Are you comfortable with the idea of guns being made available to all and sundry (in India)over the counter?
Absolutely not! I do not believe that anyone on IFG is comfortable with answering this question with a "yes".
For instance, if someone has been convicted of a felony, then they should lose their right to gun ownership.
People who are mentally incapacitated are not to be allowed gun ownership rights.
It is reasonable to impose limitations on non-citizens' ability to posses a gun.
These are straightforward answers to your question. However, the question as posed is, I feel, a "nibbling" or a "leading" question. I think you have phrased it this way to advance the point that you attempted to make earlier with regards to gun ownership. I don't think that there's anything wrong with you advancing your point, but I also don't think there's anything wrong with me objecting to the point you are trying to advance.
You begin your question with, "Are you comfortable with..." I reject this kind of question as being relevant to the issue of who should own a gun. There are many things many people are uncomfortable with in a free society. For instance, I have seen some people offended about a poor person owning an expensive automobile. More seriously, one may very well be uncomfortable with another person's exercise of free speech. When I hear some of the political views expressed on TV or radio, I know I am VERY uncomfortable with these ideas. However, this being uncomfortable with free speech does not make me question in the least whether the people espousing what I consider ill-formed opinions should be deprived of their right of free speech.
My point here is that, in a free society, we cannot base our laws on what others find uncomfortable. That is exactly the situation we have now, and it is not right. Laws have to apply to all equally and fairly, without bias.
To my example of free speech, it may be observed that guns kill people, but free speech does not. I would object to this point by noting that free speech is every bit as deadly, if not more, than gun ownership.
For example, Hitler tried to take over Germany with guns and failed. Then he tried using free speech, and was successful. Free speech is a very dangerous thing. Are you comfortable with everyone exercising it?
I say, law must be based on rights guaranteed to ALL citizens, rights that cannot be deprived except by due process which is applied to every citizen, without bias on the basis of ethnic background, language, religion, color of skin, or other external factors that may affect somebody's comfort level.
Dr. Martln Luther King once famously said, "Judge me on the content of my character and not the color of my skin." So let me ask you about your "comfort level." Are you comfortable living in a society where a citizen's rights are granted or denied on someone else's subjective feelings, or are you more comfortable in a society where rights are applied to all citizens equally and where a rule of law prevails?
Upon what basis to you say that some are unfit to exercise gun ownership? Do you believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty, and are you uncomfortable with a society that deprives people of rights others enjoy because someone is uncomfortable with the possibility that people might exercise those rights?