CAFI Control

[captrakshitsharma]

Dear all apology for a long absence on my part due to health issues of a family member. I take all the blame and apologise for the delays in achieving our goals.I am Starting to work on NAGRI issues as now as we speak. All those who have concerns and wish to be a more active part of NAGRI i kindly contact me on 09971818386. (Dear Moderators Apology for giving the number openly but it is already available on the NAGRI website and freely available on net)

[inplainsight]

Count me in. At the very least, I can help members with their paperwork and appeals with the licensing department.

[varunik]

I'm up for any poster/banner or any other sort of designing.

[captrakshitsharma]

Thanks @inplainsight pls get in touch when convenient

[goodboy_mentor]

Friends,

When NAGRI had gone to Parliament, the Home Committee was chaired by Shri Lal Krishan Advani who took over as the then Chairman, Shri Venkaiah Naidu, had to leave for a sudden meeting.

Shri Advani was explicit when he said that the Government must trust its citizens, and that our Constitution clearly states that ALL citizens of our Republic have the right to firearms.

India as we know it today will certainly change once these recommendations become law.

And law it will become, once our Parliament starts to work, which unfortunately doesn't seem to be happening right now.

Very true but this fact that arms are recognized as fundamental right by the Constitution and the doctrine of the 2nd Amendment of US Constitution is very much present in it is not known to many. That is why the government has been able to enact unconstitutional provisions in Arms Act 1959 and create misery for law abiding citizens. Unless we make the lawmakers, judiciary and media aware that RKBA is a fundamental right recognized by the Constitution, it will be very difficult to achieve any meaningful RKBA.

I am explaining in brief for the readers who are not aware that arms are recognized as fundamental right by the Constitution below:

Rights and duties are two sides of the same coin. Since arms are acknowledged as fundamental right of citizens by Article 19(1)b, that is exactly why there is corresponding and equivalent fundamental duty to defend the country(surely defend the country with arms and not with bare hands!) under Article 51A(d). In other words the doctrine about the necessity of arms as fundamental right of free citizens to maintain a free State in the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution also exists very much in the Indian Constitution. In other words Constitution envisages every citizen to be ever ready with all manner of arms(including firearms, ammunition and explosives etc.), being part of well regulated people's militia. Since arms include firearms, ammunition and explosives, the regulatory powers of government are mentioned in Article 246(5) of the Constitution.

One needs to understand that wherever in Article 19(1) two rights of citizens are joined, they are joined with conjunction "and". When Article 19(1)(a) says "to freedom of speech and (with) expression", since fundamental rights are negative rights, it also includes another unstated combination "to freedom of speech and without expression".

Similarly when Article 19(1)(b) says "to assemble peaceably and without arms", it also includes another unstated combination "to assemble peaceably and (with) arms". This combination of two fundamental rights(to assemble peaceably and (with) arms) gets reflected in the corresponding fundamental duty of citizens in from of Article 51A(d) and other statutory provisions flowing from Article 51A(d) like The Punjab Village and Small Towns Patrol Act, 1918 or The Himachal Pradesh Village and Small Towns Patrol Act, 1964.

If one further analyzes the provisions of Arms Act 1959 and its Objects and Reasons, will further find details about this fact. One of them is the separate use of words "citizen" and "person" since citizens enjoy enhanced protection of their rights under Article 19.

Anything that is an offense under Part III of the Constitution, even the State is not exempt from that offense because of equality before law as per Article 14. For example murder, kidnapping etc. are offenses under Part III, thus no exemption under law for State for these offenses. Surely arms are not an offense under Part III of the Constitution that is why the State is exempt from the Arms Act 1959. Since arms are not an offense under Part III, then what are arms for Article 19(1)(b) when there exists Article 19(3)? They are nothing but fundamental right under Part III.

Arms Act 1959 is flowing from the Constitution and arms license is not a privilege granted by the Government. It is also a legal fact that Government has no discretion to refuse except only refusal as is allowed in the Arms Act 1959. In other words if the person is not offending Sections 9 and 14 of Arms Act 1959, it is his right to get a license. Since it is a matter of right, that is why Section 14(2) prohibits refusal of license merely on the ground that person does not own or possess sufficient property. Since it is a matter of right, that is why Section 14(3) makes it mandatory for licensing authority to give the refusal of license in writing, so that applicant can approach High Court or Supreme Court to get his right enforced. There are plenty of related High court judgments. Also Supreme Court has held in Ranjit Singh Etc. Etc vs Union Of India on 26 September, 1980 that that “An applicant for a license is entitled to have it considered in accordance with the terms of the statute and to press for its grant on the basis of the criteria set forth in it”. Moreover Supreme Court has held in Poonam Verma & Ors vs Delhi Development Authority on 13 December, 2007 that "Guidelines per se do not partake to the character of statute. Such guidelines in absence of the statutory backdrop are advisory in nature. This is because guidelines, by their very nature, do not fall into the category of legislation, direct, subordinate or ancillary. They have only an advisory role to play and non-adherence to or deviation from them is necessarily and implicitly permissible if the circumstances of any particular fact or law situation warrants the same."

Since Section 3 of Arms Act as it stands today((self incriminating), we have to face so much misery while applying for arms license. Parallel case law can be read in HAYNES v. UNITED STATES, 390 U.S. 85 (1968). It can be read here http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/g ... 0&invol=85

[essdee1972]

Gentlemen, first of all thanks for fighting for all of us! It is truly a rare case, when the "haves" (people with licensed guns) are fighting for the rights of the "have-nots" (those of us without the same). Reminds me of an occasion, when I overheard two guys, each owning multiple automobiles, moaning about how Tata Nano would create havoc once everyone of the hoi-polloi gets a set of 4 wheels!

Kudos to all of you!

Also would like to volunteer for any NAGRI-related work which can be done at long-range. Designing, writing, etc. As someone said, if I can leave the world a better place........ (if I leave, the world will anyway be a better place..... )

I am trying to convert, most often getting a splitting headache from banging the head against the brick walls of ignorance, fear, and 2.5 centuries of brain-washing. My better half and some relatives are convinced, so are some of my friends. But as Robert Frost says, "miles to go....."

@ inplainsight, I had once been faced with the same question. My reply was:

(a) Being financially (somewhat) better off than the housemaid & driver (I hope ), I would probably be having a better weapon(s), and I will make sure the hired help / service providers know this, so why fear?
(b) Having a backup (a driver with his own gun) would be better, say, if I was travelling and was somehow waylaid by miscreants. Similar situation applies if the said miscreants try any funny business at home. An armed bai would probably be better deterrence than an old lady (my mom) who at 76 maybe can't hold a gun straight, even if she has one!
(c) Someone on the site (I forget who, apologies!) has Robert Heinlein's quote as a signature: An armed society is a polite society

[Virendra S Rathore]

Hi Rakshit,

Just called you up. Count me in as a volunteer. I really don't know what I'll do but just that I want to help.
May be campaigning, content management or other mundane stuff. Once it starts, I can figure out where I fit.

Regards,
Virendra

[inplainsight]

Sorry, I haven't been able to call yet. I've been travelling quite a bit.

I'm back in Delhi in 2 weeks, will call then.

[StampMaster]

There are few suggestion I would like to bring to notice-
1. site needs to be redesigned.
2. Maintain a blog to provide regular updates of the events etc
3. Membership payment has to be made easily available- online application and payment.
4. Regular e-mailer need to be sent to members to provide them updates.

and so on. I would be happy to volunteer and also in developing the above.

[captrakshitsharma]

Thanks for suggestions and the help offered please contact me on the number provided on the NAGRI site.