Are Indians responsible to own guns.

[Ramandeep]

Firstly I would like to state definitely there many number of highly responsible gentleman in India who possess guns. My concern is generally for the larger part of India who comes up owning guns. If suppose gun laws are relaxed then definitely we will have a large number of population which is armed and being armed for self defense is definitely reasonable but there would be other aspects of it. Like in India getting driving license is probably the easiest in the world and we all know how the drivers(majority) are in this country but do we have responsible drivers I don't think so more than being responsible people drive responsibly only when they have a fear of getting a "challan"(ticket). In most parts of India I have seen people driving in the wrong lane just to avoid taking a big turn, if people know at any time of a night there are no cops around that place and the traffic is lean majority would jump the red signal just saving a minute may be. Couple of months back there was an article in Hindustan Times that statistically in India people who pass their driving test in the first attempt the figure is 96%(it feels funny that 4% actually fail despite the system we have), this is the highest in the world but we all know the fact, if one gets a challan(ticket) that never reflects on the driving license whatsoever the responsibility applied by law seems minimum. In some parts of India if a cop confiscates a driving license getting another is very easy within days and spending just few thousand rupees. My whole point about discussing about driving habits of our people is not the discussion i intent to do but the general idea about the "attitude" people have in our great nation.

I myself have gun license since last 7-8 years but have come across and handled them pretty early in my life as almost everybody in the family owned weapons as a Sikh the weapons are an important part of our social diaspora and is definitely respected and held in high esteem. I have come across many number of people who owns guns, wanna have guns or simply are enthusiasts. So i can definitely say after talking to a person that why did that person obtained a gun license. I guess 30 years or back people who had obtained gun license was majority of people who were fond of hunting and those people say back in the day that was the "in" thing, but that's definitely not anymore now i guess those "hunters" are replaced by people who are interested in shooting sports because I have seen both the categories of people have the same gleam in their eye while talking about shooting with their gun, there is a high number of people who are highly enthusiastic about weapons, then there is by far very few number of people who really need it for genuine self defense, some mafia type of people also are successful in obtaining weapon license their purpose is only shady as much as it can be. Now there is another type of people who definitely scares the most are the people who wants a gun's license just to brag it among their friends, relatives etc.. nothing else as pure and simple as that because those are the type of people who are deemed to misuse and mishandle the weapon in every which way possible. That is really amazing because those type of people seems like are in majority today who are obtaining license just because they have the right connections and pay right amount of money and have striked gold in India's real estate boom(majority) for them it has become a dick measuring contest. I am a gun enthusiast and go to gun dealers around may be 4-5 times a month and if I am visiting a city definitely visit gun dealer of that place for ammos, price checks, new weapon etc.. In short in a year may be 60-70 times in all these trips I have seen atleast 15-20 people in a year coming to gun shops who obtain license for the first time don't really know a difference between a revolver and a pistol and their "Guru" becomes our beloved gun dealer who 90% of the times doesn't even mentions anything related to gun safety at all his intentions are very clear. But these folks are the scary lot, I have seen people loading and cocking inside the gun shop pointing in every direction, talking on phone and loading the pistol, insisting repeatedly to the gun dealer that they would buy only if the dealer lets them fire the weapon right outside his shop, giving the gun for cleaning with a live ammo in it.

My point is that it would be highly impossible to determine who should be given license and who not but there should be an added clause with knowledge about gun safety with it may be some kind of practical or written exam compulsory and above all obtaining license should be through a single window service dedicated solely to administer the license and licensees preferably in the headquarter of the state, there should a way to determine the threat level on an individual so in case of self defense the person can obtain a license based on the threat level he faces. Definitely there should be more rifle clubs and ranges promoting shooters and creating awareness about gun safety.

God bless India

[Safarigent]

This should actually be the responsibility of the state association. And a rigourous firearms handling and safety course should be de rigeur for all arms applicants applying for a license for a particular firearm type for the first time. Side by side, all state capitals should have ranges on the lines of the Dr. Karni Singh Shooting Range in Delhi. The authorities should make anyone proven to have discharged his/her firearm in a public area without good reason( marriages/functions etc) surrender their firearms for a specified cooling period and after a second repeat, cancel the licence permanently.

[target]

its very difficult to identify who is responsible to own gun ,,if a person is able to control its emotions "yes" if cannot control its emotions "no"..
only if a person is only using guns for protection or sports is responsible to own a gun
my view

[varunik]

This reminds me of what my CBRN prof, a retd Colonel, told me when I asked him his views on on gun ownership. He said,"kuchh ho na ho, India ki popuation adhi zarur ho jaegi"

I would agree with him, though our circumstances very much need more practical gun laws. But, first we need a mature society. By saying this, we need to dissociate guns from the glamour (Hollywood, Bollywood), and teach about guns at the right age, from the very beginning.

[brihacharan]

Ramandeep wrote:
My point is that it would be highly impossible to determine who should be given license and who not but there should be an added clause with knowledge about gun safety with it may be some kind of practical or written exam compulsory and above all obtaining license should be through a single window service dedicated solely to administer the license and licensees preferably in the headquarter of the state, there should a way to determine the threat level on an individual so in case of self defense the person can obtain a license based on the threat level he faces. Definitely there should be more rifle clubs and ranges promoting shooters and creating awareness about gun safety.

Briha

[bennedose]

This is how I see it:

I believe that if a gun is available a criminal will commit a crime at gunpoint rather than using a knife or a machete/stick. It is much easier to scare and hold back multiple people with a gun.

I will compare two countries in which guns are freely available and are floating around in the general population, Pakistan and America.

In the US a lot of violent crimes are committed using guns but the US can be classified as "safe" because the law enforcing apparatus, the police to population ratio and laws allowing police to use their arms are so strict and enforced with such uniform rigidity that gun crime is actually suppressed and people who own guns are aware of the big responsibility they carry.

Pakistan too has plenty of guns and I recall reading that Pakistan has liberal gun laws. But the police to population ratio in Pakistan is small and the police are often merely servants or on the payroll of local goons and landlords. This allows intimidation and murder to occur with impunity in Pakistan. Ajmal Kasab originally wanted to get a gun and hold up people in Pakistan when he was picked up by the Lashkar e Toiba and trained to join the team that attacked Mumbai in 2008

Unfortunately in India the state government control the police and they have never implemented police reforms. The governments want to control the police so the police become an extension of elected goons. In my opinion free gun ownership in India will lead to a situation where law abiding citizens will simply lose their friends and relatives to gun violence.

There appears to be one cliched observation comparing India and America. In America (and the UK where I used to live), corruption is only right at the top. In India corruption is allowed at all levels. The latter allows small time criminals and goons to get away while everyone simply looks away.

I am a law abiding citizen in most ways. But in India if I somehow get involved in a gun related incident, I will use all the influence that I have to get away scot free because I know that everyone else will so exactly that. I know people who have knocked down and killed people in cars who have done that an I know how government officials, police and doctors have accepted bribes to tamper with evidence. The country works in this manner and someone who tries to be 100% law abiding will simply be made a scapegoat.

[target]

but now a days police and miltary officers are also shooting them selves or their collegues..you are right sir( brihacharan ) its very necessary to creat awareness ,and to some extent it will reduce accident

[Mark]

Personally I do not believe that a person undergoes some great increase in intelligence OR morality when they assume a position of power and authority. This goes for the entire planet.

If the citizens of some country believe otherwise, then the right and proper thing would be to have that country relinquish all of its military and crime enforcement weapons to some other sympathetic country. If you believe that a government is responsible enough to possess weapons, then you by extension MUST believe that the citizens of that country in general are also responsible enough to possess weapons of defense. It can be argued for an exception when a country is occupied by a different culture, that the occupied culture can be portrayed/propagandized as being more "primitive" and therefore not responsible/mature enough to own any weapons at all.

However, if you do not believe that then a person must accept that a government is made up of the same citizens of the country as a whole, and fortunately for the planet it appears that in general there are more responsible humans than irresponsible ones, so the net benefit is a positive one.

[Skyman]

If Indians are responsible enough to have children what is a gun in comparison?

[timmy]

Personally I do not believe that a person undergoes some great increase in intelligence OR morality when they assume a position of power and authority. This goes for the entire planet.

If the citizens of some country believe otherwise, then the right and proper thing would be to have that country relinquish all of its military and crime enforcement weapons to some other sympathetic country. If you believe that a government is responsible enough to possess weapons, then you by extension MUST believe that the citizens of that country in general are also responsible enough to possess weapons of defense. It can be argued for an exception when a country is occupied by a different culture, that the occupied culture can be portrayed/propagandized as being more "primitive" and therefore not responsible/mature enough to own any weapons at all.

However, if you do not believe that then a person must accept that a government is made up of the same citizens of the country as a whole, and fortunately for the planet it appears that in general there are more responsible humans than irresponsible ones, so the net benefit is a positive one.

Hear hear! Well put, sir! Your comments strike to the heart of the issue perfectly!

[bennedose]

Personally I do not believe that a person undergoes some great increase in intelligence OR morality when they assume a position of power and authority. This goes for the entire planet.

I don't live in the US but I believe that US laws are very strict, for all the liberal gun laws. For example a person who has a concealed carry permit, if stopped by the police, must declare that he has a concealed carry permit and show it. In other circumstances that law allows an offcier to shoot if he feels he is under threat from a person carrying a gun.

To me this means that a great deal of responibility is vested in police officers in the US. Those offciers go through rigorous training and presumaby psychological assessement before they actually are allowed to prowl about with weapons. And police in America regularly kill armed men presumed to be threatening the police, making it perfectly clear to the public that they do not have the same powers as the police do.

In all societies through history it was the goons with the greatest firepower that ruled. In democracies the goons are elected and given the firepower they need to rule. That firepower is necessarily higher than what the ruled can bring to bear on the rulers. The US police and armed forces necessarily have much more firepower than the entire civilian population. So legal systems even in the most "free" models ensure inequality in weapon armament in favor of government, with the unstated conclusion being that government really is more responsible in its decision to use arms than the lay public.

[fantumfan2003]

Ramandeep,

You have started a very good thread here. It would do well for our states to tighten issuing of driving licenses rather than arms licenses. After all a vehicle in the hands of a less than responsible individual is liable to do more harm (kill/maim others) than a gun.

M.

[brihacharan]

Ramandeep,
You have started a very good thread here. It would do well for our states to tighten issuing of driving licenses rather than arms licenses. After all a vehicle in the hands of a less than responsible individual is liable to do more harm (kill/maim others) than a gun.
M.

Newspapers are full of write-ups these days along with pictures almost everyday of Motorbikers & car owners snuffing out lives of innocent people - caught unawares.
Moral of the story - A Car or a Gun in the wrong hands are equally fatal.
Briha

[goodboy_mentor]

Mark has aptly summed up the matter based on facts.

It can be argued for an exception when a country is occupied by a different culture, that the occupied culture can be portrayed/propagandized as being more "primitive" and therefore not responsible/mature enough to own any weapons at all.

This is exactly what is happening in India. The ruling elite culture, the persons connected with them and some "useful idiots" spread the fiction and propaganda that guns in the hands of common citizens will start rivers of blood on the streets.

In other circumstances that law allows an offcier to shoot if he feels he is under threat from a person carrying a gun.

Can you please quote the specific provision of law in US that empowers police officer to shoot merely because he "feels" but not a fact that he is under threat from person carrying a gun.

To me this means that a great deal of responibility is vested in police officers in the US.

Please read your above statement, your understanding of US law seems to be that police officer is allowed to shoot merely based of his "feelings" and not because of facts and circumstances. If this is your understanding(presuming it to be correct) then surely no responsibility is vested to the police! They are allowed to shoot whenever they "feel". Is the practical situation any different in India? About police killing innocent people, regardless of being armed or unarmed.

In all societies through history it was the goons with the greatest firepower that ruled.

Since they are goons, they need to ensure that the ruled be kept brainwashed and disarmed. This is exactly the spirit behind enacting of 1st and 2nd Amendment of US Constitution. To prevent the rulers from controlling the minds and the bodies of citizens. Rather to dislodge the goons from ruling over them perpetually, the 2nd Amendment empowers the right of violent revolution as a last resort with the citizens. It is totally a different discussion that US is drifting away from the spirit of Bill of Rights and allowing the State to be more and more powerful.

Wherever the goons were/are not ruling, the rulers had/have no fear or problem with armed citizens.

In democracies the goons are elected and given the firepower they need to rule. That firepower is necessarily higher than what the ruled can bring to bear on the rulers.

If goons are getting elected in democracy then it is failure of that form of democracy. It does not mean that the citizens have lost the right to defend themselves from the goons who are ruling them. I would like to bring to your attention the following write up that clearly shows that when the goons are no elected in democracy they behave like ordinary citizens and are not afraid of armed citizens:-

First Among Equals: True Democracy in Action

JOGISHWAR SINGH

As a Swiss citizen born in India, I am many times brought to think about my experiences of the democratic systems prevalent in the two countries.

Before Indian ‘patriots’ start screaming murder at what I am going to say, I should point out that I am fully aware that I am talking about two different historical realities.

Switzerland has been independent for over 800 years while India is a newly created entity, now a mere 66 years old.

Switzerland has a population of only 8 million while India has the second highest population of any country in the world at over 1.2 billion (give or take a few million). And expected, in the near future, to even outstrip China, and become the world’s most populous.

The trigger for this set of reflections was what I saw on the 7.30 pm evening news on Swiss TV a couple of weeks ago.

The Swiss President, Mr Ueli Maurer, was leaving on a five day state visit to China. The news showed him arriving at Zürich airport in an ordinary private vehicle. The President got out of the car by opening the car door himself. He walked to the nearby baggage trolley stand outside the airport entrance. He took a baggage trolley out, rolled it towards the car, lifted his suitcase and travel bag himself, put these on the trolley which he then rolled towards the entrance like any passenger lambda like you or me. He walked up to the check in counter with just two other persons walking behind him. He checked his luggage in for a commercial flight without any special treatment being meted out to him.

For any Indians (or others) who might find it difficult to believe what I have described above, you can CLICK on the link provided hereunder, at the end of this article, to view a TV news clip from the evening prime time news for July 16, 2013..

You’ll get visual proof of the Swiss President’s arrival at the airport, his check in for his state visit to China and a short interview with a TV journalist. This clip is really worth watching.

Conditioned by my personal experiences of dealing with politicians and government ministers in India while serving as an IAS (Indian Administrative Service) officer, I was so struck by the contrast between what I had experienced in India and what I was seeing on the TV screen that I told my wife that this represented one of the finest examples of democracy for me, certainly of the Swiss variety. It made me proud to be the citizen of a country where the serving President behaves like an ordinary citizen and does not feel the need to consider special privileged treatment as his divine birthright.

I remembered the countless times when I had seen the fury of Indian politicians, much below the level of the President of a country, at what they considered as a slight because they had not been treated as demi-gods.

I am not a psychologist. I do not know whether centuries of slavery have generated this distorted VIP culture in India but I remember that we all did curse the politicians there for causing so much inconvenience to the general public by expecting, demanding and getting privileged treatment.

Who in India, except maybe some politicians or bureaucrats, has not been inconvenienced by VIP visits for which miles of roads and highways, even entire neighbourhoods, are blocked off to traffic, and flights are delayed, awaiting the arrival of some VIP or even his/her flunkies/family members?

Any such inconvenience would cause an uproar in Switzerland.

In India, it does not generate even a whimper.

In this context, an incident from the not very distant past strongly lingers in my memory. A few years ago, a former IAS batch-mate of mine (1976 batch) had visited Switzerland.

I have noticed that Switzerland becomes a prize destination of choice for a lot of Indian ministers and bureaucrats during their hot summer for attending all kinds of useless conferences which are essentially talking shops organised by the United Nations, an organisation which is a hotbed of nepotism and inefficiency.

This IAS officer wanted to see Switzerland, so I acted as his local tourist guide.

While we were going around the Swiss federal capital, Bern, it was lunch time so we decided to have lunch at a restaurant very close to the Swiss parliament building.

As we took our seats at a table, a Swiss gentleman sitting at the next table, reading his newspaper while sipping his coffee, greeted us in English. While we ordered our meal and waited, he finished reading his newspaper, drank his coffee and called for his bill which he paid before leaving. While going out, he again politely wished us goodbye, even saying, “I hope you enjoy your stay in Switzerland” in English.

After he had left, I asked my visitor if he knew who the man had been. Obviously, my visitor did not know the answer. I informed him that we had just been greeted by the then serving Swiss President, Mr René Felber.

My guest thought I was making fun of him. He would not believe me so I called the restaurant manager to confirm the veracity of what I had told him. The manager duly confirmed what I had said.

My Indian visitor was flabbergasted. He said, “How can this be possible? He actually paid his bill before leaving”.

So, what struck my visitor the most had been the fact that a VIP had actually paid his bill! I wonder what he would say if he saw our current President, Mr Ueli Maurer, personally loading his bags on to a baggage trolley and wheeling it to a check-in counter just like any ordinary citizen. His disbelief could only be countered by visual evidence on the TV!

My visitor’s reaction brought back memories of when, as a serving sub-divisional or district level official, I had been called upon to organise lunches and dinners for numerous collections of freeloaders travelling with ministers or bureaucrats in India.

I seldom remember any politician or bureaucrat actually paying or even offering to pay for the bonanza laid out for them. Those who did offer to pay, did so at the ridiculously low official daily fare of eleven rupees (today, a mere 20 cents US) per person or something like that.

Nobody ever asked how it had been possible to lay out a lavish meal comprising several dishes, accompanied by expensive alcoholic beverages, for such a petty sum. I never found out myself who used to pay for all this extravaganza at the end of the line.

Like a good Indian bureaucrat, I just used to pass the buck down the line to my junior magistrates and revenue officials. To this day, I am unable to clarify which poor victim -- read, citizen! -- who got stuck with paying for all the freebies on offer.

While working as chief of staff to the President of the Swiss Commission for the Presence of Switzerland in Foreign Countries many years ago, I had the chance of accompanying him to Strasbourg for meetings of the Council of Europe. I also had the privilege of close interaction with several Swiss members of parliament over an extended period of 12 to 14 months.

The contrast to the behavioural pattern of what I had experienced in India with politicians was so stark that it has stayed seared in my mind even till today.

I am by no means suggesting that Swiss politicians are angels but the kind of behaviour that Indian politicians or bureaucrats get away with as a matter of routine in India would torpedo their careers in Switzerland in a jiffy.

Each such incident deepens my gratitude to Waheguru Almighty for having made me settle down in a country like Switzerland where the President carries his own bags to the check-in counter.

Where no roads are blocked for hours so that some VIP can, in the name of security, be whisked around in convoys of official vehicles.

Where politicians and bureaucrats pay their bills in restaurants.

Where grossly sycophantic behaviour is not the general and accepted norm.

Where no red-light beacons or screaming sirens signal the passage of VIP vehicles. Indeed, the red-light-beacon culture of officialdom in India merits a full story in itself.

I might accept India as a true democracy the day I see its President or Prime Minister behaving like the Swiss President before his departure on an official visit abroad.

I don’t think I will ever see such a sight in India during my lifetime.

You think, maybe, my grandchildren will?

To view the TV news-clip, please CLICK here.

August 1, 2013

Source http://www.sikhchic.com/article-detail. ... 420&cat=12

[brihacharan]

After going through the post - First Among Equals: True Democracy in Action by JOGISHWAR SINGH led me to a wishful thinking process to ask myself "Will Indian Politicians & Bureaucrats ever behave in such a manner?

Incidentally I was a witness to this: A multinational company in India which had a Swiss collaboration hosted a Sports Day for its employees at the Brabourne Stadium in Mumbai. Employees with their families had formed a large queue at the entrance to get in - When the Managing Director of the company (A Swiss National) accompanied by his wife came a handful of Indian Managers of the company wanted to escort them into the stadium ahead of the long queue - Whereupon the gentleman refused the offer - Instead he & his wife joined the queue at the end and waited their turn to enter!!!

When the Indian Managers insisted his answer was - "I'm only the Managing Director of the company in our office - Out here I'm an employee like the ones standing in the queue!!!!
Briha