Among other things, the decree gives the right to the heads of the Moscow School of Defense staff to impose certain restrictions necessary, in their opinion, to “ensure security”.
A full ban has been declared on the circulation of civilian weapons, except for storage and seizure, throughout Moscow and the Moscow Region (as well as in the 9 regions of the Federation).
It is important to remember that the law refers to “civilian weapons” and freely sold unlicensed defense means, such as stun guns, gas cartridges and sprays of any design.
As we can see, the authorities believe that for the safety of the World Cup it is necessary to deprive citizens of the opportunity to protect themselves from criminal attacks even with the help of a can of irritating gas. They may believe that the police will grow incredibly during the event, and it will be able to always and everywhere protect everyone from any threat (including stray dogs that have gathered in packs), or that the criminals will show consciousness during the championship and not attack the citizens. Or that the safety of individuals is something that can be sacrificed for the sake of ... it is not clear what.
After all, it is not clear how the population that owns weapons in full compliance with the requirements of the law, and the legal circulation of weapons threatens the participants and fans of the World Cup?
To begin with, there was no need for restrictive measures at all, since, according to the Weapons Act, it is forbidden to wear them during public events, which also include football matches. However, it is likely that those who drafted the text of the decree did not realize this.
In order not to be unfounded, we’ll tell you all about two episodes that took place a year ago in Moscow, during the same ban. Then, in just one day, two residents of the capital managed to protect themselves and their loved ones with the help of traumatic weapons.
In the first case, a Muscovite repelled an attack by two robbers who attacked his son. The following happened: the family of Muscovites late at night, about two o'clock returned from the dacha, and while the mother and father unloaded the things from the car, their son decided to take a bike ride through the yard, which was already removed from the trunk. However, before he could even drive off fifty meters, two unknown persons jumped out of him and tried to take the bicycle away. The woman who entered the staircase was the first to respond to the cry of the boy, and called her husband, who had already climbed the stairs.
The boy's father rushed to help his son, grabbed a traumatic pistol and fired two shots into the air, scaring off the attackers. The attackers, who, according to the boy, “had a Caucasian appearance,” ran away, and so far have not been able to detain them.
On the same day, another incident involving the use of the weapon of limited destruction (PLO) took place in the capital. In 1 Cossack Lane, unknown persons of non-Slavic appearance attacked a realtor, who took out 19,3 million rubles received from an apartment sold. Two men tried to take away a backpack with money when the realtor got into his friend's car. In the course of the ensuing fight, the realtor took out a traumatic pistol and fired twice at the intruders. The attackers stopped the attack and escaped, while one of them was injured.
The realtor and his friends left the scene by car, but soon they were stopped on the Leningradskoe highway. It turned out that because of a shootout in the city, the “Interception” plan was announced, and the victims of the attack were mistaken for intruders. However, the police almost immediately figured out who attacked whom, and a criminal robbery case was opened.
As you can see, in both cases, only the use of weapons saved people. Moreover, even in the case of a bicycle, the PLO Muscovite did not turn out to be involved; it could turn out badly and even take a tragic turn. The attackers were very aggressive, the cries of the mother and then the father did not make any impression on them. And if it were not for the pistol shots, they would have rushed at their parents.
These two episodes are related not only to the fact of successful self-defense with the use of OOP, but also that the people who used the weapon, absolutely correctly and in full accordance with the law, turned out to be ... violators!
As mentioned above, both episodes occurred during the presidential decree on security measures for the time of FIFA football tournaments. And according to this document, in the regions where competitions will be held, “the circulation (with the exception of storage, removal) of civilian and service weapons and ammunition to it” is prohibited. ”
It should be noted that the circulation of weapons, as follows from the relevant federal law, is not only trade or production, but also carrying and transporting. That is, both Muscovites, the father of the cyclist, and the realtor, became violators of the decree, according to which they were to become victims, and possibly victims.
There is no exaggeration in this: if the state is unable to protect a person (you can’t attach a police officer to each one) and deprives him of the opportunity to defend himself, there is a great chance that he will be robbed, beaten or killed.
It is noteworthy that law enforcement officers, commenting on both episodes, noted that since the weapon was used legally, it would be withdrawn from the owners “only” during the security regime. Accordingly, if they were attacked again before 13 July 2017 (when the last year’s ban ended), they could no longer defend themselves.
It is clear that the police do not keep such statistics, but, based on what happened, it can be assumed that during the time of the special security measures, a certain number of Muscovites (as well as residents of other regions) were (and still) attacked or robbed, unable to defend themselves. Because in accordance with the requirement of the decree left a weapon or means of self-defense at home.
Is it necessary to “pay off” with the security of citizens for imitating measures to enhance the safety of participants and fans of football tournaments?
After all, criminals and just street criminals will not be disarmed during the competition. That's the whole point - often the authorities, instead of fighting the criminals, prefer to limit the possibilities of self-defense for law-abiding citizens, posing as “strengthening security”, because it is so much easier and more convenient.
After all, it is much easier to “press” a law-abiding person, turning his life into endless and meaningless cavils to hell, than to reveal underground arsenals and prevent illegal circulation of weapons. This is the usual, hard and ungrateful work of law enforcement, which you will not do yourself loud PR.
The same with this decree. Need to provide security? It is easy - we will forbid self-defenders, hunters and athletes to take out weapons from home, and even to the heap we will also ban trade in guns, ammunition and gas cartridges. This initiative caused a public outcry? So, the work is underway!
And the fact that the gun shops at once lost their turnover (with the remaining need to pay rent), the authorities are not concerned. As well as the fact that tens of thousands of law-abiding citizens have lost the opportunity to protect themselves and their loved ones. They, like in the old joke, prefer to look not where they lost, but where it is lighter.