How to buy a .357 pistol

[K T]

Good evening everyone, i m the new member of this great forum,although i have been reading lot of knowledge which has been imparted by more learned people. I have a query which is can we buy .357 pistol like glock 32 ,, if yes then how and what all is reqd to do so.??

[winnie_the_pooh]

Emigrate

[bishu57]

Ha ha ha @ Winnie the Pooh , good one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[drshamsherrana]

Emigrate

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23][emoji23] ohh God

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

[sumbriavikramaditya]

Dear K T,

The firearms which fall under the category of 'Prohibited Bore' are not allowed to be kept by civilians. If you are an officer in Indian Armed Forces then you can have them but then you have to import them, which again is not allowed by the Government. The bore you are talking about, .357 and the weapon, Glock are both fine examples of engineering. If you are a civilian then you can get firearms by acquiring Arms License and buy the firearms which fall under 'Non Prohibited Bore' category and manufactured by Indian Ordinance Factories.

Cheers
Vikramaditya Singh

[goodboy_mentor]

.357 is non prohibited bore. Non prohibited or prohibited bore has nothing to do with the ballistics of the weapon. The basic criteria is central government's ammunition should not fire in civilian owned firearms. This non prohibited and prohibited bore idea was started by the British around Lord Curzon's time. There was fear that mutiny like of 1857 may repeat. In order to ensure that ammunition looted from central government armories should not fire in civilian population's firearms. Unfortunately the same idea continues today by the central government that (falsely?) claims we got independence(really?) on 15.08.1947, and thus are free people and not slaves of the rulers.

@K T Following are the options to buy .357 -

1. You are residing in some foreign country where .357 is available and then decide to transfer your residence to India. Then you can bring .357 along with 50 cartridges via transfer of residency route. If you are unable to show them arms license, the firearm and cartridges will be confiscated by the Customs. Once you are able to show them the arms license, they will release the confiscated firearm and cartridges.

2. If you are in India and are willing to spend around Rs. 35 to 40 lakhs(Rs 3.5 to 4 million ) to buy from someone who already has .357 with him.

3. You are able to convince the central government to make changes in the import policy of the Directorate General of Foreign Trade.

4. You are able to convince any High Court or Supreme Court that Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 is a legal right flowing from liberty of Article 21. This import restriction is without application of mind, is very unreasonable, ultra vires of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, that is why it is violation of Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 when read together with Sections 11A(a), 11(2)(u) and 11G of Customs Act 1962. Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959, Sections 11(2)(u ) and 11G of Customs Act 1962 are legal rights flowing from equality before law under Article 14 and liberty of Article 21, thus they need to be read into for interpreting to the widest possible amplitude. Since Arms Act 1959 is specific legislation for arms and ammunition, that is why explanation of firearms in Section 48 of Customs Act 1962 gives overriding primacy to Arms Act 1959. Thus to satisfy Articles 14 and 21, Sections 11A(a), 11(2)(u) and 11G of Customs Act 1962, 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 will override the import policy. Because Articles 14 and 21 are violated that is why it is also violation of Competition Act by providing monopolistic abuse by Indian Ordnance Factory, and thus the central government has no jurisdiction to bring your non commercial import under licensing. Please note the words non commercial import. I have explained this in another thread(here viewtopic.php?f=4&t=25102) in paragraphs numbered 8, 23, 27, 29, 168 and 179 read together. The links in another post may also be of interest to you, here is the link viewtopic.php?f=4&t=20173&p=252083#p252083

If you are unable to do any of the above four things then either forget the idea or take an escapist approach to emigrate as suggested by some members. If you face some other similar problem in the new country, will you again take an escapist route and emigrate to another country? That is why I think escapism is not a proper option or idea in this matter.

[Ajaaybeer]

.357 is non prohibited bore. Non prohibited or prohibited bore has nothing to do with the ballistics of the weapon. The basic criteria is central government's ammunition should not fire in civilian owned firearms. This non prohibited and prohibited bore idea was started by the British around Lord Curzon's time. There was fear that mutiny like of 1857 may repeat. In order to ensure that ammunition looted from central government armories should not fire in civilian population's firearms. Unfortunately the same idea continues today by the central government that (falsely?) claims we got independence(really?) on 15.08.1947, and thus are free people and not slaves of the rulers.

@K T Following are the options to buy .357 -

1. You are residing in some foreign country where .357 is available and then decide to transfer your residence to India. Then you can bring .357 along with 50 cartridges via transfer of residency route. If you are unable to show them arms license, the firearm and cartridges will be confiscated by the Customs. Once you are able to show them the arms license, they will release the confiscated firearm and cartridges.

2. If you are in India and are willing to spend around Rs. 35 to 40 lakhs(Rs 3.5 to 4 million ) to buy from someone who already has .357 with him.

3. You are able to convince the central government to make changes in the import policy of the Directorate General of Foreign Trade.

4. You are able to convince any High Court or Supreme Court that Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 is a legal right flowing from liberty of Article 21. This import restriction is without application of mind, is very unreasonable, ultra vires of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, that is why it is violation of Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 when read together with Sections 11A(a), 11(2)(u) and 11G of Customs Act 1962. Section 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959, Sections 11(2)(u ) and 11G of Customs Act 1962 are legal rights flowing from equality before law under Article 14 and liberty of Article 21, thus they need to be read into for interpreting to the widest possible amplitude. Since Arms Act 1959 is specific legislation for arms and ammunition, that is why explanation of firearms in Section 48 of Customs Act 1962 gives overriding primacy to Arms Act 1959. Thus to satisfy Articles 14 and 21, Sections 11A(a), 11(2)(u) and 11G of Customs Act 1962, 10(1)(a) of Arms Act 1959 will override the import policy. Because Articles 14 and 21 are violated that is why it is also violation of Competition Act by providing monopolistic abuse by Indian Ordnance Factory, and thus the central government has no jurisdiction to bring your non commercial import under licensing. Please note the words non commercial import. I have explained this in another thread(here viewtopic.php?f=4&t=25102) in paragraphs numbered 8, 23, 27, 29, 168 and 179 read together. The links in another post may also be of interest to you, here is the link viewtopic.php?f=4&t=20173&p=252083#p252083

If you are unable to do any of the above four things then either forget the idea or take an escapist approach to emigrate as suggested by some members. If you face some other similar problem in the new country, will you again take an escapist route and emigrate to another country? That is why I think escapism is not a proper option or idea in this matter.

I appreciate the above said , its beautifully written . Although i myself believe it is not possible to implement the same unless some one with a political high platform advocates such a right for gun liberalisation. As in case of animals Menika Gandhi has been able to instill a lot of changes in policy which i believe are both positive and widely negative. An organisation of same or better caliber can help.
Atleast if not liberalise , they can atleast globalise the civilian bore non prohibitted bore market or atleast produce with a tie up with a foreign arms company.
On contrary i feel, the quality of weapons produced here has a hidden motive, they are prone to failure with continuous action which can be a deliberate act to render it unuseful beyond an act of self defence so they are not to be used in a mutiny type of situation. Inputs are welcome.
Cheer!

[sumbriavikramaditya]

I am sorry I was wrong about .357 being a PB cartridge.

[bishu57]

There exists another legal way of owning a .357 in India. As a sports shooter qualify for the nationals in the centre fire discipline. In the nationals please shoot the Minimum Qualifying Scores ( MQS) and become a renowned shot, Repeat the same feat on the subsequent year and the year after . Based on your renowned shot status of three years you may apply with letter from NRAI for import of a .357 bore revolver .

All said above is extremely a tough ask but possible


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[xl_target]

Keep in mind the Glock 32 in.357 that you are talking about is not the more common .357 Magnum round.
The caliber is .357 SIG.
Glock doesn't want to acknowledge a competitor, so they don't mention the "SIG" part on their website.

.357 SIG is nothing more than a .40 S&W cartridge necked down to accept a .355" diameter projectile.
.40 S&W itself is nothing more than a shortened 10 mm Auto.


From left to right; .357 SIG, 10 mm Auto, .40 S&W

Your chances of getting .357 Sig ammo in India are slim to non-existent.
Hence Winnie's comment.

[goodboy_mentor]

As in case of animals Menika Gandhi has been able to instill a lot of changes in policy which i believe are both positive and widely negative. An organisation of same or better caliber can help.

About Meneka Gandhi's organization, if my information is correct, she has a number of volunteer advocates, who due to their personal convictions about the cause of animal rights, take up her cases free of cost in High Courts and Supreme Court. If similar advocates practicing in High Courts and Supreme Court come forward for this matter, I do see lot of potential about judicial activism in this matter. Such advocates need to come forward and get in touch with NAGRI. There is a an organization created by a number of members of this forum, named National Association for Gun Rights India(NAGRI). It's website is http://gunowners.in/ You may visit the website to know more details.

You may visit this link viewtopic.php?f=4&t=20173&p=252083#p252083 Go to the post by me replying to query of Ankushtyagi92. You will find five links numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Just read them very very carefully, you will find all the technical masala, including judgments of High Courts as well as Supreme Court related to these type of matters. The last link has rough draft related to the PIL related to this matter. It needs to be updated with some more points, like from Writ Petition (civil) No 494 Of 2012, Justice K S Puttaswamy (retd.), and Anr. ..petitioners Vs. Union Of India And Ors(mentioned here viewtopic.php?f=4&t=25494&p=251374#p251374) and from Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005(mentioned here viewtopic.php?f=4&t=25256&p=249475#p249524)

Atleast if not liberalise , they can atleast globalise the civilian bore non prohibitted bore market or atleast produce with a tie up with a foreign arms company.

Problem is dishonesty in implementing the laws with proper respect to the Constitution and judgments of Supreme Court. Honesty and integrity is in short supply in relevant quarters.

On contrary i feel, the quality of weapons produced here has a hidden motive, they are prone to failure with continuous action which can be a deliberate act to render it unuseful beyond an act of self defence so they are not to be used in a mutiny type of situation. Inputs are welcome.

I do not think there is any such hidden motive because even the guns they supply to army are of poor and variable quality. It is well known fact that INSAS rifle supplied to army was prone to jamming. Recently was reading somewhere that army has recently rejected the IOF rifles twice because they were prone to malfunction or jamming. IOF is a governmental organization, we all know how these organizations work. Employees have job security and there is no pressure on them to excel because there is no competition. Similarly the private companies manufacturing shotguns and their ammunition do not have much competition. As the saying goes, in the group of blind men, the one eyed Jack becomes their leader. Same is the case with this matter.