Weaponization of commons
History of Right to bear Weapons in modern India.
Even PhDs in Indian History do not know that in 1931, Sri Sardar Vallabhbhai, Sri Jawaharlal Nehru etc passed the resolution of Congress Karachi Adhiveshan where in they had demanded that right to bear weapons be made a Fundamental Right !! And the Karachi Adhiveshan was co-drafted by Mahatma Gandhi himself !!
This demand was a demand cum promise i.e. a promise from Mahatma Gandhi and company to people of India that if and when Congress comes into power, they will make right to bear weapons a Fundamental Right. I believe that Mohanbhai, Vallabhbhai, Jawaharbhai did not have any intention to keep this promise when they made it.
It was a dishonest promise made with intention of not keeping. They had made this promise only because Shri Bhagat Singhji had put such views. And these views had become so popular in commons and activists that Mohanbhai et al had no option but to add them to their books to retain their market share in the activists.
Mohanbhai and Company never wanted an armed citizenry as the British elitemen and Indian elitemen who sponsored Mohanbhai and Co. did not want an armed citizenry.
The existing intellectuals insist of keeping us commons weak so that their sponsor elitemen can beat us commons via criminals and policemen, and not worry about retaliation or deterrence. If we commons are armed, it would become impossible to beat us commons left, right and center and fleece money from us.
So Indian intellectuals never told students and activists via newspapers or textbooks that Mohanbhai and company in 1931 had demanded right to bear weapons, and also demanded that it should be made a Fundamental Right.
In addition, intellectuals tell the non-80G-activists that Indian commons are irrational, fools, temperamental, violent natured, aggressive etc and so only “weapons” a common of India should have is nail-cutter, takali, charkha, truth, non-violence, satyaagrah etc.
One should note the double talk of Indian intellectuals. When asked why Russia or China style revolution did not happen in India, they say Indians are by nature non-violent and too tolerant. And when asked why shouldn’t Indian commons have guns?
They will do a 180 degree turn and say India’s commons are too aggressive and violent and so they must not have guns !! I would have argued with them, if at all I thought they were honest.
Make right to bear arms (Weaponization of Commons) a Fundamental Right and Fundamental Duty We at MRCM Party pledge to make weapon bearing a Fundamental Right as well as a Fundamental Duty i.e. a person will be required to keep a non-automatic gun and 240 bullets in his home.
The duty will enforced on all able bodied male between the age of 21 and 45 and for females it will encouraged but not compulsory. The duty is similar to Switzerland where in a male resident between 21 and 45 is required to keep gun and 24 bullets at home.
Weaponization of Commons
Weaponization of Commons : the Mother of Democracy The democracy had perished in most of Europe by 300 AD, and re-started in about 950 AD in Britain.
Weaponization of Commons – In 950 AD in Britain, the King had to enact a procedure that if a policeman is involved in death of a citizen, the King’s Officer named as Coroner will call 7-12 citizens at random from the census list.
The citizens were allowed to ask questions to the policemen and victim’s family members etc were allowed to make statements. As the end of the inquiry, each Juror would say one of the three words about the accused officer’s conduct : Justifiable, Excusable or Criminal.
Though there is no explicit law, but if majority of the Jurors say “conduct was criminal”, then the officer’s service is almost terminated.
Now why did the King in 950 AD enact this procedure? Was there any demand by then intellectuals to have “citizen’s participation in Govt”? NO. The reason was that so many citizens were armed in Britain back then, that the King could see that .