Posted on 12/03/2008 3:52:52 AM PST by marktwain
Banning guns is in the news. India practically bans guns, but that didn’t stop the horrific Muslim terrorist attacks this last week.
cut .....
Given that the terrorists smuggled their machine guns in with them, would anyone argue that India’s extremely strict gun licensing and artificially high prices for guns helped prevent the terrorist attacks?
victims watched as armed police cowered and didn’t fire back at the terrorists. A photographer at the scene described his frustration: “There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything. At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, ‘Shoot them, they’re sitting ducks!’ but they just didn’t shoot back.” Meanwhile, according to the hotel company’s chairman, P.R.S. Oberoi, security at “the hotel had metal detectors, but none of its security personnel carried weapons because of the difficulties in obtaining gun permits from the Indian government.”
India has extremely strict gun control laws, but who did it succeed in disarming? The terrorist attack showed how difficult it is to disarm serious terrorists. Strict licensing rules meant that it was the victims who obeyed the regulations, not the terrorists.
cut ..............
Conclusion When police can’t promise to protect law-abiding citizens such Plaxico Burress or the victims in India, why don’t we allow people the right to protect themselves? Unfortunately, bans do more to encourage crime than prevent it.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com ...
The following is India’s Arms Act:
http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms/india/stats/
INDIA
Governance: Federal republic
FIREARMS OWNERSHIP
Percentage of Households with Firearms: Not known
Estimated Number of Firearms: There are an estimated 40 million firearms in India, the majority of which are illicit. India accounts for the majority of small arms in South Asia, which has an estimated 75 million firearms (63 million of which are in civilian possession). (3)
Types of Legal Firearms:
Relevant law - Arms Act, 1959 & Arms Rules, 1962.
Prohibited Bores
Prohibited Bores - Arms Rules, 1962 - Schedule I - categories I(b) and I(c).
MHA - sole licensing authority - w.e.f 8.8.1987.
Applications to be made through the local licensing authorities/State/U.T. Governments.
Non Prohibited Bores
Non-Prohibited Bores - Arms Rules, 1962 - Schedule I - category III.
District Magistrate/Collector - licensing authority - license for the whole State or part thereof.
All India or part license - granted by the State/U.T. Governments only.
Renewing authority - DM/Collector.
Applications in Form-A - available in the Collectorates/DM’s offices.
Purposes of Lawful Firearms Ownership: Target-shooting, protection of person or property and private security. Firearm ownership is not permitted for the purposes of collecting or for hunting of game for sport or food. (2)
DOMESTIC FIREARM LEGISLATION (2)
India’s domestic policy on small arms and light weapons is regulated under the Arms Act (1959) and Arms Rules (1962). Due to the gravity of the problem of the proliferation of illicit SALW (Small Arms Light Weapons) and their misuse in terrorist activities, India has, since 1987, withdrawn substantially the license issuing powers of State and District authorities - who may not, now, issue licenses for prohibited bore weapons. Since 1987, their powers have been limited to issuing licences for non-prohibited bore weapons and these licenses are valid for a limited geographical area. Licenses for possession of prohibited bore weapons may only be issued, under special conditions, by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. (4)
Licensing Requirements: All firearm owners must be licensed. Applicants must provide information regarding:
their date of birth;
the availability of a safe place to store the firearm and ammunition;
the purpose for which they require a firearm;
any previous criminal record or prohibition to possess a firearm. However, if the report of the police officer is not sent within the prescribed time limit (3 months), the licensing authority may grant the licence. (2)
The applicant must present photographic identification and pay the prescribed fee for that firearm. (2) Under the existing law, all civilians are required to get their weapon /s inspected once a year by a competent authority - this is also recorded in the licence. (4)
The licensing authority may also refuse the licence for which he will record the reasons. The licensing authority may refuse to grant the licence if the applicant:
is of unsound mind;
is below the age of 16;
is deemed by the licensing authority to be a threat to the security of the public peace;
has been sentenced on conviction of any offence involving violence to imprisonment for any term at any time during a period of 5 years after the expiration of the sentence;
has been ordered to execute a bond for keeping the peace or for good behaviour at any time during the term of the bond. (2) (6)
The licensing authorities maintain list of firearm owners and the firearms held by them. No centralised database is maintained about firearm ownership and the identification of firearm. Every police station maintains a register of the licence holders in its jurisdiction, with the name of the licensee, description of weapon and its purpose. This list is updated from time to time. The licences are renewed after the prescribed period mentioned in the license or 3 years, whichever is earlier. Any police officer or other officer specially empowered on this behalf by the Central Government can demand the production of licence from the person carrying firearms or ammunition. The licensee is required to inform the licensing authorities of any change of place of residence. (2)
Registration Requirements: All small arms manufactured in India are uniquely marked by stamping to indicate the registration number, manufacturer/factory of origin and the year of manufacture on one or more of the critical components of a small arm - the body, the breech block and the barrel - during the final stages of production. This applies to arms that are produced for private/personal use and those which are used by armed forces, police or paramilitary forces. Allotment of these registration numbers for the armed forces/police and para-military forces is done centrally and a record is maintained of these registration numbers along with the indent. This provides for a double check on the records. A record of each and every weapon manufactured by the factory is kept along with the information on the concerned dealer. Arms which do not bear specified identification marks may not be sold or transferred. Further, any person found in possession of a weapon without identification marks would be presumed to have removed/obliterated the marks unless proven otherwise. (4)
Training Requirements: No training certification is required. However, some state governments do require such a certificate from professional bodies. (2)
Storage Requirements: The firearm must be stored in the safe place described by the owner in his or her licence application. There is no regulation regarding safety in domestic custody by the owner except the initial assurance of availability of safe place to keep arms in his application for grant of licence. (2)
Penalties: Penalties for violations of firearm laws include:
Imprisonment varying from six months to life with or without fine.
Minimum imprisonment with a fine (prescribed in most of the cases of contraventions).
The death penalty (prescribed when someone has used prohibited firearms and prohibited ammunition or has contravened licensing conditions in any act leading to death). (2)
For the following infractions, punishment is the payment of a fine in addition to imprisonment for no less than three years and no more than seven years:
manufacturing, selling, transferring, converting, repairing, testing or possessing any arms or ammunition contravened by the Arms Act ;
shortens the barrel of a firearm or converts an imitation firearm into a firearm that contravenes the Arms Act ;
brings into, or takes out of, India, any arms or ammunition of any class or description in contravention of the Act . (6)
Guess they’ll have to take the ‘’p-ss on the victims’’ approach, much like we do.
Related article of interest from last night posted here at FR:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2141959/posts
This morning, I heard New York’s mayor state (IRT the Plaxico Burress case) that because of their gun laws NYC was one of the “safest cities in the world.”
Safe for who? Not for law-abiding citizens. He must be saying safe for the criminals.
I think he meant safe for NYC's ruling elite.
Come to think of it, we are saying the same thing
The cops in India sound like the cops at Columbine.
The contrast in worldviews could not be more stark. One group has eliminated the only practical solution from consideration. Call it ideological blindness.
Preparing for the coming paradigm shift.
He was breaking the law, thus not "law abiding". When a law is wrong, you work to get it changed, you don't just ignore it.
‘The cops in India sound like the cops at Columbine’
Both were terror attacks, something many don’t seem to ‘get’ about Columbine. It wasn’t a school shooting, it was a well planned attack, carried out with precision.
‘How liberals and conservatives view guns...
The contrast in worldviews could not be more stark.’
Indeed it is stark...which is a big reason the GOP lost the Presidential race. The 2008 nominee couldn’t/wouldn’t make that case.
That is one approach.
Matty Lauer, on this mornings TOADY Show, teasing a piece on what to do if you're a victim of violent crime, said that fighting back was not a good option because "too many people have too many guns." Another gun-control success story.
Plaxico Burress is not my poster child for 2nd amendment rights, but there a times that a prudent person ignores an unjust law.
My problem with Plaxico Burress is that he was not acting as a prudent person at the time he shot himself. A prudent person -- who fears for his safety -- wouldn't be out in the middle of the night "clubbing" in an unsafe part of town.
That being said, New York firearms laws are tyranical, unconstitutional and should cause its citizens to throw their elected representatives from office if those elecetd representatives support those laws. But I don't live in New York and could never envision planning to live in New York.
And Virginia Tech
***But I don’t live in New York and could never envision planning to live in New York.***
You’re lucky
You were correct and prescient. The URL that you linked was made as useless as the police at the Mumbai/Bombay train station. Try it. See what happens. Somebody doesn't like it. I would like to know how to do that trick. I'll repost it from Lott's website. I'll link your thread. Lott's column makes too much sense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.