Draft Arms Rules, 2015 : Comments/views invited now !

[goodboy_mentor]

http://mha.nic.in/sites/upload_files/mh ... nt2014.PDF
About Mr.Sharma

Also should'nt the MHA have put up on the website, the proposed amendments to the Arms Act 1959 (the Amendment Bill) first, before putting up the Draft Arms Rules 2015. If the Arms Act itself is being changed (pending approval) how can the Rules for it be drafted first? Can a lawyer or more experienced member answer please. I am very confused.

Arms Rules can be amended so long they do not violate the parent law i.e. existing Arms Act. What is the purpose or objective and reasons of these draft rules has not been made clear officially in the document. Why?

Arms Act can be amended later for any purpose so long it does not violate the Constitution. Present Draft Rules are giving smell of future amendments to be made to Arms Act for more restrictions and further amend rules again if required. The Draft Rules are in essence nothing but same proposed amendments to Arms Act that were rejected by Lok Sabha and sent to Standing Committee on Home Affairs. After failing to get Arms Act amendments passed in Parliament, MHA issued the same material in guise of illegal "policy". Now it is trying to legitimize the same policy as "law" by pushing it through Arms Rules amendment via Rajya Sabha and then finally amend the Arms Act. So the goal and target of MHA appears the same.

Why a particular Mr. Sharma has been engaged for this purpose? What are his qualifications, legal competence, experience and suitability to draft changes to existing laws? What rules and procedures were followed by MHA to select him only? Why well qualified and experienced lawyers were not selected? These are big questions which Rajya Sabha M.P.s must ask before even touching these proposed Draft Arms Rules.

[Anand]

What I understand from this is that, the MHA has created a new set of rules namely the Arms Rules 2015 in conjunction with the existing Arms Act 1959 taking into account all the subsequent amendments and GO's and consolidated them under this latest heading. In addition some changes (quite a few negative) have been incorporated as well as some clarifications made. For example: Blank guns and ammo, Airguns above 15 Ft. Lbs., and noise and flash suppressors have been included in the permissable arms category. So you will need a license to get a blank gun. If you get one blank gun and one suppressor and one air rifle above the 15 Ft Lbs. the 3 slots in your license are used up even before you buy a gun!!!

For the Restricted category schedule, specifically, Arms capable of simply chambering any .38 Bore rimmed cartridges have been put under this heading. This is not the same as the earlier Arms Rules 1962. If this is accepted and comes into force, all firearms that can simply chamber any .38 bore rimmed cartridges will be affected. Please also note that for restricted rifles, the calibers have been mentioned specifically (and also the words "chambering and firing"), but for the .38 rimmed arms, only chambering is the criteria, not "chambering and firing".(not in favour of the licensee).
I believe that this was done intentionally because even if a more liberal Arms import policy were adopted in future, the most common caliber available anywhere in the world would be one of the '.38 rimmed" bores. This IMHO this is not a typo error but is a backdoor method to see to it that even in the face of any seeming liberalization, the effect would be that it would practically be impossible to have any benefit from the so called liberalization.
It should be clearly written as "any arms capable of chambering and firing .380 rimmed service cartridges"; akin to the 9mm service cartridges.

So far as I can glean from the new Rules are:
Negatives: (and comments)
1. For area validity, the ones that get maximum benefit are those who don't really need it because they are already issued Govt. arms or have security.(it creates a class divide)
2. Lack of caliber clarity as mentioned in the case above.
3. Three firearm limit continues as is, only sport shooters of different categories may get more guns.
4. License fees have been increased drastically so only those who are financially unburdened can afford
5. When carrying arms in public, handguns to be holstered but other guns have to be in fully covered carriers; this precludes long guns for self defense in public for practical reasons.
6. Applicant will need signatures from 2 people of good social standing who support him in getting arms license (meaning recommendations from MLA's, MP's, IPS, IAS officers etc?)
7. Only dedicated sports persons may allow others to use their arms by permitting in writing for 2 weeks
8. For Junior target shooter arms covered are only .22 LR (if he is in skeet or trap or big bore then ammo quota remains unaddrressed )
9. Licenses to continue in book form instead of smart cards
10.Arms can not be discharged anywhere except in approved shooting ranges, thereby precluding informal practice in safe places such as farms or unpopulated deserted areas etc.(Also if this is approved what happens to those who live in places with no approved ranges?)
11.Two members in a family may get "additional licenses" attached to a regular licensee (chances are the law will be misused to deny another family member from getting a regular license in that household)
12 Ammunition limit for a regular licensee has been fixed at 50 at one time and 100 per year( thereby precluding any chance of regular practice unless they join a Rifle Association which can be expensive or become an aspiring shooter)
13. A licensee normally can not carry more than one firearm and 50 cartridges in declared checked baggage in an aircraft unless permission is obtained from DGCA. Even though the license may allow 3 or more firearms and more than 50
cartridges at one time, a licensee has to get additional permissions for this. This issue has not been addressed.(this is indirect regulation)
14. Carrying of licensed arms on aircraft in checked in baggage is currently exorbitant, charges of Rs.5000 or more by most airlines are being levied, unless the licensee is traveling to & from a competition or is a MP, MLA, IPS, IAS or defense
officer. Sometimes this is more than the cost of the ticket in some sectors.Akin to services for wheelchair bound passengers which is free, Ideally this can be also be kept free. If at all chargeable due to increased costs of special check in procedures, a small percentage of the ticket may be levied, say no more than 10%) This issue must also be addressed.
15.Once and for all, clear the air regarding deposit of Arms by licensees during any Elections including a statement that this situation will be applicable only in special cases with regard to those licensees as stated in the Election Commission's advisory. (This point has not been addressed.)
16. .22 LR Rifle as fourth firearm for licensees with NRAI/State association membership is not acknowledged in the Arms Rules. Mention of only 3 firearm limit per person continues to confuse.
17. As such the application form can be used to only apply for one firearm, changes must be made to allow all 3 firearms to be applied for at once. Also for NRAI members space to apply for .22LR Rifle as 4th firearm must be allocated on the form. Better still, a new consolidated form with space for the requirements for normal licensees as above, renowned shooters, and aspiring/junior shooters can be created.
18. Especially in urban areas, with regard to carrying of licensed firearms into restaurants, malls, hotels, movie theaters etc.these entities are creating their own policies supposedly due to "security" concerns and asking the licensees to leave their guns in their cars unattended, or in case of 5 Star hotels asking them to lock them up in lockers thereby precluding the actual intent of carrying the firearms which is for the personal protection of the licensee. If a private entity can restrict carrying of arms of licensees, then what is the value of a Govt issued license? These places are soft targets for terrorists especially when there can be no armed retaliation since your gun is locked up away from you. Sensitive places/offices such as the assembly of a state, courts, police stations, secretariats, Govt. Mints, military areas, secure zones of airports etc. can be put on a "prohibited places" list as these places are covered by Govt provided security. (this issue is not addressed)
19. Schools and other educational institutions such as colleges and universities require special permission to carry firearms into. These are easy and soft targets for terrorists since under the current law no legal firearms are carried there. Allow the parents of children to be able to carry licensed firearms into the schools and allow armed teachers.(this issue is not addressed)


Positive changes:(with possible negatives and questions)
1. Increase in ammo quotas for members of NRAI, and other sport shooter categories ie. renowned and international, aspiring/junior shooters.(creates a class divide with high quotas for some, while inadequate for others)
2. No need to register with local SHO when temporarily visiting a new place up to 6 months.
3. Verification process is time bound ie: 30 days (max 90 days in certain cases thereby allowing timely escalation to appellate authority or court in case of denial)
4. Licensees can get 2 members of their families added as "Additional Licensees" (like the erstwhile "retainers"), but these can not have regular licenses of their own while they are additional licensees (* see 11 in negatives above)
5. Safe handling certification will be required (but those who are allowed to impart training may charge exhorbitant rates)
6. Safe storage requirements to prevent undesirables getting access to firearms.(how will verification be done to ensure compliance ?, and what would be adequate must be made transparent to prevent harassment)
7. Medical certificate needed for Mental and physical competency (but this can be abused to harass licensee)
8. Time for acquisition of arms after license is given, has been increased from normal 3 months at present to 2 years (with 1 year additional extension)
9. Licenses to be in book form in navy blue for permissable arms and in maroon for those covering restricted arms thereby making them readily identifiable.
10.This is a point that can be said to be favourable to the license applicant but, still leaves discretion to the LA:
"(h) of those persons whom the licensing authority considers fit for any other reason to be eligible for grant of licence based on the police verification report and on his own risk assessment."

The primary focus given to "threat perception" in the new proposed 2015 rules is diametrically opposite to the spirit of the Arms Act 1959.
In any case if the Arms Act 1959 itself were to be amended in favour of the licensee, then more changes to these Arms Rules 2015 will flow from it. On first reading I thought these may possibly be merely an interim set of Rules that are being
reiterated but on more careful reading this is clearly not the case. Members please add to these so we can all write to the MHA.
Regards,
Anand

[mbsolan]

By making it more difficult to get arms licence govt is discouraging legal arms. People who want to get an arms licence are already facing harassment in the hands of authorities. Huge hike in fees will make it unaffordable. All fees, cost, will actually be transfered to shrinking consumer base. Setback for manufacturers, traders, licence enthusiasts, RKBA.

[captrakshitsharma]

Request all to put forward a few points which can collectively be drafted into a document to be presented to the HM by IFG/NAGRI

[mbsolan]

Please come up with a collective draft which can help many more who want to file an objection.

[varunik]

the permissible muzzle energy is given 20J, where our regular ARs for now have approx 15J. Shouldnt we ask for some relaxation here too? say 25J?

[goodboy_mentor]

What I understand from this is that, the MHA has created a new set of rules namely the Arms Rules 2015 in conjunction with the existing Arms Act 1959 taking into account all the subsequent amendments and GO's and consolidated them under this latest heading. In addition some changes (quite a few negative) have been incorporated as well as some clarifications made. For example: Blank guns and ammo, Airguns above 15 Ft. Lbs., and noise and flash suppressors have been included in the permissable arms category. So you will need a license to get a blank gun.

Section 44 of Arms Act applies for creation of Arms Rules. As per Section 44(1), the rules need to be notified in the official gazette. As per Section 44(3), the rules need approval of both the houses of Parliament. Only after these two conditions are fulfilled, the Rules get "force of law".

The "clarifications" are going to have negative outcome in future. The road is getting prepared. Why? Because as per definitions in Section 2 of Arms Act 1959, blank guns are neither "arms" nor "firearms" but are imitation firearms. Similarly the ammunition for blank guns is not "ammunition". Arms Act does not apply to imitation firearms in any way or form. Since Arms Act does not apply, then why they are being pushed into Arms Rules and labelled as "Blank-firing firearms" or their "ammunition"? Similarly why are fire arm replicas being listed? Buy pushing blank guns, fire arm replicas etc. into Arms Rules, the road is getting prepared for bringing these imitation firearms under restrictions of licensing. Curios and historical weapons, under Section 45 (c) are missing, why? Same reason, read Rule 74(4). Slowly restrictions will get tightened more and more until suffocation and death for every category of arms or firearms.

Similarly for air guns road is being created to finish GSR 991 and bring them under draconian licensing. From legal angle I am very happy with the present deal wood test. It is very well suited for country like India and working very well for so many decades. Where is the problem? If MHA honestly wants to "liberalize" then it can simply increase the thickness of deal wood under deal wood test rather than bringing in entirely new parameters of measuring "energy".

Noise and flash suppressors are already listed in Category 1(d) Schedule I of existing Arms Rules. They are in category of firearms. Same legal position exists in this draft arms rules. They need license. So if you have two guns, get one suppressor license, your three firearm limit is reached.

Similarly if dealers and manufacturers are thinking something is good for them, they are mistaken.

From point of RKBA and legalities, if given choice to select between two options, I am very happy with existing Arms Rules. Similarly Government has been over delegated enough powers under Arms Act and its Rules beyond the Constitutional limits, so there is practically no need to amend Arms Act or its Rules from government's perspective except under greed for getting more powers for more restrictions. Rather than making one or two amendments at a time, why entire Arms Rules is being replaced? Because it will overhelm the senses of reader, create confusion and lack of clarity about real direction in which things are moving hidden under barrage of words running over 225 pages.

Request all to put forward a few points which can collectively be drafted into a document to be presented to the HM by IFG/NAGRI

I am studying these draft rules. Will post my points here in 3 to 5 days. Meanwhile I request everyone to keep continuously posting their views. They are great help to get ideas.

If NAGRI really wants to succeed for RKBA, it seriously needs to understand that RKBA is a fundamental natural, human, civil, political, religious, historical and common law right fully acknowledged under at least Articles 13, 14, 19, 21, 25, 246(5), 261(1)&(2), 300A, 307, 367(1), 372 of the Constitution of India. Arms Act has been enacted to legislatively enable this very important right. This can also be ascertained from reading the Objects and Reasons of the original Bill that became Arms Act 1959. This also needs to put into the heads of M.P.s, Ministers, Judges and the common man.

[mbsolan]

What is the last date before which objections can be filed?

[nagarifle]

30 days from the time it was uploaded

[Commonwealth_of_PA]

Reading it makes my head hurt

I think I'll just keep chugging away at my laws, which are confusing enough. I wish you good luck and success with this one

[Kittu]

Similarly if dealers and manufacturers are thinking something is good for them, they are mistak
No dealers and manufacturers thinks this is good for them
got some msgs trough whattapp.i am sharing here
rs 500 per weapon renewal fee for manufaturer,raise from 200 to approx 500000.tl fee 500 to 5000 for 14 days validity
there are lots more

[goodboy_mentor]

Similarly if dealers and manufacturers are thinking something is good for them, they are mistak
No dealers and manufacturers thinks this is good for them
got some msgs trough whattapp.i am sharing here
rs 500 per weapon renewal fee for manufaturer,raise from 200 to approx 500000.tl fee 500 to 5000 for 14 days validity
there are lots more

If dealers and manufacturers are really serious they should co-ordinate with NAGRI and consult an experienced civil lawyer. And tell him that RKBA and Arms Act is covered by at least Articles 13, 14, 19, 21, 25, 246(5), 261(1)&(2), 300A, 307, 367(1), 372 of the Constitution of India. If lawyer or any one needs more clarity on this or has specific questions, I will be happy to clarify in this thread or via PM or email. Does anyone know what arguments the airguns manufacturers association or their lawyers given in the Supreme Court case they are fighting?

[goodboy_mentor]

For rebuttal of the meaningless legitimization of costly centralized or state level databases under Draft Arms Rules may refer to following post http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 75#p229775

[Virendra S Rathore]

So if someone picked up a round that I couldn't recover, and put it at a crime scene ... I'm screwed ??

[aadhaulya]

Request all to put forward a few points which can collectively be drafted into a document to be presented to the HM by IFG/NAGRI

I am studying these draft rules. Will post my points here in 3 to 5 days. Meanwhile I request everyone to keep continuously posting their views. They are great help to get ideas.

If NAGRI really wants to succeed for RKBA, it seriously needs to understand that RKBA is a fundamental natural, human, civil, political, religious, historical and common law right fully acknowledged under at least Articles 13, 14, 19, 21, 25, 246(5), 261(1)&(2), 300A, 307, 367(1), 372 of the Constitution of India. Arms Act has been enacted to legislatively enable this very important right. This can also be ascertained from reading the Objects and Reasons of the original Bill that became Arms Act 1959. This also needs to put into the heads of M.P.s, Ministers, Judges and the common man.

Dear GBM,

The need of the hour is to send out individual mails from the maximum number of people possible. That would probably be possible if each member gets the mail sent through all his contacts (face book or whatever).
For that, a complete mail (Including the 'Dear Sir, and 'Yours truly') has to be drafted that can be sent individually.
I would suggest someone to prepare a draft mail and give 2 days for members to respond with their suggestions, so that by Monday morning we can get into the work of roping in people to send out the copy of the draft after filling in their names only.

Regards