the media and politicians and put forth our points . All members should write to the media and talk with the local politicians on this subject.

[Raptor]

Thanks , we need our members to sensitise the media and politicians and put forth our points . All members should write to the media and talk with the local politicians on this subject.

begging the captian's pardon, sir, my post was with reference to the legal recourses/remedies available in case one's application is turned down.

[captrakshitsharma]

The applicant in that case is free to file a case against the authorities stating provisions of the arms act.

[andy_65_in]

I personally feel that the government should lift the ban on imports of firearms which would greatly benefit everyone-i mean how does it make a difference as to from where i acquire a firearm as long as its on proper license.the government should also lift ban on hunting albeit in a controlled manner .

[Raptor]

the government should also lift ban on hunting albeit in a controlled manner .

absolutely against lifting the ban on hunting sir, you know what will happen if they actually do lift the ban. Mass slaughter! Although in theory your proposition is rather attractive, the 'realities' of this country are infinitely different. We are assuming that hunting privileges will be granted to sane individuals like yourself, however, the said privileges are just as likely to be bestowed upon anybody with enough clout and truckloads of dirty money!