agrippedsoul

Pakistani cyber propaganda exposed. Netizens beware !!

2011-08-26T10:37:00.000-07:00

For last week or so the Defence Forum of India and Indian political forum have been under constant DDoS (distributed denial of service) attacks from the Pakistani handlers. These are sophisticated attacks per their persistently well backed plans and they continue even as I'm writing this blog.
Apart from the usually over friendly neighbors unequaled jealousy, the attacks were a result of their propaganda being conveniently exposed by members of Defence Forum of India, Indian political forum and Bharat Rakshak forum.
This is very much like the 'Fai' case, Indians thronging to a fake and propagandist forum. Here I'm collating whatever has been found till now, only to warn the fellow netizens not to fall in their trap.
(For detailed discussions, visit http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6081 )
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a Pakistani run defence forum under the url - http://www.indiandefence.kom/ (replace k with c in .kom just FYI, don't click on it) masquerading as an Indian defence site. Please be aware of it. This is very much like 'Fai' case, Indians thronging to a fake forum.
Indians must avoid visiting those sites as not only serve Pakistani propaganda but also the Ad revenue generated due to Indian posting there, goes straight... to the Pakistani handlers who use it for we know what ...
Every new eyeball that these fake forums catch will add strength to their propaganda (more popularity, precedence at search results and thus a chain reaction).

See the caption wordings, designing and structure for Pakistan Defence forum and fake Indian defence forum. Ditto.
http://img808.imageshack.us/img808/2944/picture2bn.png
http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/2465/picture1uol.png

Watch the phone number given at both sites:
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/6012/picture3lq.png
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/162/picture4tt.png

Watch both the site's Google Adsense client Id used to show online ads which fetches revenue for its clients:
http://i55.tinypic.com/1231k4z.jpg
http://i56.tinypic.com/2lulcg.jpg

Indiandefence, Australiadefence, Iraniandefence, Turkeydefence
are all Pakistani (defence.paki) owned facades. These sites are designed to act as forums to attract members from the above countries, attract traffic and from where all the proceeds, donations, ad revenue goes into Pakistani hands. This money is than used to attack other Indian forums to destabilize them by impeding smooth operations of these forums. It also acts as a double whammy as now you have Pakistanis controlling the defence forums of these nations which now freely allows them to spew propaganda however they see fit, and censuring any items which they deem damaging Pakistani interests.
Just one look at the background and the servers they operate on unmasks them out:
defence.paki:
Domain Name: defence.pk
Registrant Name:
Ahsan Farooqui
Contact Person:
Ahsan Farooqui
Address:
Indianapolis
Create Date: 2006-12-17
Expire Date: 2012-12-17
Agent Organization:
PakHost Web Services 2293
Technical Contact
PakHost Web Services
Technical Support
Lahore, Punjab 54000
Billing Contact None Specified (or deleted)
Nameservers
NS1.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM
NS2.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM

TurkeyDefence:
Registrant: Tariq Khan
Registered through: FXDomains
Domain Name: TURKEYDEFENCE.COM
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM
NS2.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM

AustraliaDefence:
Registrant: Tariq Khan
Registered through: FXDomains
Domain Name: AUSTRALIADEFENCE.COM
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM
NS2.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM

IranianDefence:
Registrant: Tariq Khan
Registered through: FXDomains
Domain Name: IRANIANDEFENCE.COM
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM
NS2.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM

and finally the Paki owned IndianDefence:
Registrant:Sedo
Registered through: FXDomains
Domain Name: INDIANDEFENCE.COM
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM
NS2.WORLDDEFENCENETWORK.COM

Note how the facade is carefully put up by using "Sedo" to register the paki owned Indian Defence; but they fail to mask the servers. All these sites run off the same servers, and all are facades put up by pakistani handlers.
Please be careful and do not visit/post at these fake bloated forums or not only they'll get revenue for their evil net vigilante but your personal information that you share inadvertently (even in PMs) would fall in wrong hands.

Regards
Virendra

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

2010-08-24T02:04:00.000-07:00

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

Gun Control And Self-Defense In Modern India

2010-08-19T04:24:00.000-07:00

"I live in India and I am a proud firearm owner -- but I am the exception not the norm, an odd situation in a country with a proud martial heritage and a long history of firearm innovation. This is not because the people of India are averse to gun ownership, but instead due to Draconian anti-gun legislation going back to colonial times."
-- http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms/india

To trace the roots of India's anti-gun legislation we need to step back to the latter half of the 19th century. The British had recently fought off a major Indian rebellion (the mutiny of 1857) and were busy putting in place measures to ensure that the events of 1857 were never repeated. These measures included a major restructuring of administration and the colonial British Indian Army along with improvements in communications and transportation. Meanwhile the Indian masses were systematically being disarmed and the means of local firearm production destroyed, to ensure that they (the Indian masses) would never again have the means to rise in rebellion against their colonial masters. Towards this end the colonial government, under Lord Lytton as Viceroy (1874 -1880), brought into existence the Indian Arms Act, 1878 (11 of 1878); an act which, exempted Europeans and ensured that no Indian could possess a weapon of any description unless the British masters considered him a "loyal" subject of the British Empire.

An example of British thinking in colonial times:

"No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a free man and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion." --James Burgh

And thoughts (on this subject) of the man who wanted to rule the world:

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty." -- Adolf Hitler

The leaders of our freedom struggle recognized this, even Gandhi the foremost practitioner of passive resistance and non-violence had this to say about the British policy of gun-control in India:
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Gandhi, An Autobiography_, page 446

Post Independence :-

India became independent in 1947, but it still took 12 years and in 1959 the British era Indian Arms Act, 1878 (11 of 1878.) was finally consigned to history and a new act, the Arms Act, 1959 was enacted. This was later supplemented by the Arms Rules, 1962. Unfortunately this new legislation was also formulated based on the Indian Government's innate distrust on its own citizens. Though somewhat better than the British act, this legislation gave vast arbitrary powers to the "Licensing Authorities", in effect ensuring that it is often difficult and sometimes impossible for an ordinary law abiding Indian citizen to procure an arms license.

"A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie." -- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

Also the policy of throttling private arms manufacturing was continued even after independence. Limits were placed on the quantity and type of arms that could be produced by private manufacturers -- ensuring that the industry could never hope to be globally competitive and was instead consigned to producing cheap shotguns, of mostly indifferent quality, in small quantities. A citizen wishing to purchase a decent firearm depended solely on imports, which were a bit more expensive but vastly superior in quality.

More Recently :-

This changed towards the mid to late 1980s, when the Government, citing domestic insurgency as the reason, put a complete stop to all small arms imports. The fact that there is no documented evidence of any terrorists ever having used licensed weapons to commit an act of terror on Indian soil seems to be of no consequence to our Government. The prices of (legal & licensed) imported weapons have been on an upward spiral ever since -- beating the share market and gold in terms of pure return on investment. Even the shoddy domestically produced guns suddenly seem to have found a market. Also since the Government now had a near monopoly on (even half-way decent) arms & ammunition for the civilian market, they started turning the screws by pricing their crude public sector products (ammunition, rifles, shotguns & small quantities of handguns) at ridiculously high rates -- products that frankly, given a choice no one would ever purchase.

"That rifle on the wall of the laborer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -- George Orwell, the author of Animal Farm and 1984, himself a socialist

Why Citizens Need to be Armed :-

Curtailing gun ownership, to curb violent crime, through denying licenses or making legal arms & ammunition ridiculously expensive is based on flawed reasoning. The fact is that licensed firearms are found to be used in a statistically insignificant number of violent crimes, while contribution of motorcycles & cars are far more dangerous. The certainty that a potential victim is unarmed, is an encouragement to the armed criminals. Less guns, more crime. Most violent crimes involving firearms are committed using untraceable illegal guns from black markets. Terrorists or the mafia are not going to be deterred by gun-control laws, they will be willing and able to procure arms of their choice and use them to commit crimes irrespective of any laws. Ironically in India it is cheaper (by several times) to buy the same gun in the black market than it is to buy it legally!

"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You'll pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins." -- Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, Mafia hit man

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, just like laws, discourage and keep the invader the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike. But since some crooks will not, others dare not lay theirs aside.... Horrid mischief would ensue were half of the world deprived of the use of them...." -- Thomas Paine, Thoughts on Defensive War in 1775

And from the world's gentlest human being :-

"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -- The Dalai Lama, speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate

It is, of course, no coincidence that the right to have guns is one of the earlier freedoms outlined in U.S.A.'s Bill of Rights. Without guns in the hands of the people, all the other freedoms are easily negated by the State. If you disagree with that statement, ask yourself if the Nazis could have gassed millions of Jews, had the Jews been armed with rifles and pistols -- there weren't enough German SS troops to do the job. Lest we forget, in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1944, a couple of hundred Jews armed with rifles and homemade explosive devices held off two fully-equipped German divisions (actually about 8,000 men) for nearly two months.

Closer home, take the case of the Godhra carnage and the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. Would wanton mobs have slaughtered so many innocent people with such disregard to consequences if their potential victims had been armed and ready to defend themselves? A serious consideration should be given to an armed civilian population as a solution to religious and racial riots as well as other crimes. Since all criminals are instinctively driven by their self-preservation even after their deeds; allowing legal ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens would act as a serious deterrent to them. This will make sure that if even the Govt. fails to do its duty to protect the life and liberty of its citizens (as it has so often done in India's recently), citizens would still be able to protect themselves. I'll take some potential objections and try to answer them:
Arguments & Counter-Arguments

Q1. Won't legal owners of arms use the firearms to kill and murder others?
Ans. When a man holds a rifle, he becomes almost godlike: suddenly, he has the ability to deal death and injury to another over a considerable distance -- to send, as it were, a thunderbolt of Zeus. For some men, unquestionably, this power is going to be abused, just as some men will always drive a fast car at reckless speeds. For the vast majority of men, however, this power produces precisely the opposite effect: they are humbled by the power they hold, and they become more responsible in its use. That is why, in a nation like the United States with well over seventy million gun owners, only a tiny fraction, less than half a tenth of one percent, use a gun to commit a crime each year. Official statistics suggest that in India also, of all the crimes involving fire-arms, the vast majority are done by guns obtained illegally at black market. Also since the licensed firearms would be registered with the Govt. along with the owners address, the type of the firearm, its serial number etc. Those (the criminals) who want to commit crimes will not and DO NOT bother to purchase firearms legally and register them. They can and do buy them from the black market (at a fraction of the cost of a legal firearm, I might add). Legal ownership will allow law abiding citizens to protect their and others life and property.

Q2. Won't there be a free for all during riots?
Ans. By definition riots ARE free for all. However, very few people will participate in riots knowing that a large number of law abiding citizens own firearms in the area. This will actually prevent riots. Riots are mostly started by miscreants (unscrupulous politicians?) who want to benefit from the chaos of riots. However, the risk (loss of life or limb) for the miscreant in starting and/ or participating in such riots, when a large number of the general civilian population owns legal firearms, is significant. Therefore in most cases miscreants will not dare to start riots in the first place.

Q3.What about domestic violence and firearms?
Ans. Domestic violence has nothing to do with firearm ownership. Firearms are merely a tool -- not the cause of violence, to quote a famous NRA slogan "Guns don't kill people, people kill people". Women in India face domestic violence even today with very limited legal gun ownership. If anything, legal firearms in the hands of women might help even the odds -- by removing the physical weakness of women from the equation.

Q4. What about accidents?
Ans. More people in India get killed in automobile accidents than firearm accidents. In countries where gun ownership rates are high like the United States (which has a firearm to population ratio of approx 96:100, i.e., almost 1 firearm for every man woman & child), Switzerland, New Zealand etc. several times more people die in road accidents than from firearm accidents. Firearm accidents can be further minimized by making a gun-safety course mandatory before a permit is issued -- so long as this is not used as another excuse to delay or deny permits.

Q5. What about firearm assisted suicides?
Ans. A suicidal person has many different available ways to end his/ her life. Firearms are just another means for him/ her. Statistically suicide rates have little correlation with firearm ownership patterns. Many countries with strict anti-gun legislation have high suicide rates and vice versa.

Q6. Are there any working systems and what are the results?
Ans. Yes, for example in U.S.A., Switzerland, New Zealand. One must note here that different states in US have different degrees of gun ownership and firearm restrictions. Interestingly the states with more restrictions on gun ownerships have a higher crime rate than those that are less restrictive.

Q7. If we take things in our hands, then what are the cops and army for?
Ans. One cannot delegate the right and responsibility of self protection to others. The State and all of its law enforcement agencies are an organized deterrence to prevent organized crime. What about the random acts of violence an innocent citizen could face anytime anywhere in this country? The buck stops at you. It is not legally/logically binding on the government to protect you as an individual at all times all places. Conclusively, if they fail to protect you, your family or property against any such crime, you cannot sue them by holding responsible for it
Talking of law, Indian Constitution requires the citizenry to ensure law enforcement when situation mandates. That is what sections 96 to 106 IPC want them to do in self defense. A citizen's legally obtained fire-arms are for that purpose.
I do not condone violence or a violent solution to problems, but there can be no justification for not letting people be prepared to defend their own and their families' lives and property. When one is surrounded by mobs bent on setting you on fire and the like, in a country where policing is non-existent, owning firearms by people will have a great deterrent effect on mobs. Of course, if I could sue the police for not giving me complete protection, then I might feel differently (but don't count on it). But as I said, by law, the State cannot be at fault for not protecting its citizens. -- so if the cops take 25 minutes (or several hours) to respond to your call, and in those 25 minutes a criminal kicks open your door, shoots you and your wife, rapes your 11-year-old daughter, and beats your baby to death, that's just tough luck. What about incidents like 1984 and Godhra, where the local administration and police wilfully neglected their duty to protect the citizens of this country?

Please also read the entertaining "Parable of the Sheep" for an explanation so simple that even a child can understand it.

As the Indian Law stands today a citizen of this country cannot even own a stick without inviting a penalty of 7 years in prison. We live in a country where we have still not cast off the yoke of antiquated laws made by our colonial masters to keep us oppressed and at the mercy of the government, notwithstanding the lofty vision of the first page of our constitution.

Harping on the few who unfortunately misuse firearms unfairly ignores those millions of us spread all over the world who own and use them responsibly. Dreaming romantically about a world where everything has been made perfectly safe "for the children" is just that, dreaming. I'd like to live and live safe-sound till that wonderful dream comes true. I've tried visualizing world peace until I'm about ready to have an out of body experience, but as soon as I open my eyes, they're bombing civilians in the North East or gunning down innocents in Kashmir. Welcome to the real world.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."-- George Mason

Right of self-defense, The law redefined :-

In a recent decision the Supreme Court has redefined the law relating to right of self-defense. Traditionally seen as a mitigating factor to criminal liability the Apex Court has gone ahead by giving a re-look and lay down a ten-point guideline for the citizens of this country to exercise their right of self-defense. Closely examining the earlier decisions on the point, the Apex Court in no uncertain terms went on to declare that "A person who is in imminent and reasonable danger of losing his life or limb may in exercise of self defense inflict any harm even extending to death on his assailant either when the assault is attempted or directly threatened."

The Court declared the legal position as under;

1. Self-preservation is the basic human instinct and is duly recognized by the criminal jurisprudence of all civilized countries. All free, democratic and civilized countries recognize the right of private defense within certain reasonable limits.
2. The right of private defense is available only to one who is suddenly confronted with the necessity of averting an impending danger and not of self-creation.
3. A mere reasonable apprehension is enough to put the right of self defense into operation. In other words, it is not necessary that there should be an actual commission of the offense in order to give rise to the right of private defense. It is enough if the accused apprehended that such an offense is contemplated and it is likely to be committed if the right of private defense is not exercised.
4. The right of private defense commences as soon as a reasonable apprehension arises and it is co-terminus with the duration of such apprehension.
5. It is unrealistic to expect a person under assault to modulate his defense step by step with any arithmetical exactitude.
6. In private defense the force used by the accused ought not to be wholly disproportionate or much greater than necessary for protection of the person or property.
7. It is well settled that even if the accused does not plead self-defense, it is open to consider such a plea if the same arises from the material on record.
8. The accused need not prove the existence of the right of private defense beyond reasonable doubt.
9. The Indian Penal Code confers the right of private defense only when that unlawful or wrongful act is an offense.
10. A person who is in imminent and reasonable danger of losing his life or limb may in exercise of self defense inflict any harm even extending to death on his assailant either when the assault is attempted or directly threatened.

Source references :
Abhijeet Singh - http://www.abhijeetsingh.com/arms
Aman - http://indiansforguns.com/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=4236
Courtesy :
IFG - http://www.IndiansforGuns.com
NAGRI - http://www.gunowners.in (National Association for Gun Rights India)

A citizen's open letter to the Member of Parliament - India

2010-07-28T04:37:00.000-07:00

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,

I am a native of pink city, Jaipur. As you are my representative in the parliament of India, I am writing to you with immense concerns over some recent developments.

Late last year the Ministry of Home Affairs of India (MHA) began the process of amending the currently in-force Arms Act.

MHA published the draft of this new policy on December 21st / 22nd 2009.

Further to the process, the MHA, through an executive order addressed to the Home Secretaries of all States/ UTs, directed them to begin implementing the new Arms Policy for Individuals.

This order dated March 31, 2010 was almost exact replica of the draft published in Dec 2009.
Please see the policy document attached.

The cabinet has now approved the Arms Act (Amendment) Bill 2010 and the government is preparing to table it in the coming monsoon session of parliament.

Sir, I would like to draw your attention to the way all this has happened:-

A. The draft of policy was published for public feedback without a due notice in any widely circulated national news daily.

B. The draft was published only in English while majority of the population still uses/understands only Hindi and/or other regional languages such as Assamese, Marathi, Kannada and Gujrati etc.

C. The publishing gave very less time for the public to send their feedback; moreover its timing was even alarming - when maximum civilian population was on a holiday.

D. Many of us posted our draft objections to the ministry and copied the same to:
The office of the Hon'able Home Minister – For review and action
The office of the Hon'able Prime Minister of India – For information (Hard copy)
The office of the Hon'able Chairperson of the National Advisory Council – For information
The office of the Hon'able Leader of the Opposition (Lok Sabha) – For information
The office of the Hon'able Leader of the Opposition (Rajya Sabha) – For information
Various Members of Parliament & other concerned parties – For information.
Enclosed herewith is a copy of the draft objections that I had sent to the ministry within the stipulated time period of feedback. I had also raised grievance against the MHA with regards to the matter (Grievance no. MINHA/E/2010/00472)

However, the executive form of this policy was almost completely unchanged from the draft version. There were absolutely no changes made with respect to the numerous feedback/objections raised.

E. Even more critical is that the new policy has changed specific fundamental guidelines of the Arms Act 1959 and thereby contravened the constitution itself.

Yet the approval from cabinet and executive order of immediate effect released by the ministry have openly bye-passed the parliament and its authority. It is unmistakably well known that any changes to the Arms Act or even Arms Rules would first have to be tabled in front of the parliament, before they could be implemented at all. Not to mention the MHA's hasty reckless execution of the motions in this process without any consideration of an ordinary citizen's concerns. When this executive order was was issued - March 31, 2010 the parliament was very much in session, yet it was kept in dark. It devoids us of any chances to prevent the ministry from making disastrous mistakes on an issue of individual as well as public importance in a nation counting more than a billion's citizenry. This compels one to doubt the intentions of the ministry which probably was just running through the motions, literally sneaking past under the carpet.

All this, to say the least Sir, is uncalled for and draconian.

I would now specifically enumerate the various concerns that I have over this policy :-

1) (a) Why a directive was issued ordering State/ UT Home Departments to immediately implement the so called new arms policy, WITHOUT placing before the parliament the required amendments to the Arms Act and Arms Rules? What was the urgency?

(b)Does the ministry have credible evidence that Arms License Holders were an immediate threat to the nation that such a strict policy should be immediately implemented in direct contraventions of all norms and bypassing the required procedures? If so, what is this credible evidence?

(d) Over the past 5 years in what percentage of total (violent crime) cases were licensed arms used? What percentage were unlicensed Arms?

2) The Ministry contends that Licensing Authorities misuse the provisions under Section 13(2A) of the Arms Act, to issue Licenses without proper verification. (a) In the past 5 years how many such cases were detected, wherein the Licensing Authority was found to have misused the above provisions.

(b) In such cases what action was taken against the relevant Licensing Authorities?

(d) Does the ministry contend that the police is more honest than the executive branch?

3) The above amendment states that the maximum time allowable for police verification be set at 60 days. (a) Is it not correct that in the Ministry's directive to all State/ UT Home Deptt's (dated 31st March 2010) this timeline was set at 45 days?

(b) Why 60 days or even 45 days?

(c) In today's day and age, it should not take more than 1 or 2 days for the relevant police deptt. to trace out the antecedents of the applicant. Even if one allows for a heavy workload, this should not be more than 1 week or maybe a maximum of 10 days!

4) Furthermore, the amendment is silent on WHAT ACTION will be TAKEN AGAINST police department's that do not send in the police verification report within the stipulated time period.

(a) Will the officer concerned be suspended for dereliction of duty?

(b) Will it be entered into his Confidential Report/ service record?

(d) In the absence of clear cut and strong punitive action, it can be safely assumed that the concerned officer can delay the report indefinitely, in effect denying a license through the process of infinite delay! (e) In such cases what remedy would the license applicant have?

5) The Ministry wishes to implement a new policy wherein "licenses may be considered from persons who may face or perceive grave & imminent threat to their lives, for which the licensing authority will obtain an assessment of the threat faced by the persons from the police authorities."

(a) Is this not in direct contravention of the objectives for which Arms Act was enacted by parliament in 1959, wherein one of the objectives of the Act was outlined as - "that weapons for self defence are available for all citizens under license unless their antecedents or propensities do not disentitle them for the privilege; and that firearms required for training purposes and ordinary civilian use are made more easily available on permits"?

(b) Furthermore, how are citizens to prove grave & imminent threat?

(d) What are the statistics for violent crime over the last 50 years?

(e) Is violent crime not on an upward spiral?

(f) Do citizens not justifiably arm themselves to protect themselves against random acts of violence?

(g) Is a law abiding citizen, with no previous history of violent crime not capable of deciding for himself whether or not he/ she feels the need to take measures to protect himself/ herself?

6) Even 60 years after independence, why are we continuing with the irrational policy of restricting civilian purchase of certain calibers?

(a) What is the justification?

(b) Why does the Indian state need to feel threatened from it's own citizens?

(d) Does the ministry have any clear and logical justifications for continuing these restrictions?

(e) Anyone who knows anything about guns can see that these calibers possess no magical properties in terms of extra power etc., so why restrict their civilian ownership?

(f) Would it in fact not help serve the interests of the majority if their ownership was in fact encouraged, so that in times of need the government could call the owners of these firearms to serve the nation and/ or requisition their stores for government use?

(g) Would this also not allow the government to more easily sell surplus stores to civilian market and use the money thus earned towards modernizing the arms in use by the military/ police forces?

7) In the Ministry's directive to all State/ UT Home Deptt's (dated 31st March 2010), it has been stated that the Licensing Authority may call for ANY document which it may consider necessary to verify the applicants bonafides.

(a) Is this definition not too open ended?

(b) What if (for example) a particular Licensing Authority asks me for my Great Grandmother's birth certificate and refuses to proceed without it?

(c) As per the directive, the Licensing Authority would be well within his/ her rights to do so, but would it be a sensible request?

(d) It should be made amply clear what documents are required AND WHY, so that there is no scope for mischief in the future.

8) In the matter of ammunition quotas, it should be referred to an expert committee to determine exactly how many rounds of ammunition a person needs to shoot EVERY YEAR out of each firearm so as to attain a basic level of proficiency and Maintain that level of proficiency.

(a) Only after evaluating the above and keeping into consideration every license holder's need to store an appropriate amount of reserve ammunition, should a BASIC MINIMUM ammunition quota be arrived at.

(b) For additional quotas the relevant authority should be the LOCAL licensing authority who is at the ground level and in a better position to judge the merits of each case.

(c) Furthermore over centralizing such mundane requests puts needless burden on average ordinary citizens, without providing any demonstrable benefits.

9) The whole concept of mandatory reporting of use of ammunition (by arms license holders) is absolutely ludicrous! The Ministry expects license holders to maintain records of each round of ammunition, where it was used, what date, what purpose, no. of bullets fired etc. This is both practically infeasible as well as a needless burden on the arms licensee without providing any demonstrable benefits.

(a) What exactly does the Ministry seek to achieve through this?

(b) The central police forces, for whom the ministry is directly responsible, have been found to be pilfering and selling arms & ammunition in the black market. They are required to maintain full accounts of government issued ammunition, but it still finds it's way to the black market!

(c) It may be suggested that the Ministry first concentrate it's effort on ensuring that it's own ammunition is not sold in the black market, BEFORE it even considers imposing an ill thought out and ludicrous regime on honest law abiding gun owners.

10) In the Ministry's directive to all State/ UT Home Deptt's (dated 31st March 2010), a new class system has been created. All India licenses will only be issued to (i) Sitting Union Ministers/ MPs (ii) Personnel of Military/ Paramilitary (iii) Officers of All India Services (iv) Officers with a liability to serve anywhere in India (v) sports persons. In essence (barring the sports persons), the Ministry seeks to create an elite super class out of the very people whose sworn duty it is to serve the citizens of this nation!

(a) So while the citizens they serve are barred from carrying their means of self defense while exercising their constitutional right to freedom of movement, those who are sworn to serve them shall have no such problems?

(b) To top it all, many of the classes named above are eligible for security guards once again provided at the tax payer’s expense. Has this irony completely escaped those that have drafted this document?

(c) Everyone else (besides those named above) can apply for an All India license, but it will be granted only in special cases and that too by the Ministry of Home Affairs!! Has the Ministry given up all other tasks to now concentrate it's time & energies purely on Arms Licensing issues? One would have thought that more pressing matters would occupy their minds.

(d) May it be pointed out that the above line of application is what is followed currently for the issuance of what are commonly referred to as Prohibited Bore Arms Licenses. It should also be pointed out that this is an extremely difficult process and except for those with very high connections it is impossible to get such a license. It seems that the Ministry now seeks to make the All India License similarly difficult/ impossible to acquire!

(e) Over the past 5 years EXACTLY HOW MANY holders of All India validity Arms License were found to be engaged in violent crime across their state borders?

11) If citizens’ freedoms are being curtailed, it is incumbent upon the Ministry to justify and justify again - every little thing! The FREEDOMS of our citizens are not to be taken lightly by anyone, let us not forget much blood has been shed and many lives destroyed for us to acquire these very freedoms.

In the words of the great Mahatma Gandhi - "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

Are we worse than our erstwhile colonial masters when it comes to the freedoms we offer our own citizens?

Sir, the constitution of India, law of this land nowhere specifies that I as an individual citizen can expect, obligate and completely depend upon the state or any of its agencies to protect me, my family and my hard-earned property at all times and every place.

My protection, my self defense is not only MY responsibility but also my legal and fundamental right; confirmed by the constitution of India. I cannot do that if I'm being devoid of the very means to do so.

This disturbing scenario screams out loud that the government is the master, not the servant, of the people in this democracy.

Sir, I urge and request you with all my honesty, to raise these questions and explain in the parliament, to the government that it has to trust the law abiding tax-paying citizenry like us with the means of self defense and immunity of life, liberty and dignity; otherwise the government will lose its own worth of trust it has from us.

Attachments:
1. New Arms and Ammunition policy - http://mha.nic.in/pdfs/AaAPolicyInd-080410.pdf
2. Objections to the draft policy - http://www.indiansforguns.com/draft_objections.pdf

Thank you

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

Talking of religion

2010-06-12T18:40:00.000-07:00

Couldn't sleep the whole night. Went to YouTube and finally found something to interest me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3jRPDb2LXQ&feature=related
and many others ...

Of the various interpretations by Dr. Zakir Naik (Islamic preacher whose videos are spread over YouTube), I agree with many and disagree as well.
What I like is that he tries to be reasonable and provide logic.
I believe faith and logic have their own place but qualifying the religious thoughts or theories with correct logic makes it easier for a materially context-ed society like us to understand them better. Some might be surprised that I learned how to perceive this world, from the movie series of Matrix.
Moving forward, for three of his quotes I have reservations:
A: He says that Quran had prior knowledge of the big bang explosion.
Firstly, no one knows what exactly the original holy texts looked like and what they taught. In the subsequent centuries there has been a lot of twisting, manipulation and misinterpretation of religious texts in almost all religions including Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. This is a core scientific matter. I'm having hard time believing this. I even don't second the similar claim in Hinduism about having already discovered many great theories of today thousands of years back. The preachers today however do not hesitate to infuse these to maintain morale/pride of followers in the respective religions.
Secondly, these aren't the fundamentals so I would say that it is up to the individual to decide what to take and what not in these gray areas.

B: Someone hurled at him that Islam is dividing people into Momins and Kafirs. Thus creating hatred.
Most understand it as Muslims and non-Muslims. However it means one who believes in God and one who does not believe. I don't know what is taught by the prominent Islamic preachers on this one.
While I expected a resolving reply on that question he just counter argued by stating even Hinduism has divided people in four castes. Explaining castes he further adds that shudras are down ridden caste according to Hinduism.
An explanation -
When Hinduism talks about castes, the idea is not to divide people but rather to organize the society into four sections only and only on the basis of the four different types of duties they would perform with natural skill.
How these four groups accomplish this? Creation of every caste was based on a specific gene pool which enables the creature to have paramount expertise and natural ease at certain specific tasks.
A brahmin is so because he/she is better at learning and teaching. He is good at digesting information, converging it to knowledge and advicing on basis of it. Affinity is to the mind.
A kshatriya is so because he/she is a good warrior and has generous concern towards protection of his people. Its their duty to fight for the god to prevail and defend the society/state. Just like the courage comes from the heart.
A vaishya is defined by the trade and commerce they perofrm to keep afloat the economy. Affinity is to the Abdomen and thighs.
A shudra is the one who will render his/her services at routine jobs. Relate it to our feet which do the routine job of walking and taking us from one place to the other.
So this is what all of us are genetically structured to do. This is what we're supposed to do.
Truth is that there is no more dignity or shame associated with any of these jobs. They imply no high or low status. Whoever suggests such status segregation is ill informed.
All of us who're lavishly tagged as engineers today are actually doing routine jobs, providing services to our clients. So going by his notion, many of my friends even in IT would be mad at him :D.
Orientation of this theory is not towards the status of a human but towards the nature of the karma that he/she does.
Just because biologically feet are lower than chest or thighs, if one deduces shudra jobs are downtrodden, there is no bigger disaster of understanding.
That way we should be hating our feet and we shouldn't be touching feet of elders. Even touching feet has a scientific reasoning. You establish a one way connection with the positive vibrations/energies of a person by touching their feet (thumb specially). In layman terms we call it 'taking a blessing'.
That is not the only case. His interpretations of Hinduism have been challenged many times. Hindu ancient text are very encrypted and it takes a lot more time to understand them properly, decades of study in fact.
Anyways, conclusively I can suggest that we should be even more cautious while talking about other religions because a small misinterpretation or comment with surficial knowledge could make others see red.

C: He beautifully explained in proper context the difference between arguments of protesting animal slaughter and feeding on cattle. At the question of cows he did not explain why Muslims kill and eat cows but again refuted with a counter blame that more than Muslims, there are Hindus in the cow slaughter business (for profit).
The question is still unanswered. Reason ?
What I've learned this far is that co-existence, tolerance, compassion and respect for others are the common and best teachings of any religion including Islam. This means that we would not do things which will surely hurt the religious sentiments of other. It is not new to anyone how much of holy importance and dignity cow has in Hindus.
Question arises, are cows the only cattle available for Muslims to feed in the name of high protein and availability? Though even it being true wouldn't suffice for what is happening but lets us say that it is not true and lot of other options are there (which in fact is the case).
Now, why can't our Muslim brothers have even this much of good gesture to spare cows when Hindus equate cow to the place of mother. Even on practical terms, what you gain on keeping a cow is much more than killing her for meat protein.
This is one of the places where it pinches. But it doesn't have to end here. The point takes us to acknowledging that if there's any such ignorance from Hindus towards Islamic beliefs we should pull back from the line we've crossed.
This bit of compromise from both sides will be a great gesture and gel us together like never before.

Jupiter Saturn transits, gear up for milestones

2010-05-23T01:08:00.000-07:00

On September 10th 2009, transiting Saturn hopped onto Virgo and May 2nd this year, Jupiter has come into Pisces. This brings a much valued opposition of Jupiter and Saturn which is going to be like this till May 8 next year.
The outer and slow moving planets of our solar system - Jupiter, Saturn have a telling influence on our life in long term. They're the major players to drive the life via big events/changes and milestones. They shape the personality with shades to stay forever.
With these two in opposition. it is time to expect some big things happen. There's going to be a definite churning around of the directions and outlook we currently have in our lives.

Jupiter, the harbinger of benevolence is at its own sign Pisces which is the most developed water sign and is highly receptive of influences to sub-conscious. For the same reason this one year would bear long living fruits in our karmic vibrations and spiritual being.
Be prepared to travel and meet strangers. You'll surely think a lot, ask questions and learn a lot. Visit you elders, teachers and listen to them.
Destiny has put us in the class. Now its up to each one of us if we listen to the lessons this time.

But Saturn is a hard task master. Its entanglement of the situation brings a lot of mental worry as well. Mostly on the grounds that Saturn tenants Virgo, the sign of expressive analytics and search for perfection. Jupiter might bring excitement and hurry, yet Saturn wants us to keep a practicality check right now, not to get carried away in the soul's world. It gets to you in your desperation to need to have a few things sorted out asap. But that is not how Saturn lets it happen. Saturn loves structure and discipline; a slow step by step routine approach. Failing to abide by this, one can only hope for delays all around in the material and spiritual progress which he/she aspires for.

All in all, this presents a tremendous opportunity to find the true capacities on you inner self and find peace of mind, if you could have some patience and faith in what tradition preaches you to live like.
Note: This is not the time to chase your targets by hook or crook. It is time to bow your heads down, get slapped a bit for whatever impurities you have and then be blessed for true happiness.
Paying off to the worries you may go through, expect to get rid of enemies this time.
As the plates shift, ensure that this personal experience and intrigue at a spiritual level doesn't harm the relations with your better half (if you have one).
Those who've long waited for some desires to come true can hope for the best now, with a few remedial measures that if required a professional astrologer or veda scholar might suggest on case basis.
Lets go hear out and pamper our souls to rescue ourselves from this mud :)

The first words

2010-05-08T09:41:00.000-07:00

To open your eyes in the world, for me, is like holding to a thread on one end and beginning a journey. A journey where you traverse the thread transforming it into a garland of images portraying everything you are , everything you do and feel; till you think you've reached the other end called destiny.
Thinking of destiny always baffles me. It is a marvel if you think, how the soul is gripped into the numerous layers of illusion, how it is connected and yet very abstract from the impressions which we call our experiences. I wonder why the almighty send us all in the circus here and what would happen if he hadn't; no answers.
They say a soul is never bad or good, black or white, sweet or sour. But the intelligence mounted, which favors illusion over soul - the mind - leverages this freedom and takes many shapes which sometimes surprise our own imagination.
We, in India, are placed in privilege here to understand the intricacies of this circus and the dimensions beyond. This privilege was utilized by our ancestors for thousands of years and not only that. They left behind a vast treasure of organized knowledge meticulously infused in our culture. It is to know for ourselves, the path we're chosen to dwell upon.
And we do refer to it indirectly sometimes when we look around unsatisfied, after working in offices, earning fat, romancing, fighting, cleaning up the robotic parts of us.
Its not all that is to it. We're more than that, yes pretty much more. But the eyes to look further aren't open and they wont until the mind gives way to the soul.
I hope writing here I would intrigue myself and perhaps connect to others who care. It would be interesting.

God bless us all.