Military Review

How to write a law for a Russian person?

124
Today we want to talk about a very serious and dangerous question for society. It will be about the basics of Russianness. About clamps that are laid in us ancestors. About mutual aid, about compassion, about mercy, finally. That did, does and will make us Russian.




To begin with, a couple of stories that were highlighted by our colleagues from RIA "News". In the summer of 2017, a fight took place in the city of Yekaterinburg. Although it is difficult to call a fight. The usual youth party in the absence of parents ended with one of the guests calling a 22-year-old acquaintance with a request to pick up a drunk girlfriend from the hop company.

The "botanist" who came for a friend of his friend, naturally, was insulted by the participants of the binge. The case ended traditionally. In front of the girls, the boys were roosters, but after going out on the street they seemed to have agreed peacefully. Even shook hands.

But then there were four drunken "jocks". They decided to restore justice. Even despite the persuasion of all parties to the conflict. One of the guys hit come for a girlfriend in the face. According to the guy, he "swam a little." But still managed to hit the attacker in response.

A fight ensued with the fallen comrades. It ended quickly. The guy who hit the "nerd", began to sink his tongue and breathing was broken. And now the striking 40 minute provided assistance.

Historywhat a thousand. Although not. There is one nuance. The one that hit back weighed 60 kg. And the victim for 100. And the injury of the victim is serious. Fracture of the base of the skull.

Today, a process is underway in Yekaterinburg that threatens Vladislav Ryabukhin, the 60-kilogram botanist, the 8-th years of a strict regime colony. The injustice of the threatening sentence is understood even by the victim. Lawyers on both sides advocate a peaceful settlement. Compensation for the treatment and everything.

Another case is the same banal. In Novosibirsk, two drunken guys molested people. In the end, they attacked a couple of young people. The gentleman was kicked away, and the woman was dragged somewhere. And there was also a man. He stood up for the woman.

And he behaved accordingly. One against two. Hit first. This fight is over. The second bully fled. Hooligan received an open head injury. And our hero went to the police with a confession. They filed a case under the article "Intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm." The same 8 years of age ...

Thanks to the expertise. They recognized that injuries were caused by a fall from the height of their own body. The case was retrained to "causing harm by negligence." And this is "only" six months zone.

It would seem, how is the first case connected, which is now in the work of the court, the December case and our topic? Meanwhile, the analogy is complete. Both defendants will never, again, never go to help someone! They just pass by someone else's misfortune.

Once upon a time, in early youth, a wrestling coach told me a phrase, the meaning of which I understood much later. "Any fight for you can end up in a hospital, a prison or a grave. And therefore, at the slightest opportunity to avoid a fight, avoid it. Save your own nerves and the nerves of your parents."

Who is to blame for the fact that, by law, to protect the weak today means playing roulette with fate?

Sit or not. Remember the girl in the Moscow metro, which applied trauma and received a deadline. The gun is more dangerous than a knife. Are there any more girls who will get a gun for self-defense?

Remember the most terrible article for a normal person? "Excess of self-defense measures"?

Who determines the necessary self-defense? One against several drunken inadequates - is this normal? And if the drin picked up from the ground and struck along the ridge of the attacker - what is it like? Who in the fight counts the force of impact?

Any fighter who grew up in a working-class area under Soviet rule or on the outskirts of a democracy knows full well that gentlemanly in a fight is expensive. It is necessary to strike first and so that the enemy does not rise. Then there will be a chance to perform a ridiculous, but very clear installation from our childhood - "... do your legs."

What happens in different parts of our state suggests a terrible thought. Remember, Sofia Rotaru had a popular song. Very beautiful words. "In the word" we "one hundred thousand" I "..."

According to the laws of mathematics, the sum change does not change. And do you think that one hundred thousand "I" is always "we"? Don't you think that by such “deeds”, in accordance with the law, this “we” is killed in us?

Sorry for the banality. Parable about a broom remember? So what is better? Broom or twig? "We" or "I"? Tomorrow we will help those who are ill, or pass by, as is the case in “civilized” countries?

Do you want to live in a country where the police fight against criminals, medicine saves the sick and injured, a fireman pulls a child out of a burning house, and a rescuer rescues a drowning man in the water?

Of course, I want to live in such a country. But Russia is not yet such a country. Unfortunately.

But it is well known and gradually goes on saying when these specialists appeared at the scene of the incident.

And unfortunately, there are such examples, which in reality completely discourage the desire to take a step forward. To the restoration of justice.

Twigs Scattered. Separated. Those who fear the law. Afraid to make a move.

Law-abiding. As in the civilized West.

Not able to stop the cad or maniac. Enter the burning house. Jump into the icy water. To take weapon and say no to fascism in the Donbas.

This should deal with the military, firefighters, doctors, rescuers, police.

Rest? Sit calm and obedient? Pending?

Or is it necessary to revise the laws? In the direction of protection in the first place the interests of law-abiding and caring citizens?
Author:
124 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Square
    Square 1 February 2018 06: 49
    +2
    For a Russian person, the law is not written
    There is a door, and he breaks down a board from a fence and climbs
    1. populist
      populist 1 February 2018 06: 55
      53
      How to write a law for a Russian person?

      So after all the power is not Russian. How does she write a law for Russians?
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Pax tecum
          Pax tecum 1 February 2018 13: 43
          17
          Putin admitted that Russians in Russia are second-class people. 14.04.2012 under the heading Politics
          https://newsland.com/user/4297740075/content/puti
          n-priznal-chto-russkie-v-rf-eto-liudi-vtorogo-sor
          ta / 4326705
          V. Putin spoke out against amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the “state-forming Russian people”. "Is it dangerous. We don’t need this, ”he said, responding in the State Duma to the question of the deputy from the Communist Party, film director Vladimir Bortko.
          According to Putin, the introduction of such an amendment will automatically make part of the Russian population first-class people.
          The amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation rejected by Putin consists in replacing the phrase "multinational people of the Russian Federation" with the phrase "Russian people and peoples of the Russian Federation, united by a common destiny on their land."

          And, yes ... Even in the Constitution of the RSFSR, Russians were spelled out!

          The Constitution (Basic Law) of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic of April 12 1978
          The Great October Socialist Revolution, carried out by the workers and peasants of Russia under the leadership of the Communist Party, headed by V.I. Lenin, overthrew the power of the capitalists and landlords, established the dictatorship of the proletariat and created the Soviet state - the main instrument for protecting revolutionary conquests, building socialism and communism.
          Soviet power guaranteed all peoples of Russia equal rights and free self-determination, and provided workers with truly democratic rights and freedoms. The formation of the RSFSR provided Russian people, all nations and nationalities of the Russian Federation are favorable conditions for comprehensive economic, social and cultural development, taking into account their national characteristics in the fraternal family of Soviet peoples ...
          1. Pax tecum
            Pax tecum 1 February 2018 14: 06
            15

            How then to understand this?
          2. Spnsr
            Spnsr 1 February 2018 22: 20
            +1
            Quote: Pax tecum
            Putin admitted that Russians in Russia are second-class people. 14.04.2012 under the heading Politics
            https://newsland.com/user/4297740075/content/puti
            n-priznal-chto-russkie-v-rf-eto-liudi-vtorogo-sor
            ta / 4326705
            V. Putin spoke out against amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the “state-forming Russian people”. "Is it dangerous. We don’t need this, ”he said, responding in the State Duma to the question of the deputy from the Communist Party, film director Vladimir Bortko.
            According to Putin, the introduction of such an amendment will automatically make part of the Russian population first-class people.
            The amendment to the Constitution of the Russian Federation rejected by Putin consists in replacing the phrase "multinational people of the Russian Federation" with the phrase "Russian people and peoples of the Russian Federation, united by a common destiny on their land."

            And, yes ... Even in the Constitution of the RSFSR, Russians were spelled out!

            The Constitution (Basic Law) of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic of April 12 1978
            The Great October Socialist Revolution, carried out by the workers and peasants of Russia under the leadership of the Communist Party, headed by V.I. Lenin, overthrew the power of the capitalists and landlords, established the dictatorship of the proletariat and created the Soviet state - the main instrument for protecting revolutionary conquests, building socialism and communism.
            Soviet power guaranteed all peoples of Russia equal rights and free self-determination, and provided workers with truly democratic rights and freedoms. The formation of the RSFSR provided Russian people, all nations and nationalities of the Russian Federation are favorable conditions for comprehensive economic, social and cultural development, taking into account their national characteristics in the fraternal family of Soviet peoples ...

            This will become relevant if RUSSIAN becomes higher than petty nationalism! Understand that back in the last century, not to mention the previous ones, Russian carried civilization to the world around him, and now he is only ready to defend his own, such as superiority! If the Russian will again be ready to accept into his world those who want to become Russian, then this claim will disappear by itself !!!
            1. mac789
              mac789 4 February 2018 14: 14
              +5
              Russians took a lot of people into their world - as a result, they became second-class people in their country.
          3. SLAVA
            SLAVA 4 February 2018 21: 46
            +2
            My dear, an article about what, about self-defense, or about the oppression of Russians? You bitch .... selling sabotage people !!!
            1. mac789
              mac789 5 February 2018 07: 44
              0
              Yes, you are a hamlo sir, and you don’t even speak Russian.
              1. SLAVA
                SLAVA 5 February 2018 14: 12
                0
                ....) in essence?))) diplomas!
                1. mac789
                  mac789 5 February 2018 21: 10
                  0
                  Moreover, they are not able to read their own pearls. To the library! Urgently !!!
          4. Sverdlov
            Sverdlov 8 February 2018 00: 17
            0
            "in the fraternal family of Soviet peoples ..."
            That was the main thing!
        2. Yegorchik
          Yegorchik 1 February 2018 17: 57
          +7
          Quote: Pax tecum
          And, by the way, in the events described, weren't the chocks opposed to the Russian guys?

          In the first case, I heard blacks for this incident, the one to whom the Russians minted Armenians on the mint, but I don’t remember the nations of the others, but the names are not Russian. But in the second case, I don’t know. But once they condemn our mischief, too, are black.
        3. flicker
          flicker 3 February 2018 16: 53
          +2
          Russian patriotism does not at all cancel the need to think, but in other situations, on the contrary, strengthens this need. This became especially noticeable after the events in Ukraine, where, as it were, the people seemed to have infiltrated the fraternal, as it were. And it all began, also with patriotic slogans, and ends with Svidomo fester: civil war.
          I hope there are no inadequacies that would like the path of the Ukrainians to defeat their homeland to be repeated in Russia.
          I also hope that the authors of the text do not call for "Svidomo".
      2. SLAVA
        SLAVA 4 February 2018 21: 49
        0
        Well, what's the problem? let's separate Russian from non-Russian!
    2. Vend
      Vend 1 February 2018 09: 49
      +7
      Laws should not be written for a Russian person, but for officials of the system. Who are doing everything to impede the implementation of many necessary laws.
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 1 February 2018 18: 16
      +1
      A fracture of the base of the skull is a serious injury. A common cause of a head strike when falling even from a height of one's own height. The higher the height and weight, the body the more likely such an injury. To knock down even the 100th drunk is not a big deal for any "nerd." I hope that the qualification of the deed on the basis of the law will be given by the court, but not by civil online forums. And anyway, why on "VO" to arrange malakhovshchina type come on who is bolder and that is right?
      1. SLAVA
        SLAVA 4 February 2018 21: 53
        0
        Yes, the topic is about the sarosomeness of the attack)))))! Do not be alright, this concept and the nonhumans who composed it!
  2. Same lech
    Same lech 1 February 2018 06: 56
    31
    Alexander Staver, Roman Skomorokhov raised a sore subject for me ... and they are 100 percent right.
    More than once I was in a situation when I wanted to wave my hand from the heart.
    Novosibirsk is not always a calm city and we have all sorts of scumbags that do not allow people to live humanly ... but I understand perfectly ... the law on self-defense that draws where you turned and went ... for self-defense they can be sentenced for the very fact of self-defense and no human rights defenders they won’t help here ... I wish those who passed such a law to be in the place of injured people from bandits and who decided to defend themselves.
    1. EwgenyZ
      EwgenyZ 1 February 2018 07: 25
      16
      Quote: The same Lech
      I wish those who passed such a law themselves to be in the place of the injured people from bandits and who decided to defend themselves.

      Our laws are written in order to be written, for the "tick". Most go to deputies not to write laws, but to live well, promote their business, get out of criminal prosecution, get a good pension, etc. Those who want something to change units and "do not do weather." The example of the Liberal Democratic Party and the Communist Party in 1993 is indicative. Having received the majority of seats, the "people's deputies", first of all, provided themselves with luxurious offices, a large number of servants, in the form of various assistants, and ministerial salaries. I don’t remember a single law over the years so that immediately after publication it starts working normally immediately without any amendments or additions.
      1. your1970
        your1970 1 February 2018 09: 05
        +5
        Quote: EwgenyZ
        Our laws are written in order to be written, for the "tick".

        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        those who passed such a law themselves to be in the place of injured people from bandits and thinking to defend themselves.
        - for a number of reasons, I am in the subject, so to speak. At the moment, self-defense is one of the most difficult, controversial, difficult to prove and scandalous court cases. Outwardly, everything is simple - but in fact ..
        Here, for example, the case of Voronenko - if it weren’t for the video recording from the surveillance cameras, the killer could have said that he was walking past - when the guard started shooting at him, the killer started shooting in response and accidentally killed Voronenko (absolutely by chance !!). In that particular situation, maybe the killer would not have fallen off, but in a little altered?
        common: two / three attacked — one managed to hit, fell, a concussion. The second says, we went, didn’t touch anyone, he attacked us first .. How to prove that they had a conspiracy, intent to rob? They are pieces of paper for a joint attack They didn’t write that there was no evidence that the intent was there. So, two or three of them are not proof, are there reasons why people go around in heaps. Cameras? They are practically absent in the country, except for Moscow / St. Petersburg
        We had a case-grandfather went over to squirrels and began to defend his hut by shooting from a hunting double-barreled shotgun in the neighbors. It seemed to him that his neighbors were taking everything out of the house. As long as they reached the district police officer, the grandmother broke her grandfather’s gun so grandfather three weeks he was in the hospital, and the gun was found unsuitable for firing. The grandmother deliberately defended herself when she poked him with a poker (for starters !!) - but the neighbors, if he would shoot someone inside the courtyard?
        1. Palch
          Palch 1 February 2018 10: 13
          +5
          Nonsense and fantasies of a novice lawyer. Your examples and two examples from the article in comparison as a fifth-grader babble and extracts from a scientific article. Forgive me of course for being rude.
          1. your1970
            your1970 1 February 2018 14: 04
            +2
            Quote: Palch
            Nonsense and fantasies of a novice lawyer. Your examples and two examples from the article in comparison as a fifth-grader babble and extracts from a scientific article. Forgive me of course for being rude.

            My examples are the possible interpretation of events in any direction, at least in favor of the attackers, at least in favor of the defenders. Examples from the article - during verification, they may turn out to have the completely opposite interpretation

            A counter-question is, if a grandfather would kill any of the neighbors (in the courtyard at home !!) who went to the grandmother’s case, and the district policeman would live in the district center for 90 km, the fact of the squirrel would go unnoticed - would grandfather sit or not? God’s dandelion is 86 years old, he and 60 year old grandmothers are young ...
        2. Same lech
          Same lech 1 February 2018 10: 20
          10
          .At the moment, self-defense is one of the most difficult, controversial, difficult to prove and scandalous court cases.

          Since the law is so controversial, then the deputies of the State Duma should pay more attention to it ... register all controversial issues using law enforcement practice ... where there is no single answer, the court should intervene, taking into account all the circumstances of the case.
          In any case, the law should have a reinforced concrete amendment ...
          the attacker must be responsible for the consequences of an act of self-defense.

          Do not attack ... do not show aggression and you will be happy ...
          if attacked ... hit first ... pushed first ... even if the first spat on the bald spot to the opponent, do not be offended then that you will get a fair change ...
          and no one should care why you attacked ... whether you were drunk ... in a bad mood or under drugs.
          1. domokl
            domokl 1 February 2018 12: 11
            +7
            It's not the law, but the people who apply it. The police and the IC is convenient for a tick to open the case in hot pursuit. The stick system has not been canceled.
            How many people from the "simple" walking around the streets with a trauma? And the second question is, is there a pistol (legal) in the kids car on a Ferrari? And will it be used in case of an accident on the road?
            And the third rhetorical question is, will the child sit down for exceeding or not. And in the law of all cases you do not contemplate. Alas...
        3. RL
          RL 1 February 2018 11: 06
          14
          Why am I carrying a gun? Because wearing a policeman is both difficult and uncomfortable.
        4. EwgenyZ
          EwgenyZ 1 February 2018 17: 18
          +5
          Quote: your1970
          - for a number of reasons, I am in the subject, so to speak. At the moment, self-defense is one of the most difficult, controversial, difficult to prove and scandalous court cases. Outwardly, everything is simple - but in fact ...

          I agree with you a thousand times, but only if without witnesses. And if there are witnesses and there is a camera recording (as with that girl from the subway), but, anyway, they give the deadline. And this is not the first case. Laws must be written for people, not for the "tick".
        5. omit
          omit 4 February 2018 16: 29
          0
          your1970
          for a number of reasons, I am in the subject, so to speak
          If you are in the subject, you should know that his last name is Voronenkov.
      2. mac789
        mac789 4 February 2018 14: 18
        +3
        Our laws are written in order to promptly identify and clean up all those who are able to resist attacks on their rights. About the rest as slaves. If someone else did not understand it, so much the worse for him.
    2. tracer
      tracer 1 February 2018 16: 36
      10
      In America, street gangsterism was suppressed very simply. Executions on the spot. He pulled out a knife or barrel .... Just get a bullet and not necessarily from the police, from a person nearby. Only such a law works against scumbags. In Russia, the situation is paradoxical. They judge a defender saving someone’s life who cares. Somehow, a drunken neighbor who recently returned from the zone attacked with his ax the brother of the younger one who was leaving school. Having grabbed a double-barreled shotgun, he jumped out of the house ... They took their own Toporonos. Suddenly realizing that the duration of their worthless life is getting numb. I don’t want to give Dada that it would be an attack on the authorities obliged to protect us. In America, nothing would have happened to me at all. Even if their carcasses were lying next to the ax they stole.
      1. Tatanka Yotanka
        Tatanka Yotanka 1 February 2018 20: 24
        +2
        Quote: tracer
        In America, street gangsterism was suppressed very simply.

        ???????? belay belay but what about Chicago, Detroit, cordoned off ghettos, black neighborhoods, ethnic gangs?
        1. tracer
          tracer 2 February 2018 01: 06
          +2
          You are not talking about that a bit .... street crime kills where it is necessary, and who is needed. Or does not kill where it is not necessary and who is not necessary. Have you ever thought of such a thought? No one sane in the quarters where you do not have to be will not go and there is nothing to do there. DO YOU SERIOUSLY THINK THAT THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO DISCOVER? MAY BUT DO NOT WANT. Let the poor with a gopota herself successfully eliminate each other. Authorities pay less benefits. And on "Alaverdi" to you "very interested". THERE ARE DISTRICTS IN MICHIGAN STATE WHERE BLACK AT NIGHT TIME IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO APPEAR .... Yes, freedom, and democracy. But, (I know this for sure, a colleague told one brother works for him in the police). As soon as the appearance of blacks or suspicious is detected, a patrol code is automatically issued to all patrols. They will resist if they just shoot.
          1. Tatanka Yotanka
            Tatanka Yotanka 2 February 2018 10: 26
            +2
            so you’re not talking about it, we’re talking about the state, write then- but in prosperous quarters of America ......, and just do a strange division at least at the city level, if the police can control one area and are afraid of turning up in another means, it means a role model, and just do it, I am touched by the brave American racks with weapons over crying women,)))
          2. Stanislas
            Stanislas 2 February 2018 11: 58
            +1
            Quote: tracer
            street crime kills where necessary and who needs
            Who needs? Street crime is the lower layer of the criminal world, a kind of anti-system, represented in the upper strata of society in the form of organized crime, corruption, etc. their authority. This system is not self-destructing, but self-organizing.
  3. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 1 February 2018 07: 08
    34
    Here it is, "justice" based on Western laws and imitations of the West request
    He stole a chicken because of hunger - five years in prison.
    He stole billions - six months conditionally.
    How many fights were in youth at discos !!! So the district police officer will come and everything will be solved with the help of the usual “next time you will sit down”. And then think.
    For the girl to intervene? Only after the fight did they frown upon those who in a crowd for one ...
    And people grew up like normal ...
    And now the “laws” adopted for the sake of not our mentality lead to scoffing of the people, to individualism, to commercialism, to indifference ....
    I completely agree with the authors yes
    1. Knowing
      Knowing 1 February 2018 07: 38
      +7
      The whole point is not that the US (in RUSSIA) does not have the Law on Defense (it really does not exist!), That is, it is not executed in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, or is interpreted, interpreted by the prosecutor's office, and, as a consequence, by the Court "at will"; so in Article 37 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation it is explicitly stated:
      1. It is not a crime to harm an infringing person in a state of necessary defense, that is, in the protection of the individual and the rights of the defending or other persons protected by law, the interests of society or the state from socially dangerous assault, if this encroachment was associated with violence dangerous to the life of the defending or other person , or with an immediate threat of such violence.
      2. Protection from infringement, not associated with violence, dangerous for the life of the defending or other person, or with an immediate threat of such violence, is legitimate, if the limits of the necessary defense were not exceeded, that is, deliberate actions that are clearly not appropriate to the nature and danger encroachment.
      2.1. Do not exceed the limits of the necessary defense of the defending person, if this person, because of the unexpectedness of the encroachment, could not objectively assess the degree and nature of the danger of the attack.
      (part two. 1 is introduced by the Federal Law of 08.12.2003 N 162-ФЗ)
      3. The provisions of this article are equally applicable to all persons, regardless of their professional or other special training and official position, as well as regardless of the possibility to avoid socially dangerous encroachment or to seek help from other persons or authorities.
      (part three as amended by the Federal Law from 27.07.2006 N 153-FZ)

      In Art. 38 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation Of extreme necessity it is said: 1. It is not a crime to harm interests protected by criminal law in a state of emergency, that is, to eliminate the danger that directly threatens the person and the rights of the person or other persons protected by law to the interests of society or the state, if this danger could not be eliminated by other means and however, the limits of emergency were not exceeded. with a reservation in the second part: Exceeding the limits of extreme necessity shall be recognized as causing harm that clearly does not correspond to the nature and degree of the threatening danger and the circumstances in which the danger was eliminated when the indicated interests were harmed equal or more significant than prevented. Such excess entails criminal liability only in cases of intentional harm.- and the courts, and the investigation as a rule, in order not to bother, they take the side of the one who suffered the most ... hi
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 1 February 2018 09: 31
        +6
        Quote: Knowing
        either interpreted

        All this is deliberately interpreted, with the aim of making of us -
        Twigs Scattered. Separated. Those who fear the law. Afraid to make a move.

        To anyone who considers himself a MAN, I recommend reading A. Kochergin’s book, A Man with an Ax. hi
      2. Glory1974
        Glory1974 1 February 2018 20: 14
        +4
        Exceeding the limits of extreme necessity shall be recognized as causing harm that clearly does not correspond to the nature and degree of the threatening danger and the circumstances in which the danger was eliminated when the indicated interests were harmed equal or more significant than prevented.

        It turns out that if you tried to rape, then you can only rape in response wassat So that the harm is not more significant than prevented.
  4. savage1976
    savage1976 1 February 2018 07: 23
    +6
    The most interesting thing in the other, if you step in, you risk sitting far and for a long time, if you pass by, you risk sitting far and for a long time, but you are on the article Refusing to help. So choose your head on a chopping block or a burden on the head.
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 1 February 2018 09: 34
      15
      Quote: savage1976
      under article Refusal of help

      That's just a paradox - there are few who come in, and almost everyone is sitting on the article on exceeding self-defense, and the majority passes by, but is there anyone sitting on the article on refusing to help? wink
  5. Alone
    Alone 1 February 2018 07: 26
    22
    Everything is true for all 100 ... One acquaintance, interceded for girls a couple of times and both times he raked off the "law". Now, he says, in life I will not intercede for anyone.
    And also on a national basis a similar mess. We fought Russian with Russian, then we can agree; Russian fought with non-Russian (especially from the Caucasus), and God forbid Russian beat Appan, then Khan, an article for inciting ...
    1. Pax tecum
      Pax tecum 1 February 2018 14: 10
      10
      282 "Russian" article and the aliens of the most filthy species feel masters on Russian soil ...
      And, by the way, one of the points of the program of presidential candidate P. Grudinin (as well as entire political parties (LDPR, Communist Party ...) and social movements) for the abolition of this article.
      "Yu. Boldyrev and P. Grudinin: Article 282 of the Criminal Code - a system of suppressing society ..."
      By the way, the article was developed under Yeltsin, as well as the abolition of the death penalty.
      1. EwgenyZ
        EwgenyZ 1 February 2018 17: 27
        0
        Quote: Pax tecum
        And, by the way, one of the points of the program of presidential candidate P. Grudinin

        You, as I understand it, here for the "popular" nominee "chopped".
  6. Per se.
    Per se. 1 February 2018 07: 42
    12
    Remember the most terrible article for a normal person? "Excess of self-defense measures"?
    If we talk about the adjustment of the laws when it comes to self-defense (the holy right of every citizen), and you must clearly distinguish between premeditated murder and murder, as an accident, a coincidence of circumstances. The whole essence of the laws is justice, which is not understood by everyone in its own way, but has a reasonable interpretation for the whole society. Any murder, even of the latest bastard, should be considered by the court and evaluated by it within the framework of the law. In this case, two conclusions are important. First, no permitted possession of a weapon should automatically legitimize murder, as a self-defense right exempting from a fair trial in assessing this action. Secondly, the law itself must be fair and understandable. If we deliberately declare that it is impossible to create such a law, to ensure its observance, to ensure the safety of the population, this is tantamount to recognizing the inability of the state to perform its functions in protecting its citizens, depravity and ineffectiveness of court and investigation, weakness of law enforcement agencies, society, which is already evidence of the depravity of the government itself and the social system itself. In our case, it seems, it is necessary to change (improve) not only laws relating to self-defense and weapons, but also the current government itself and the social system itself, which led to a decline in culture and morality. Without a good education, culture and morality, social justice and confidence in the future, there is no normal, prosperous society, and no weapon here will not save from eternal danger and degradation.
    1. domokl
      domokl 1 February 2018 12: 18
      +7
      Weapon? We have enough readers who wore a gun for half a life. And they are well aware that it is difficult to master a weapon so that it can be used on time. The attack happens instantly. So, the weapon is for students and others who have seen the army or power structures at a distance.
      1. Svidetel 45
        Svidetel 45 1 February 2018 13: 21
        +5
        Firstly, an attack does not always happen suddenly, it is not uncommon for it to be preceded by certain signs, due to which one can prepare and prepare a weapon, and secondly, let, maybe, in one case there are a hundred of them, but it happens when, by chance, a sudden attack crashes, and for the sake of this one case, saving the life and health of at least one normal person, it is possible and necessary to give people the opportunity to effectively defend themselves from any scum. Unfortunately, it seems that our authorities are more concerned with respect for the rights of the criminal element than with law-abiding citizens.
      2. Per se.
        Per se. 1 February 2018 14: 37
        +4
        Dear Alexander, let's first define the “weapon”, otherwise there is a lot of speculation on the topic, from the notorious stools to the victims of car accidents. The state, as a public institution, is obliged to protect its citizens from external and internal threats, in general, this is the army and the police, they have weapons by definition of their status. Moreover, with external aggression, as Vysotsky said in the role of Gleb Zheglov, for an enemy soldier, evidence of his guilt is not required, he came with a weapon to our land. Another thing is aggression on the street from a tribesman, who can be both a complete recidivist and a drunken neighbor, but both of them are citizens of a country that prohibits the death penalty, and their guilt can only be determined by the court, as well as the adequacy of actions of other citizens need to defend against them. If we talk about weapons, then immediately it is necessary to highlight its status, hunting and sporting weapons, by definition, are intended for hunting and sport shooting, it was created for this, a license was issued for it. If such a weapon is used against a person, it will be its misuse, just like a kitchen knife or stool. There is no fundamental difference what killed the person, you can kill and sharply sharpened pencil or cord from the boot. Now the most important thing, military weapons, he has only one status - the destruction of the enemy, that is, murder. Army weapons and military equipment, serve the defense of the country, its use by law to protect the Fatherland. There are a lot of speculations here, such as I had a gun in the army, and why it was impossible for a citizen, they trusted the army and the tank, this is the army ... I have a weapon and the right to use it in exceptional cases, delegated to law enforcement officers to protect citizens from internal threats. Therefore, speaking of weapons, one should understand that those who advocate for the legalization of military weapons, they do not advocate for the weapons themselves, as such, they want to get the right to kill, being protected by law. Moreover, wanting a monopoly on the same gun, which I would like to have only with them, making other weapons powerless, in the form of the same kitchen knife. Killing from a pistol will be legal and cultural, and to kill them with a knife is not legal, not correct. If society itself has an immoral social system, such newly-minted "samurai nobles" will be no better than bandits if they receive and consolidate their privileges, buy justice for any actions under the guise of self-defense. And, at once I will emphasize, self-defense should be justified for everyone, there is no murder, you want to kill, kill, but the court must decide the validity of such necessity, rightly passing its verdict. In a prosperous country, the issue of the legalization of military weapons would hardly be relevant at all. We must fight for normal laws, a just social system, then we will have to fear less for our loved ones and our lives.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. domokl
            domokl 1 February 2018 18: 34
            +2
            laughing To get the word means to take it out of the cabure, and not to find it on the nearest lawn repeat
          2. Per se.
            Per se. 2 February 2018 06: 13
            +3
            Quote: Nehist
            Interesting. I here for the weapon and what? And it is legal.
            I have already said that the weapon itself is not a problem, shops are bursting, you can legally buy what’s allowed, not legally, any. You are for the legal, so what? It is necessary to understand for combat, that is, for obtaining the legislative right to kill (to use the status of a weapon for its intended purpose, when even a license “to shoot”, like during a hunt, is not necessary), and so that there is nothing for it. Conveniently, without trial or investigation, on a personal understanding of the threat, take and pass a death sentence, let everyone be afraid and jealous ... Just do not say that there is enough to get the barrel, and everyone will fall down or run away themselves, that you will humanely shoot into the air or "up". You, after all, are not dreaming of a scarecrow or trauma, took out a barrel, - shoot, otherwise another “cowboy” will shoot earlier, or the next time “gopot” will just quietly stick in the back sharpening and take away the lighted weapon. I said many times, if you want to save beauties in wastelands, go to work in the police. They didn’t shoot at the shooting gallery, swallow shit with blood in the hot spot ... You can’t let this genie out of the bottle, you can’t give the right to a military weapon, to its legislative status, to ordinary people. If we are talking about self-defense, it should be justified, but it is impossible to legally justify premeditated murder, which is inevitable when obtaining the right to the status of military weapons. They killed the attacker from a carbine, shotgun, or from a trauma, just with a kitchen knife, the court must determine how adequate your answer was. To do this, there must be a fair and understandable law, so that the peasant who cut armed gangsters, saving his family, would not be tried as guilty, but his snicked face, which could be shot with a side glance, or a scratch on his Lexus, would not be justified such a "self defense". We all love weapons, the difference is that one needs the right to one’s life, and the other one needs the right to die.
            1. Dedall
              Dedall 2 February 2018 19: 32
              +5
              Dear, you did not understand the essence of the issue that was raised in the article. And there he asks when the criteria for what is considered aggression and what is necessary self-defense will be enshrined in law. Something like medieval Russian Truth, where it is indicated clearly and unequivocally. In about the same way these criteria are described in Sharia.
              I would also like to add that at the current level of jurisprudence, the law should clearly outline the conditions that are necessary to confirm the words of an individual person. That is, if it is written that everyone who has a gun should carry a recorder on his forehead and turn it on before use, then it should. But in Texas at the end of the 19th century, they were not there and therefore the criterion of aggressive intentions indicated the first delivery of a revolver (or other weapon). In this case, the defender must be shot in front, and not in the back. And that’s it! If the sheriff confirms this, the jury finds the defender not guilty.
              1. Per se.
                Per se. 2 February 2018 21: 09
                0
                Quote: Dedall
                Dear, you did not understand the essence of the question that was raised in the article. And there it is asked about when the criteria of what is considered aggression and what is necessary self-defense will be fixed by law.
                Well, why, in the article a rather serious topic is touched upon, broader than that indicated by you. Take this.
                Do you want to live in a country where the police fight against criminals, medicine saves the sick and injured, a fireman pulls a child out of a burning house, and a rescuer rescues a drowning man in the water?
                Of course, I want to live in such a country. But Russia is not yet such a country. Unfortunately.
                Next, a conclusion is made, through the question, - "Rest? Sit calm and obedient? Pending?"That is, we must act, and already these actions should, as it turns out, justify the amended law. I spoke about the problem from the topic that concerns those who want to act like this, replacing not only what."should deal with the military, firefighters, doctors, rescuers, police"but the court with the investigation, the firing squad itself, if you take up arms. If you read my comments, the main conclusion was in the first, -" In our case, it is thought that it is necessary to change (improve) not only laws relating to self-defense and weapons but also the current government itself and the social system itself, which led to a decline in culture and morality"In a normal country, a medical officer should not perform the work of a firefighter, and the retired policeman, like a civilian in his peacetime life, should not feel that the war has not ended for him. This is not normal. As for everything together, it’s necessary come to the polls and send then to such power, which led the country to the fact that hospitals and schools were shut down, that some are furious with fat, others pick up things when they have billions, and for most of them, life is on the verge of survival.
                1. Dedall
                  Dedall 2 February 2018 21: 25
                  +3
                  At this time, it remains only to rely on the all-seeing eye of the Heavenly Father and the all-pervading power of his Holy Will. Pray and His Grace abide, Amen !!!
                  1. Per se.
                    Per se. 2 February 2018 22: 11
                    +1
                    I appreciate your humor, if not sarcasm, but I do not really hope for God invented by the priests, but otherwise, everything happens "by the ways of the Lord, inscrutable" ... I would like to bind my "camel" in any case. And, in truth, Amen!
        2. mac789
          mac789 4 February 2018 20: 25
          +2
          If I understand correctly, the inevitability of punishment should be a stopping factor for the offender ... Otherwise, blood revenge becomes the only deterrent. In our country, the inevitability of punishment is actually abolished by the law enforcement agencies.
          As for the right to bear arms. I think that you can’t enter it. For one good reason - the procedure for obtaining it will be furnished with so many conditions and costs that only a snickering, arrogant, brazen pseudo-elite will receive legal weapons, while the vast majority of normal, law-abiding citizens will be left with their bare hands. And to send a couple of kilograms of gifts in the window to any protected insolent now is not a problem. For this do not need a legal trunk.
  7. Vard
    Vard 1 February 2018 07: 44
    +9
    They put us in jail for how much you talk ... how much you get ... There were incidents so to speak ... All that I said was as follows ... he wanted to hit me ... he missed ... he lost his balance and fell ... I didn’t touch it with my finger ... In the absence of witnesses and expert data, it’s the most ... And the throw through the thigh on the body leaves no traces ...
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 1 February 2018 09: 37
      +8
      Quote: Vard
      he wanted to hit me ... missed ... lost his balance and fell ... I did not touch his finger.

      We swam, we know .... He grabbed me by the chest, I pushed him away. And where he broke his jaw - I have no idea! laughing
      1. domokl
        domokl 1 February 2018 12: 20
        +5
        recourse :It is right. He didn’t beat him but pushed him away .. But I was hit repeatedly. just got to dodge ...
      2. Sverdlov
        Sverdlov 8 February 2018 01: 43
        +1
        Laughing here ...
        And I received a criminal record under 116 of the Criminal Code for beating an old man.
        The evidence was the testimony of witnesses who “showed” that the wife of the patient had told them that he told her that I had beaten him ...
        And the conclusion of the forensic expert - "no traces of beatings were found.
        Three years of appeals, cassations and complaints.
        Answer - you were correctly convicted on the basis of the testimony of witnesses and the conclusion of the forensic medical examination ...
        This is Russia, children ...
  8. Strashila
    Strashila 1 February 2018 07: 50
    13
    For a very long time ... back in the 90s there was a broadcast on this topic, the Weiner brothers took part in it ... it even sounded like that ... that in case of damage to the attacker the defender would sit down, statistics confirmed, already from the 60s years, that there were no acquittals ... a friend himself, he got ... there were two attackers ... he managed to put one down and crashed from his two-meter height, breaking his head with subsequent resuscitation ... received 3 years probation .. ... the second attacker, right ... was a witness ... the body is easier ... there is a victim and there is one who has done it ... what to think ... after all, a group attack must be proved ... and there are witnesses ... He will speak against himself. Therefore, criminals are not afraid of anything ... the victim is afraid of both the criminal and the law if he can defend himself.
    1. old reindeer herder
      old reindeer herder 1 February 2018 08: 48
      +2
      comrade is not in the subject, you can type in the search line "Yandex" "judicial practice in criminal cases about the necessary defense" can learn a lot of interesting things

      [Quote] [/ quote]
  9. Gardamir
    Gardamir 1 February 2018 07: 59
    13
    There is one more nuance about which the authors kept silent. In the first case, the nerd is Russian, and the guest is a guest from the south.
    1. aybolyt678
      aybolyt678 1 February 2018 09: 41
      +2
      Quote: Gardamir
      There is one more nuance about which the authors kept silent. In the first case, the nerd is Russian, and the guest is a guest from the south.

      and one more question: about the moral code of the girl who had to be taken so long?
      1. Antares
        Antares 1 February 2018 11: 46
        +6
        Quote: aybolyt678
        the moral code of the girl who had to take so long to take?

        Vasilisa drank a lot and was not able to communicate.
        Quote: Gardamir
        Muscled guest from the south.

        Sargiz

        all the troubles due to women.
        Even the woes of women because of women
        “Forward” and “injured” do not confuse.
        1. domokl
          domokl 1 February 2018 12: 24
          +6
          Well, the attacker as a child engaged in boxing. Even a couple of times in the ring acted. True, so modestly, he never had a sports category. Even youthful. But the "professional" ... This is from the case ...
  10. Northern warrior
    Northern warrior 1 February 2018 08: 02
    17
    It is better not to leave the attackers alive, otherwise it will turn out in court that you were the first to attack them. If you are defending yourself at home with the help of a smoothbore, then "treat" uninvited guests with 8 mm buckshot - a 90% guarantee of squinting. Of course, you will be accused of exceeding, but it will be easier to prove your case in court - your version of what happened against the version of corpses.
  11. Fox
    Fox 1 February 2018 08: 09
    11
    He often fought, harnessing himself for the weak, although he himself was not a Hercules (but he was diligently engaged in boxing) ... and so the first question from the tracker always was: how did he beat?
    when the last time with 4 nariks clashed the questions were the same ... the answers too: I didn’t have time to hit anyone! everything! but the fact that a concussion in one and a Bosko in another was broken ... it's not me ... the main thing is for myself do not slander yourself. on this and come across. forever.
  12. free
    free 1 February 2018 08: 45
    10
    Bravo author, it’s just that you need to remove the existing power, since it will never let them change. While we are tearing each other, while we are messing around in the mud, she (the power) quietly turns her affairs! Nobody looks in her direction. the topic is very serious, write on this topic more often.
  13. ttk1975
    ttk1975 1 February 2018 08: 46
    +5
    Thanks to the authors for the article. The question is very relevant in our not very healthy society.
  14. erased
    erased 1 February 2018 09: 02
    12
    Authors write correctly, but not completely. But even a simple conclusion can be drawn from the article - under the current government and the rules of the Russian Federation, people should not expect anything good. For there will be no good. Everything is like in 1917. The state is rotten, and the people are in shit. And there is only one way out.
  15. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 1 February 2018 09: 02
    10
    In America, if a person lies on the ground convulsing, or else no one comes close to him to personally provide assistance, they will call an ambulance and the police and that’s all. And not because such- "unspiritual" -just- suddenly, he has a spinal injury and you can’t move it, you move it, and then, you will pay him his whole life for the “delivered disability” ...
    1. Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat 1 February 2018 09: 54
      +8
      The same thing - no one in the US ever helps anyone in a brawl or attack by criminals. The reasons are purely pragmatic: 1 — not a “professional” in “defense” and “fight” —you can suffer yourself, you will have to be treated, and insurance will not cover this treatment, since you not only did not try to avoid the danger, but climbed into a dangerous situation yourself .... 2-not the fact that the “victim” needed protection and, in addition, to compensate for his losses, the victim may also accuse you of “unintentional participation in increasing her moral stress” or that you “got into her personal life. " There is nothing to be done, once the “rule of law”, then we must follow the rules, and not succumb to emotions.
      1. Loess
        Loess 1 February 2018 10: 14
        10
        Mdya ... I don’t want us in the USA.
      2. domokl
        domokl 1 February 2018 12: 28
        14
        It is not only in the USA. In Japan, a couple of our flew home. Heat. They left the terminal and one European woman fell. From stuffiness probably. Our rushed to help. Apply ice and in the shadow carried.
        Two hours at the police station. So far, the injured kuchubumag has not signed. the charge? You were not allowed to provide medical care in Japan. No license and medical training confirmed by local authorities ...
    2. would
      would 5 February 2018 10: 43
      0
      It is immediately clear that you do not know anything about the United States. In the US there is a code of laws better known as the "law of the good Samaritan." The specific standards and their application depend on the particular state, but in some of them anyone who tried to help but inadvertently harmed the injured person (up to death) is relieved of any responsibility, provided that he sincerely tried to help.

      And there can be no “then, you will pay him all his life for“ delivered disability ”“ purely legally.
  16. SPLV
    SPLV 1 February 2018 09: 03
    +4
    Nice and to the point. Just one question. Military Review is not an advisory body under the President. In practice, how can a large community, in practice, influence legislation?
    1. domokl
      domokl 1 February 2018 12: 30
      +9
      First of all influential media. This means that anyone should read it and even answer the questions asked.
      Raising the topic, we always focus on the reaction of the authorities.
  17. Loess
    Loess 1 February 2018 09: 05
    +5
    As long as they will be judged by the results of the work of lawyers, and not by justice, while lawyers will receive enormous money for making white black and black white - until what law is written, nothing will change. This is not only in Russia, it is everywhere like that. After all, the law is a drawbar ... and the lawyers are turning.
    1. Sverdlov
      Sverdlov 8 February 2018 01: 54
      0
      They judge the laws as they like, they completely lost their fear. And the advocates are just raising money. Whoever brought it is right.
  18. betta
    betta 1 February 2018 09: 07
    +9
    My life experience has shown that the law protects just the aggressor, because the victim can only complain and sue, otherwise .... The aggressor has already done his thing, and can easily lie, dodge proving his innocence. This is Roman law, and while it will be difficult to wait for justice.
  19. aybolyt678
    aybolyt678 1 February 2018 09: 14
    +4
    Crime is a normal reaction of normal people to abnormal conditions of existence.
    1. Galleon
      Galleon 1 February 2018 09: 42
      +4
      This is NOT a normal response to abnormal conditions. A normal reaction is a kind of feat, at least in a spiritual sense.
      1. aybolyt678
        aybolyt678 1 February 2018 09: 45
        0
        Quote: Galleon
        it's a bit of a feat

        the feat is to remain normal in abnormal conditions, you mean?
        1. Galleon
          Galleon 1 February 2018 10: 22
          +4
          What else remains? Go beyond human? Perhaps it will be necessary if you get into such a situation and lock. But God forbid, of course ...
      2. Dedall
        Dedall 2 February 2018 22: 29
        +2
        Actually, this expression is taken from the novel by V. Pikul “I have Honor” and tells about the period when the protagonist gets legal practice in the criminal police. And in those days there were purely practices without any common human talk. And every law-abiding citizen could safely buy weapons by a note of a policeman and carry in his pocket at any time. And for the jury, the main characteristic of the defendant was that given by the priest of his parish.
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 2 February 2018 22: 45
          0
          Quote: Dedall
          Actually, this expression is taken from V. Pikul’s novel “I Have Honor”

          Isn't Dostoevsky the same?
          1. Dedall
            Dedall 2 February 2018 22: 49
            +1
            I repent, I could not master anything but the "Idiot". Back in 1982, he wrote a report to the conference about gambling addiction - now this is such a misfortune. But Pikul plowed several times. Very sitting in the mountains to read it.
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 2 February 2018 22: 55
              +1
              It seems in the "Crime and Punishment" the investigator said so. But I also read “Honor”. I can be confused. wink Remarque also has this phrase somewhere. I already googled it.
  20. Dzmicer
    Dzmicer 1 February 2018 09: 38
    +5
    The Soviet legal tradition that equalizes the criminal and the victim still destroys the lives of respectable citizens. The laws of the USSRF protect more a criminal than a victim.
    1. Northern warrior
      Northern warrior 1 February 2018 10: 26
      14
      Judges and prosecutors are afraid of contacting the "children of the mountains," because they may well kill for their convicted fellow. Russian people are fragmented and demoralized, therefore they become a victim of criminals of all stripes and law enforcement officers protecting them.
      1. Dzmicer
        Dzmicer 1 February 2018 10: 43
        +7
        Judges and prosecutors fear contact with "children of the mountains"

        This is another glorious Soviet tradition generated by Leninist national politics:
        “... internationalism on the part of the oppressor or the so-called“ great ”nation (although great only by its violence, great as the great mordimord) should consist not only in observing the formal equality of nations, but also in such INEQUALITY that would compensate the oppressing nation large nation, the inequality that develops in actual life

        Lenin lived, Lenin lives, Lenin will live (until all of his legacy is dismantled to the ground).
  21. X Y Z
    X Y Z 1 February 2018 11: 16
    +7
    I graduated from school in the early 70s of the last century and the favorite topic of teachers was the topic of our non-civic behavior. In their opinion, we should have boldly and actively fought against hooligans, even armed ones, to prevent antisocial acts, etc. Only now they could not tell us who would sit for all these exploits. After all, the current law on self-defense of the Russian Federation is the closest relative of the requirements and articles of the law that were proclaimed in the USSR. Feet grow from there. And, in my opinion, one of the most serious perversions in relation to their citizens in the USSR was the complete absence of the right to their own defense outside police control. How many thousands of worthy people have broken their lives and become outcasts. It’s scary to even think ...
  22. D_V_K
    D_V_K 1 February 2018 11: 48
    +6
    Better to sit in the courtroom than to lie in the cemetery. Although, everyone decides for himself ...
    1. sleeve
      sleeve 1 February 2018 12: 15
      +2
      Not a gram better ... Not even a second. Especially afterwards.
  23. sleeve
    sleeve 1 February 2018 12: 14
    +6
    And how many signatures need to be collected so that the State Duma takes a bill (appeal) for consideration? And let's try? What we do not have lawyers for the correction of the stated? Better hoarseness, but something is born. And if you are not born, then this is the same result ... We will continue to think. We’ll only push the discussion of the military into the framework. After all, the right thing. The police are not protection. Police pathologist offenses. Well, we, in the end, are the citizens of our non-curious country. Take a chance?
  24. realist
    realist 1 February 2018 12: 30
    +5
    the topic of self-defense is very broad and complex. a specific case in E-burg is generally insanity, the boy just defended himself on you too! octagon! it’s a pity if he sits down, but if the attacker understood that the victim had a gun, he would most likely be more careful and polite. the short-barrel for self-defense must be allowed, we are normal people, and the fact that our native state is afraid of us is its problems.
    1. EwgenyZ
      EwgenyZ 1 February 2018 17: 45
      +1
      Quote: realist
      but if the attacker understood that the victim had a gun, then most likely he would be more careful and polite.

      Judging by the article, the attacker could no longer understand anything and the trouble happened anyway, only with much more serious consequences for both sides.
      1. realist
        realist 1 February 2018 19: 08
        +2
        when he attacked, he was healthy and insolently out of measure, when he received an adequate response he immediately "fell ill." I would know in advance that the guy can give a symmetrical answer, he wouldn’t get ...
        1. EwgenyZ
          EwgenyZ 2 February 2018 00: 40
          0
          Quote: realist
          when attacked, was healthy and impudent beyond measure

          They say he was drunk, that's why he didn’t think ...
          1. realist
            realist 2 February 2018 07: 44
            +1
            nonsense, since he got into a fight, he appreciated his chances highly, did not count on resistance - and this is the main thing that pushes people to attack.
  25. Freeman
    Freeman 1 February 2018 12: 34
    +9
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    it’s not a fact that the “victim” needed to be protected and, in addition, to compensate for his losses, the victim may also accuse you of “unintentional participation in increasing her moral stress” or that you “entered into her personal life without demand”.

    Quote: Less
    Mdya ... I don’t want us in the USA.

    This is all from the lack of secular manners. Take the example of English gentlemen.
    Ireland. There is a fight near one of the pubs. An Englishman approaches the fighting and asks:
    - Excuse me, is this a private fight, or can everyone participate?

    laughing
  26. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 1 February 2018 13: 38
    +4
    I decided clearly for myself. There is a threat to life for me and my loved ones, beat first, and there be what happens.
    1. mac789
      mac789 4 February 2018 08: 20
      +2
      From the testimony in court of a man beaten by the first hundred-kilogram orphan with a height of ninety-five meters armed with a one and a half meter baton (about two baseball bats): "A man attacked me with an ax, I dodged to verbally calm the attacker, but the man struck me with an ax in the arm, which is why I experienced a sharp pain. I managed to grab the ax, we fell and started to fight. During the fight, the man pressed my eyes about ten times and I experienced acute pain. Then the attacker several times hit me face on the ground, causing me to experience acute pain. Then we climbed onto legs, without releasing the ax from my hands, and the attacker struck me several times with his head in the face, which made me feel sharp pain, after which he tore the ax away and left. "
      Here is such a hundred-kilogram orphan - a test of acute pain. Not a word about his attack on the car. Not a word about the club. Moreover, the orphan directly denied the attack on the car, and the club and he did not have anything for it. Photographic materials from the place where the baton was taken disappeared from the materials of the investigation. There were no traces of blood at the scene, tools and clothing. During the investigation, not a single examination was conducted. There were other miracles. So I advise you to be prepared for the fact that your opponents will prove to be acute pain painters.
  27. yehat
    yehat 1 February 2018 14: 15
    +2
    the laws are basically normal, the practice of their application needs to be changed.
    She is too focused on finding the guilty and cares little about the peace of society.
  28. Reserve officer
    Reserve officer 1 February 2018 14: 22
    +5
    Alexander Staver, Roman Skomorokhov ...
    I always read your articles with attention. You guys are really talented journalists. And write brightly and on business. Thank you very much.
    And one request - please write to me in a "personal" your nickname on this site. I want to write a message. There are a few thoughts that I want to share. For a regular comment - too much, but for an article on this resource - too little.
    Thanks again for the article.
  29. MRomanovich
    MRomanovich 1 February 2018 14: 30
    0
    Quote: Pax tecum
    282 "Russian" article and the aliens of the most filthy species feel masters on Russian soil ...

    Yes, my friend - a nationalist.
    1. Pax tecum
      Pax tecum 1 February 2018 17: 03
      +7
      Well, yes, I do not deny it. But so far, moderate. And, as it begins, it will be seen further.
      And what is NOT normal in nationalism? In its normal understanding, if you understand what I mean (oh, this tautology)?
      I relate to the Russians, and not to the Russians.
      And if you knew what tough nationalists the great Russian people were in our History ... Suvorov, Mendeleev, Pavlov, Lomonosov, Popov, Lermontov, Alexander III ... Do you know their statements?
      They would definitely be attracted by 282 ...
      1. Pax tecum
        Pax tecum 1 February 2018 17: 14
        +6

        For example...
        1. MRomanovich
          MRomanovich 1 February 2018 19: 02
          0
          We can’t understand each other. I grew up in an international environment and I can not as you call some nationality "filthy." By the way, I also have a biased attitude, but it is connected exclusively with the politics of unfriendly countries, and not with ethnicity.
        2. KERMET
          KERMET 1 February 2018 20: 45
          0
          Are you sure that this could say Lermontov?
  30. mac789
    mac789 1 February 2018 14: 37
    +6
    Our bosses just need ... ... Not qualified consumers ... and not law-abiding citizens ... They need ... ... Slaves.
  31. Serhiodjan
    Serhiodjan 1 February 2018 16: 03
    +2
    What percent support this article! But I don’t know how to make it change the law! Anyone have any ideas?
    1. vladimirvn
      vladimirvn 1 February 2018 16: 15
      +1
      Quote: Serhiodjan
      But I don’t know how to make change the law

      Komsomol article in China. https://www.kuban.kp.ru/daily/26788/3822442/
      "The boss is afraid of the people, the people are afraid of the boss." Complete harmony. laughing
    2. Pax tecum
      Pax tecum 1 February 2018 18: 00
      +5
      There are methods, but violent and history will have to be repeated.
      Until the current government is changed, the laws will not change. Here we are either them, or they are us.
      Well, it’s worth trying to start with the elections in March.
  32. 82т11
    82т11 1 February 2018 20: 00
    0
    To be honest, I didn’t understand what else, apart from “Yaroslavna’s crying”, do the authors propose?
    There is a site (https://www.roi.ru) write your offers there and advertise on the Internet.
    Do not believe the Internet; organize a social movement.
    But such meaningless articles telling how everything is bad with us and I can write) Where is the specifics? What do you offer?
  33. German Titov
    German Titov 1 February 2018 22: 57
    +1
    Once upon a time, in early youth, a wrestling coach told me a phrase, the meaning of which I understood much later. "Any fight for you can end up in a hospital, a prison or a grave. And therefore, at the slightest opportunity to avoid a fight, avoid it. Save your own nerves and the nerves of your parents."
    Probably all trainers have golden words. One of my friends was under investigation for 6 years (broke arms dealers). The boss had the courage (despite the "recommendations of the prosecutor's office") not to dismiss until the court ruling. The case was eventually dismissed (three prosecutors investigated one by one). In another case, the client (taxi driver) during the attack of the "majors", by radio, called for help. Of the taxi drivers who arrived, they selected two who "allegedly shred majors (about 50 people arrived there). Therefore, the advice was to give someone" on the scoreboard ", called" Shvidku help "and" screw "from this place further. Better in the morning, a summary read and wonder how “Ludwig Aristarkhovich” - and who damaged this deputy’s face, ay.yay.yay .... "And why do we have an acute sense of justice? The defense to keep and protect the weak, should be able to everyone who considers himself a man. But we have such Women !!! Unfortunately, those who come up with the Laws are cut off from realities.
  34. Brigadier
    Brigadier 2 February 2018 04: 38
    0
    While Putin and his accomplices are the oligarchs in power, hell, what will change!
    As they planted, they will plant for self-defense!
    EVERYONE VOTES FOR THE BREAST !!!
    1. mac789
      mac789 4 February 2018 20: 42
      +1
      Is it really not clear to you that he is the same appointed deputy chairman. Dima 2. The same swing only in the opposite direction. Tired of a career intelligence officer, capttalist Putin? Nate to you a man from the plow of the socialist Grudinin - an intelligent sane uncle ... Against the general background. That's just me personally very much worried about the social group that defines the passengers of these swings.
  35. Icarus
    Icarus 3 February 2018 15: 19
    +2
    Quote: EwgenyZ
    Quote: The same Lech
    I wish those who passed such a law themselves to be in the place of the injured people from bandits and who decided to defend themselves.

    Our laws are written in order to be written, for the "tick". Most go to deputies not to write laws, but to live well, promote their business, get out of criminal prosecution, get a good pension, etc. Those who want something to change units and "do not do weather." The example of the Liberal Democratic Party and the Communist Party in 1993 is indicative. Having received the majority of seats, the "people's deputies", first of all, provided themselves with luxurious offices, a large number of servants, in the form of various assistants, and ministerial salaries. I don’t remember a single law over the years so that immediately after publication it starts working normally immediately without any amendments or additions.

    No guys. The point is not in the laws but in their application and in the judicial system. If we have 99% of convictions, which is higher than under Stalin, then the matter is not in the laws. Something needs to be changed in the judicial system. And the laws, and in particular Art. 37, 38 of the Criminal Code, normal, as well as the guiding explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court to them.
    1. Falcon5555
      Falcon5555 4 February 2018 03: 44
      +2
      And in the laws, and in the judicial system. The laws are abnormal.
  36. karabas86
    karabas86 4 February 2018 20: 58
    0
    All is well, but why the heck donbass has slipped.
  37. would
    would 5 February 2018 11: 00
    0
    Well, you have to start again. Why is this the situation? Were there no proposals to change it? There were, were.

    There was also a decision of the plenum of the Supreme Court, very competent and relevant to reality. There was a vote at the ROI for the "Doctrine of the Fortress" which gained 100 thousand votes. So where are they all? After the “Fortress Doctrine” scored 100k, the Ministry of Internal Affairs began a genuine hysteria and they began to criticize every comma, the media began scribbling dozens of articles with fantasies “Now drunk Russians will lure people and kill them at home,” and the State Duma just quietly put the bill into the far box . Three times, the bill was introduced three times for discussion.

    Resolution of the plenum? The same situation, there was a terrible hysteria in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and it never became law. And the decision of the RF Armed Forces does not have the force of law and is a purely recommendation for lower courts, that is, it is not binding.

    So it is an absolutely proven fact that the State Duma and the "law enforcement" system are against the right of citizens to the necessary defense, that is, they seek to protect criminals. Why? Well, there are a lot of theories, someone recalls the connection between State Duma members and organized crime groups and specifically "thieves in law", someone says "The rifle gives rise to power." One way or another, but it is a fact.

    And all this with an undisguised attitude towards the Russian people when the “people's representatives” say directly from the TV that Russian weapons are not possible because they are unbalanced drunk, that the Russian nation is underdeveloped in order to protect themselves and own weapons. Direct speech, live. Only a little shortened.

    So you can imagine that in Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov went on the air and said "The Chechens are completely drunk, they are unworthy of weapons, unworthy of defending themselves, they are an undeveloped nation ..." and hereinafter? I can’t imagine it at all. And in Dagestan? And in Ingushetia? Exactly. The truth is that, unlike the Russians, Caucasian ethnic groups have minimal self-esteem that allows them to a priori consider themselves worthy to own weapons and protect themselves. A priori, this is not even a question of discussing Caucasian society, it is not a question in the mind of a Caucasian man. This reality is so natural that it is not recognized, it simply is. And as a result, the woman who killed four militants from her husband’s AK in Chechnya was not waiting for the prosecutor to find out the legitimacy of the machine gun and “Why didn’t you shoot the attackers in the legs? Why did you kill them and not detain them? Why didn’t you run away? Why did you shoot the fighters who were leaving? ? ", and the highest award of the Chechen Republic, an apartment in the elite residential complex of Grozny and personally gratitude from Ramzan Akhmatovich Kadyrov.

    Meanwhile, prosecutors and bunkers are waiting for Russian guys in Russia, and in the comments on Topvar they write that "the Russians are unworthy of owning weapons, they should not be given them." And after all this, these same people are surprised, “Why h .... they have crushed everyone for themselves and are not afraid of anything?”
    1. SLAVA
      SLAVA 5 February 2018 14: 20
      +1
      In Russia, both Russians and non-Russians have enough weapons, and there are no problems in acquiring them legally, but the right to use them for self-defense or protecting your home is practically absent!
      1. would
        would 5 February 2018 15: 01
        0
        In Russia, Russians have enough weapons


        Russians just have very few of them. While in Chechnya each family has at least an absolutely militant AK (this is from the words of the Chechens themselves), in Khabarovsk for the entire village for decades suffering from the invasion of bears there may not be a single trunk. Every resident knows the name of a person whose bear was bitten not so long ago, but even there is no civilian Saiga.

        but the right to use it for self-defense or protection of your home is practically absent!


        I’m about this.
  38. starshina78
    starshina78 5 February 2018 19: 06
    0
    One day in one of the programs late one evening, one of the higher Interior Ministry generals dropped these words (not verbatim) - "There will never be such a thing as self-defense in our country, and they will always punish people who have damaged the attacker for the reason that , while detaining someone, he can consider detention for an attack by unknown people and resist and in court to motivate that he did not know that these people were in plain clothes cops "something like this. The bottom line is that the cops are against. And the courts in FIG someone. they have a guilty verdict plan.
  39. Loki_2
    Loki_2 7 February 2018 20: 58
    0
    "nerd" vs "four tipsy" rolls " - This is lyrics that not one court will accept.
    Fracture of the base of the skull - this is physics on the basis of which they will pass a sentence.
    This is how the justice system works and it has nothing to do with justice. This is understood by all people whose thinking has crossed the threshold of 14 years.