Reasonable Gun Control needed

Discussions on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
User avatar
Old Timer
Old Timer
Posts: 3399
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 1:43 pm
Location: The Land of the Nagas

Re: Reasonable Gun Control needed

Post by nagarifle » Wed Jan 13, 2021 11:55 am

and lets take the number of death caused by vichles for the same time peroid. also death by cancer and alchole, and death by trools

if you say it can not be done, then you are right, for you, it can not be done.

For Advertising mail webmaster
Learning the ropes
Learning the ropes
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:05 pm

Re: Reasonable Gun Control needed

Post by GurnaniM » Mon Jan 18, 2021 3:04 pm

partheus wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 2:59 pm
GurnaniM wrote:
Wed Jan 06, 2021 3:01 pm
i agree 100% with eljefe its "Shot Placement" that dictates the lethality of the bullet not its NPB / PB stature. Also as pointed out multiple times the notion behind introduction of PB /NPB was to serve the interests of then British raj in essence .. as such its just differentiating the service caliber. (worth noting in contrast to PB 9mm the more powerful. 357 magnum & 45 acp are NPB). Also the stats about 3100 gsw deaths by PB will also be so as the requirement of using firearms in line of service is that much higher than most armed civilians who will use it as a last resort and then too in large percentage brandishing or warning shot itself deters the threat.
Not sure if terminal lethality of a cartridge is the rationale behind the whole NP/PB division. Whatever the law makers were thinking, I do believe the current rules effectively discourage military and police armouries from becoming targets of interested civilian parties. If I were to entertain the idea of civilians using the same cartridges as govt agencies do, is it too much to imagine backdoor nexuses forming wherein military ammunition is being siphoned off to civilian markets?

In general talk, I get the feel many people think PB munitions are 'P' because they are inherently better than their NPB cousins. This really isn't the case. Military, LEO agencies have needs that go beyond effectiveness. One of the driving reasons why some cartridges are all the rage in govt circles is because they are being mass produced all over the world and have fairly mature supply chains that can be relied upon in war time.

The latest and greatest cartridges don't mean much if you run out of them on day one and then can't source them. 9 mm para, 5.56 and 7.62 NATO and 7.62X39, are being produced in most industrialised countries in the Nothern hemisphere. All of them are sufficiently powerful for their intended purposes and given their availability come at reasonable cost, hence why militaries around the world prefer them.
I think the rationale behind PB/NPB was done exactly for the reason cited by you at the time british were understandably cautious that the revolting public doesn't use thier own service ammunition against them and thus this whole shenanigan and like other similar laws that were introduced by the erstwhile British empire to serve thier own intrest have continued to remain in force in independent India even after 73 years of Brits leaving our country says more about our own lawmakers.

User avatar
Fresh on the boat
Fresh on the boat
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2021 10:50 am

Re: Reasonable Gun Control needed

Post by arbind » Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:15 pm

Owning a gun in India is a farce, really!
The average Joe can't buy any gun except BBs and .177 cars, which are really only for all other things, except self defense.

The 0.22 cal which was the only relatively decent gun has also been shown the door.

It reminds me of a post i read much earlier that there's so many restrictions on people owning even decent air guns because the politicians fear the and don't trust their voters, though they're allowed to get all high and mighty, with no limit.

Want to own a fire arm...become a politician!

Post Reply