A point for discussion

[Oleg Volk]

Hopefully, I got the facts right. As far as I know, Indians today cannot carry pistols or rifles, even flintlocks.

[Sakobav]

Oleg

Not exactly -- if one has a valid license for Non Prohibted Bore ( NPB) gun and they can carry their guns CCW statewide or nationwide depending upon type of license. Indians license holders dont require a separate CCW permit.

If person is a VIP or with connections or ranking Govt officer they get their own posse of armed guards.

Getting gun license and then finding a good gun without burning down ones saving an uphill task all in all and only privileged few can pull this off..

Hope it helps

Best

[xl_target]

Getting gun license and then finding a good gun without burning down ones saving an uphill task all in all and only privileged few can pull this off..

That's the problem when you put too many restrictions on gun manufacture, gun importation, gun ownership, etc. Restricting gun imports and restricting competition in the manufacture of guns, allows the entities that manufacture guns to display a total lack of innovation and quality control. You end up with a substandard product that you cannot export and only people who have few other choices will buy those products. There are a lot of unwanted effects that are caused by protecting an industry. Most of those will impact the industry itself, ultimately rendering that industry almost ineffective. There is a lot to be said in favor of a free market system.

Allowing an entrenched bureaucracy to decide who gets a permit without laying down very specific guidelines for issue, lays the system wide open to corruption and an unacceptable arbitraryness. The end result seems to be that only the wealthy can afford to keep and bear arms. There being not enough police to protect everyone, the ones who that protection the most; the economically disadvanteged, are basically left to rot. This is not what one should see in a democracy.

The people who make these laws are the politicians who are supposed to represent their constituents. So how do you get your politicians to follow the will of their constituents? The traditional way to get around this, in a democracy, is to only elect politicians who will espouse your views and to work to remove from office those who do not. Many people will say that one persons vote will not make a difference. That might or might not be true. However, if you have an organization that has a very large number of members and those members vote to enforce the goals of that organization, it is quite possible to bend those politicians to the will of the members of that organization.

In the US the NRA identifies candidates, who are pro and anti (in relation to) the NRA's goals, as a guide to their members. Many of those members will follow the NRA guidelines to keep anti-gun candidates out of office. To change policy peacefully in a democracy this is one way to proceed.

[tingriman]

Getting gun license and then finding a good gun without burning down ones saving an uphill task all in all and only privileged few can pull this off..

That's the problem when you put too many restrictions on gun manufacture, gun importation, gun ownership, etc. Restricting gun imports and restricting competition in the manufacture of guns, allows the entities that manufacture guns to display a total lack of innovation and quality control. You end up with a substandard product that you cannot export and only people who have few other choices will buy those products. There are a lot of unwanted effects that are caused by protecting an industry. Most of those will impact the industry itself, ultimately rendering that industry almost ineffective. There is a lot to be said in favor of a free market system.

Allowing an entrenched bureaucracy to decide who gets a permit without laying down very specific guidelines for issue, lays the system wide open to corruption and an unacceptable arbitraryness. The end result seems to be that only the wealthy can afford to keep and bear arms. There being not enough police to protect everyone, the ones who that protection the most; the economically disadvanteged, are basically left to rot. This is not what one should see in a democracy.

The people who make these laws are the politicians who are supposed to represent their constituents. So how do you get your politicians to follow the will of their constituents? The traditional way to get around this, in a democracy, is to only elect politicians who will espouse your views and to work to remove from office those who do not. Many people will say that one persons vote will not make a difference. That might or might not be true. However, if you have an organization that has a very large number of members and those members vote to enforce the goals of that organization, it is quite possible to bend those politicians to the will of the members of that organization.

In the US the NRA identifies candidates, who are pro and anti (in relation to) the NRA's goals, as a guide to their members. Many of those members will follow the NRA guidelines to keep anti-gun candidates out of office. To change policy peacefully in a democracy this is one way to proceed.

Well said, xl-target

cheers,
tingriman

[hvj1]

Very good article, xl_target

[ravi.sharma]

Hi xl_target,

Thats a great article,

In the US the NRA identifies candidates, who are pro and anti (in relation to) the NRA's goals, as a guide to their members. Many of those members will follow the NRA guidelines to keep anti-gun candidates out of office. To change policy peacefully in a democracy this is one way to proceed.

I strongly beleive this is the only way to proceed in India. To the matter of fact,we even have NRAI, which is a dominating power in India for Shooting sport but as everyone is aware, they are busy working their way to eliminate the sports and sportsmen, the recent articles about NRAI cancelling major shooting events in the country, the way they behave with Shooting Icon of the Country ABHINAV BINDRA, clearly indicates that their love and contribution is eradicating the shooting sport in India. So the bottom line is NRAI wont ever stand up for RKBA cause (these are my views.)

Another option is to have a parrallel NGO, Association, trust or whatever sort of Club to support RKBA and shooting sport. The problem lies, where and with whom we start IFG has provided a great platform for likeminded people to discuss on various Fire Arms aspect and it remains only to discussion no implementation. For a very good example, please refer these 2 topics,

I had started this thread for the consent of IFG members to Support RKBA, out of 2600 odd members only 113 have voted, the thread was simply asking a consent. These are discussions.
http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7342

For implementation, Eternalme has started this thread, in which the only trouble members had to take is to file their grievance, which shall not take more then 30 mins, from ones busy schedule. the response only 20 members have filed their grievance. That means the members, who had voted yes in the earlier thread had no real intentions of supporting or we would have had at least 100 members filing their grievance, which is a good number to start with.
http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 3&start=90



Ravi.

[m24]

Oleg, I for one, totally agree with what is said in the poster.

Regards

[Amit357]

Hi Oleg,the problem in India is "the mindset of the authorities",we are still goverened by an ARMS Act which was implemented by the Brits who were ruling our country in 1892,there have been a cpl of ammendments of the same but they also were for more strict contol of the Arms Industry,the so called Captains of the Arms Industries dont want any changes cause there monopoly is at stake.the ppl who really need the license will try out a call from a politician and the needful is done.The point of trying to educate the political parties is not on the agenda because the priority of Arms is very low and other stuff like social security is more on the agenda.I guess when you have about 20% of the population below the poverty line Arms is not gonna be a national agenda.i wont know the exact figrure but i guess 0.025 % of the populace is into Arms so---------------------------,

[lionheartguru]

Hi Oleg,the problem in India is "the mindset of the authorities",we are still goverened by an ARMS Act which was implemented by the Brits who were ruling our country in 1892,there have been a cpl of ammendments of the same but they also were for more strict contol of the Arms Industry,the so called Captains of the Arms Industries dont want any changes cause there monopoly is at stake.the ppl who really need the license will try out a call from a politician and the

i agree this (only)

otherwise we MUST ask this question to ourselves ... what have you done to spread the message and educate people about this ?

Politicians are like the bed bug which sucks blood of human beings when in sleep ... or like leaches rather with a corrupt mindset , all they know is 5saal ki kursi jitna kama sakte ho kamalo ... forget about educating the politicians cause that will make no difference in pouring water in a upside-down glass... however i dont understand one thing ... on what grounds do you say that arms are NOT the priority or puttin in other words... what makes you prioritise on Social Security and HOW ???

i am an optimist dont take my words wrong, however please throw SOME LIGHT or SPECIFY ?

jai ho -freedom to speech

regards
guru