Letter to the MP. Entwined rights of Self-defense and Keeping Arms

Please read and circulate this. I'm including all details of the mail to enable others follow suit.
____________________________________________________________________

from Virendra Rathore
to mahesh.joshi@sansad.nic.in
cc chidambaram@sansad.nic.in,
advanilk@sansad.nic.in, manmohan@sansad.nic.in, sushmaswaraj@gmail.com,
sushmaswaraj@hotmail.com, ajaitley@sansad.nic.in, jaswant@sansad.nic.in,
info@libertyindia.org, info@rajasthanpatrika.com, info@timesnow.tv, editor@the-week.com, mail@indiatvnews.com, editor@deccanmail.com,
db.dutta@deccanherald.co.in, vp@deccanherald.co.in, editoronline@dnaindia.net, thehindu@vsnl.com,
editor@expressindia.com, RATNAM@intoday.com, alok.mehta@naidunia.com, news@rediff.co.in, mail@newstodaynet.com, submissions@outlookindia.com,
ssa@sansad.nic.in, naveen.jindal@sansad.nic.in, s.raut@sansad.nic.in, f.sardinha@sansad.nic.in, manish.tewari@hotmail.com,
shahnawaz@sansad.nic.in, rakesh.singh@sansad.nic.in, ttedit@abpmail.com, ttkhand@abpmail.com, thestatesman@vsnl.com,
feedback@hindustantimes.com, editoped@asianage.com, mumbaidesk@asianage.com, delhidesk@asianage.com, bangaloredesk@asianage.com,
kolkatadesk@asianage.com, bhoomi@deccanmail.com, abmail@deccanmail.com, lkbatra@rediffmail.com, ashish.bagga@intoday.com,
letters@hindustantimes.com, neelu.bt@intoday.com, chirag.patnaik@intoday.com, editor@tehelka.com, letters@thehindu.co.in,
photo.itp@intoday.com, tb.kaveri@intoday.com, Nidhi.mehta@intoday.com, malcolm.mistry@intoday.com, payal.puri@intoday.com,
deepikaarwind@gmail.com, diya.banerjee@timesgroup.com, shoma@tehelka.com, sunandadr@yahoo.co.in, express@expressindia.com,
dwaipayan.ghosh@timesgroup.com, sg@expressindia.com, htreporters@hindustantimes.com, durgesh.jha@timesgroup.com, rahul.karmakar@hindustantimes.com,
arun.kumar@ians.in, dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com, TUSHA@tehelka.com, peer.mushtaq@hindustantimes.com, ambika.pandit@timesgroup.com,
stanly.pinto@timesgroup.com, satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com, sudeshna.s@ians.in, toireporter@timesgroup.com, president@gunowners.in,
vp@gunowners.in, secgen@gunowners.in
date Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 2:26 PM

To,
Dr. Mahesh Joshi,
Hon'ble Member of Parliament – India
307, Rajasthan House,
Prithviraj Road,
New Delhi


Subject: A citizen's objections to the proposed Arms Act amendment bill 2010


Respected Sir,

As you are aware, the Arms Act amendment bill has been circulated in the parliament on Friday - August 20th, 2010.

We wish to bring it to your kind notice that, in the guise of moving a minor amendment to the Arms Act, ostensibly to make police verification mandatory, the Ministry of Home Affairs has quietly moved to change other important aspects of the the law with the goal of undermining every citizen's legal right to keep and bear arms. Even though the Arms Act does not allow it to do so, the Ministry has formulated an "Arms Policy" which has in effect changed the law and how it is implemented, without seeking parliamentary approval or following proper procedures. The Ministry has sent a circular to all State/ UT Home Deptt.'s ordering that this new policy be followed strictly with immediate effect.

1) It is IMPORTANT to NOTE that while the Arms Act gives the Central Govt. the power to make rules, which MUST then be approved by parliament within a stipulated time period - there is NO provision for making policy without parliamentary approval. Why is it that the Ministry has not made the changes it seeks to make a part of this Amendment to the Arms Act? Is it because the Ministry fears that the parliament would not approve the changes it wishes to make and so an attempt to bypass parliament is being made?

2) Please refer to the point no. 3 under STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS of the Arms Amendment Bill circulated in the parliament. The statement seems to imply that:
(a) That all firearms are evil
(b) That firearm owners are prone to violence
(c) That the state machinery is sufficiently able to protect the life & property of all citizens at all places all times and that citizenry have no need to acquire arms to be able to defend themselves in the hour of need.
(d) That citizens do not have an inalienable right to protect their life & property.
(e) It completely ignores and negates the reasons & objects of the Arms Act 1959 and Constitutionally guaranteed fundamental right of self defense.
The very basis of the new Arms Policy is this flawed assumption that “The proliferation of arms, whether licensed or illegal, vitiates the ‘Law and Order’ situation” – what is not made clear is how the Ministry has arrived at this conclusion. In fact the Ministry has admitted in parliament that it has conducted no study/ assessment that could link license/illegal firearms to rise in crime rate. The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that this policy/Amendment has been rushed into based merely on opinion and conjecture. Such statements are an insult to the lacs of honest law-abiding citizens who keep & bear arms responsibly, by equating them to common criminals.

3) The new Arms Policy requires a citizen to prove grave & imminent threat to life prior to grant of arms license. This is an attempt to illegally amend the relevant Sections of the Arms Act which clearly outline the conditions under which arms license applications are to be approved or denied. Also, proving grave & imminent threat is impossible for an ordinary citizen as random acts of violence against a civilian cannot be foreseen. On top of that, the State or its agencies cannot possibly protect entire citizenry at all places - all times. The ultimate accountability to individual self protection is on himself/herself. That is practically unachievable without the means of self defense provided in a rational framework of laws.
Sir, this amendment will lead to large scale corruption as well as denying honest middle class citizens the only means with which to protect themselves. This despite the Arms Act 1959 stating as one of it's primary objectives to make it easier for law abiding citizens to own arms for self-defence & sport. The arms license application criteria should be objective and any citizen who is not disqualified should be automatically approved. This is the only way to ensure the process is free of fear or favour. Without the , To be practiced effectively by the citizenry, the constitutional right of self-defense, has to be supported by the right to keep and bear arms.

4) The new Arms Policy directly changes the existing Arms Rules 1962, without following proper procedure – (a) by changing the relevant authority for issuing All India Validity arms licenses, which was previously the State Govt. and has now for all (non VIP) cases been made the MHA, Govt. of India. (b) by introducing a new class system within the law, by allowing State Govt.'s to continue to issue All India Validity arms licenses ONLY for a select ruling elite. Besides everything else, this sort of discriminatory policy is against the very spirit of the Arms Act as well as the Indian Constitution.

There is a need to go into the proper depth of causes or solutions this new Amendment to the Arms Act and Arms Policy aim to address. We strongly request that the proposed Arms Amendment Bill and the Ministry's Arms Policy be immediately referred to the Home Committee for detailed study, comments and suggestions.

Thank you

Yours Sincerely
Virendra S Rathore
Email - virendra.jaipur@gmail.com