Indians For Guns

with a gun license in india can you buy all types of guns? for example, is there a separate license for a .22 pistol and a .38 one? the latter is more powerful and can easily kill someone more than the former. this makes it a good reason for the law to restrict people to .22 guns. is this how it works?

pix wrote:with a gun license in india can you buy all types of guns? for example, is there a separate license for a .22 pistol and a .38 one? the latter is more powerful and can easily kill someone more than the former. this makes it a good reason for the law to restrict people to .22 guns. is this how it works?

.22 can't kill?

Why do you think people buy guns? To tickle the aggressors/ potential rapist etc?

it is less likely to kill. it is less likely to penetrate bones. you don't have to kill an aggressor or a potential rapist. it might be a better idea to disable him until you have help.

anyway, we digress. some pistols are more lethal than and it is how it is. does the government have separate licenses for different kinds of pistols?

pix wrote:it is less likely to kill. it is less likely to penetrate bones. you don't have to kill an aggressor or a potential rapist. it might be a better idea to disable him until you have help.

anyway, we digress. some pistols are more lethal than and it is how it is. does the government have separate licenses for different kinds of pistols?

It is not a question if you have to or not have to kill. Right of private defense is a legal right explained from Section 96 to 106 Indian Penal Code. If the criminal attack satisfies Section 100 India Penal Code you have right to kill your attacker. There are many Supreme Court judgments supporting right of private defense.

Any weapon can be lethal. Even an ordinary kitchen knife or cricket or baseball bat or wooden club can be lethal. It all depends how use use it and were you hit. Same applies for any gun.

It would be good if you give your introduction in proper section of this forum and what is your purpose of joining this forum.

i don't want to start a heated discussion here. i agree with you 100%.

done. i created an introduction thread.

You do not have to always agree since if needed we also agree to disagree

Thanks for creating the thread.

well my point was that some weapons are more lethal than others. because guns are more lethal govt. has made them hard to get.

my question in this thread is, has the govt. made it harder to get some guns over others? as in... when they issue a license do they give out licenses based on the lethality of the gun?

i am sure even reknowned sports shooters can buy a sniper gun with their license

pix wrote:my question in this thread is, has the govt. made it harder to get some guns over others? as in... when they issue a license do they give out licenses based on the lethality of the gun?

The entire premise is wrong. There are two categories: NPB> Non-prohibited; PB> Prohibited(a misnomer actually).

The prohibited bore firearms are used by the armed forces, paramilitary and police.The idea is colonial when the British decided not to allow civilians to own military calibres. That logic is extended to semi and full auto firearms.

It has little to do with lethality or "power".

One could be issued a PB license but it is harder to get. Hope that clears your question.

Pix it appears that you are under some misplaced impression that .22 is less lethal than other calibers. .22 was and probably still is among the favorite calibers of assassins, contract killers and undercover agents of intelligence agencies. A person dead from .22 or .45 or from knife or base ball bat is still a dead person. This is of no consolation to the victim of crimes or their near and dear ones. But indeed it is a matter of consolation to victims of crimes and their near and dear ones if they are allowed to exercise their God given right of self defense.

It is usually in very corrupt countries with oppressive governments such kind of restrictions are usually encouraged. One such example is Mexico. It is in self interest of such corrupt countries to create such restrictions so that their corrupt officials, their corrupt police, their terrorist and intelligence agencies who actually indulge in crimes remain safe. Such governments usually fund anti gun rights organizations, media etc. to brainwash the common people.

In another thread you have said the following -

pix wrote:i have strong concerns about having free gun laws in india because of how other things in india are gray. a corrupt judicial system + everyone owning guns can spell trouble. think of someone rich killing someone else for no reason and riding on indian judiciary for years together (like Sallu bhai with his car)

Please ask yourself what is the real problem and what is the real solution? Is people exercising their right of self defense is the problem or the corrupt judiciary is the problem? If the judiciary is corrupt then how can it be cured by placing more and more restrictions on common people? Are such steps going to help corrupt judiciary or the common people?

In the example you have given, corrupt judiciary is the problem or cars are the problem?

Who gets the most benefit when the common masses are disarmed? The corrupt and the criminals or the law abiding? Isn't disarming of society done to promote thug culture and protect it? Apply your mind and do the analysis. There are plenty of historical precedents about it. Unfortunately the greatest lesson of history is that people learn no lesson from history. Thus history keeps repeating itself.

pix wrote:well my point was that some weapons are more lethal than others. because guns are more lethal govt. has made them hard to get.

Governments make them harder not because of lethality but because of their political dishonesty, bad faith and malafides. Publicly stated reason for regulating gun ownership for "crime control" is just a smoke screen. The legal trick is they tax you via licensing or registration and prescribe punishment for not paying the taxation. If you do not do it, they send you to prison. This is the technical legality involved.

pix wrote:my question in this thread is, has the govt. made it harder to get some guns over others? as in... when they issue a license do they give out licenses based on the lethality of the gun?

Lethality has no legal basis since RKBA is your fundamental right flowing into Arms Act 1959 from Articles 19(1)(b), 21, 25 and 300A of Constitution of India. The catch is if you do not follow the procedure as laid down in Arms Act 1959, you may land up in jail. So just forget about the lethality.

pix wrote:i am sure even renowned sports shooters can buy a sniper gun with their license

The main quality of any sniper rifle is it's accuracy. You do not need match grade rifles for sniper rifles. As per some media reports, in the insurgency in Grozny .22LR rifles silenced using home made silencers from plastic bottles were reported to have been used as sniper rifles for killing Russian soldiers in urban combat. Therefore almost every rifle can be used as a sniper rifle provided it is accurate enough for the purpose and hit at the range which you want to hit the target.