A man opened fire in the building of the World Court in Novokuznetsk

A man opened fire in the building of the World Court in Novokuznetsk

In Novokuznetsk, a criminal case has been opened against a man who shot from a hunting rifle in the building of the world court of one of the city’s districts. The suspect is charged with murder. This was reported by the press service of the SUSK RF in the Kemerovo region.


According to the report, on Thursday morning a 45-year-old man with a hunting rifle entered the building of the world court of Novokuznetsk. The bailiff who tried to stop the man received a charge of shot in the stomach and later died from a wound. After that, the attacker went further, where he fired a second shot at a 43-year-old female witness, who is currently in serious condition.

The witness of the incident managed to press the panic button, the attacker was detained at the crime scene by the bailiffs and Rosguard officers.


At the scene, the police and investigators of the Investigative Committee. A criminal case has been opened under the article “murder,” the issue of electing a preventive measure against the attacker is being decided. The motives of the attacker are currently unknown.

Currently, the issue of bringing charges to the detainee under the article “murder” in connection with the death of the victim and the election of a preventive measure against him is being decided

- said the report of the Investigative Committee.

The authorities of Novokuznetsk promised to provide comprehensive assistance to the families of the victims of the attack.

Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

125 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Irokez 16 January 2020 10: 07 New
    • 13
    • 48
    -35
    Well, people are already shooting from hunting rifles.
    He said that it is dangerous to have firearms even for hunting, but no they say that it is for protection.
    1. GKS 2111 16 January 2020 10: 15 New
      • 35
      • 11
      +24
      That's right, forbid. And kitchen knives, and pans with stools, too. And generally, in a straitjacket, put on everyone and tie their sleeves behind their backs. Only in this case nothing like this will happen. There’s a short barrel (to allow or not to do this, this is a favorite topic for verbal battles) or not, no one is safe from this.
      1. Irokez 16 January 2020 10: 20 New
        • 11
        • 30
        -19
        Quote: GKS 2111
        That's right, forbid. And kitchen knives, and pans with stools, too. And generally, in a straitjacket, put on everyone and tie their sleeves behind their backs. Only in this case nothing like this will happen. There’s a short barrel (to allow or not to do this, this is a favorite topic for verbal battles) or not, no one is safe from this.

        Well, if the victims had a gun, they would immediately liquidate the shooter, and if there weren’t any gunshots at all, then you would look and would not kill anyone. And with a knife you can immediately not kill and you still have to try to kill with one or two blows, and there you can get the answer yourself.
        All this talk about the benefits and necessity of gunshots on hand is from the evil one.
        1. Avior 16 January 2020 12: 00 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          It is unlikely that they would be allowed to enter the courthouse with weapons, fraught with consequences
          In the United States, people often shoot in places where it is forbidden to bring weapons into schools, for example.
      2. Hunter 2 16 January 2020 12: 15 New
        • 12
        • 6
        +6
        I am simply outraged that due to the act of one schizophrenic, the topic of the ban on weapons immediately came up. What such a case could the Court consider (ATTENTION) in order to provoke such a reaction of a clearly Sick person !? There, petty criminal cases are considered and all sorts of domestic issues (alimony, small tax arrears and other crap).
        If he didn’t have a gunshot, he would come with an ax or a knife. The question to those who allowed the purchase of weapons is obviously a sick person!
        1. Shelest2000 16 January 2020 17: 59 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          I am simply outraged that due to the act of one schizophrenic, the topic of the ban on weapons immediately came up.

          I’ll tell you a secret that those who advocate a ban on firearms themselves are far from healthy.
          1. Irokez 16 January 2020 18: 18 New
            • 2
            • 3
            -1
            Quote: Shelest2000
            I’ll tell you a secret that those who advocate a ban on firearms themselves are far from healthy.

            Why are you quoting a person who was ill himself and his fantasies came down through sexual feelings.
            Well, for example, his logic is: “A person is only a pansexual being, that religion, culture and art are only superstructures over the genitals of a person, that the love of parents and children for each other is a desire for incest, driven into the subconscious."
            The weapon itself is not scary, but scary, the fact that it is a person who uses it is not clear which formation. And even trusted and reliable people also misfire like cartridges in a clip (although a misfire can save someone's life).
            1. Shelest2000 16 January 2020 18: 23 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              The weapon itself is not scary, but scary, the fact that it is a person who uses it is not clear which formation.

              Here on the "formations", please, in more detail.
              PS. I am to the green door, what he said there about his sexual fantasies (I also have them laughing ), but about hoplophobes he expressed himself briefly, clearly and specifically. This cannot be taken away.
      3. Stas 2rep 16 January 2020 13: 26 New
        • 5
        • 3
        +2
        Yes, and axes must be prohibited. And to remove the available from the population.
      4. savage1976 16 January 2020 13: 52 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        It’s right to forbid cars, you can crush them. Ban aircraft, people die in them. Sledding is forbidden, you can break it, mountain skiing is forbidden, legs are broken there, and it is forbidden to give birth, all born die over time.
    2. Hunter 2 16 January 2020 10: 18 New
      • 21
      • 7
      +14
      It began ... you know that with the help of knives hundreds of times more murders are committed than with the use of a firearm? Continue your thought - say that you need to prohibit knives, axes, chisels, screwdrivers, the entire Garden Tool ... bricks and stones - to give in an account for builders! stop
      Quote: Irokez
      Well, people are already shooting from hunting rifles.
      He said that it is dangerous to have firearms even for hunting, but no they say that it is for protection.
      1. Irokez 16 January 2020 10: 27 New
        • 8
        • 18
        -10
        Quote: Hunter 2
        Began...

        It has not begun, but continues.
        If more people are killed from a garden tool and a screwdriver than from gunshots, this does not justify the permission and carrying of a weapon because even if it is prohibited, the total number of deaths from it will accordingly decrease and this option of potential salvation should be used.
        1. Hunter 2 16 January 2020 11: 08 New
          • 27
          • 7
          +20
          I don’t know how to explain to you that the number of murders has nothing to do with the number of Legal Firearms! If you don’t need it, speak for yourself.
          I - Need, for hunting and Sport ... God forbid, for the protection of the Wife and Children. To each his own, and sticking out his Wishlist - no need to encroach on My Rights!
          1. Irokez 16 January 2020 11: 16 New
            • 3
            • 17
            -14
            Quote: Hunter 2
            the number of killings has nothing to do with the number of Legal Firearms

            Have you ever thought you wrote?
            If a person does not have firearms (see below), then there are no deaths from these weapons (although this can be learned)? So the total number of deaths will decrease (this is good).
            1. Hunter 2 16 January 2020 11: 37 New
              • 14
              • 5
              +9
              Quote: Irokez

              Have you ever thought you wrote?
              If a person does not have firearms (see below), then there are no deaths from these weapons (although this can be learned)? So the total number of deaths will decrease (this is good).

              That you do not want to think at all. There will be (suppose by your whim) a shotgun on his hands, they will find something to replace him with. Understand that a weapon is harmless in itself, it doesn’t kill, people kill - people !!!
              And for a moment, think about the possibility of getting an armed rebuff - reduces the number of crimes in general and murders in particular. If you live in a world of pink unicorns - peace to you, red-skinned fellow, we hope that they do not gouge you.
              But, there is no need to try to limit My Legal Right to Own a weapon, which I use according to the letter of the Law!
              1. Ka-52 16 January 2020 13: 28 New
                • 5
                • 5
                0
                And for a moment, think about the possibility of getting an armed rebuff - reduces the number of crimes in general and murders in particular.

                Do not broadcast someone's tales. Crime in the United States is hundreds of times higher (especially severe) than in neighboring Canada, where gun laws are much tougher.
                1. revnagan 16 January 2020 13: 49 New
                  • 4
                  • 6
                  -2
                  Quote: Ka-52
                  Crime in the United States is hundreds of times higher (especially severe) than in neighboring Canada, where gun laws are much tougher.

                  What percentage of this crime is attributed to crimes using LEGAL firearms? And a short-barreled one in particular. I emphasize legal!
                  1. Ka-52 16 January 2020 13: 55 New
                    • 4
                    • 4
                    0
                    What percentage of this crime is attributed to crimes using LEGAL firearms? And a short-barreled one in particular. I emphasize legal!

                    learn to read and comprehend what you read. This is a useful skill. The opponent indicated that being able to get an armed rebuff reduces the likelihood of a crime being committed. I directly pointed to statistics on serious crimes in the USA and Canada. Which indicates that in the United States liberal with respect to weapons (and where there are correspondingly more legal weapons for self-defense, respectively) there are orders of magnitude more crimes than neighbors (where getting weapons for personal use is much more difficult and where the number of trunks in hands is in% ratio less). That is, millions of trunks in the hands of Americans DO NOT make their lives safer. What does the% crime with a firearm. You are inattentive. Or do you want to argue with statistics?
                    1. revnagan 16 January 2020 14: 36 New
                      • 7
                      • 6
                      +1
                      Quote: Ka-52
                      learn to read and comprehend what you read.

                      Thank you, dear father, for telling me what to learn. But I just put the letters into words, but it never occurred to me to comprehend. I will be grateful now.
                      Quote: Ka-52
                      Or do you want to argue with statistics?

                      Statistics is an interesting thing, it is like the Law, and the Law, as you know, "like a drawbar" ... However, for thinking people there is such a thing as analysis and logic. So, what is the controversy about: whether citizens should be prohibited from owning weapons or not. Are you saying that in the United States, where arms legislation is more liberal than in Canada, crime is higher than in Canada? Conclusion (veiled, but this is such a demagogic trick, I’m aware): if in the States (read - everywhere) to tighten the arms legislation, then crime there will be lower, as in Canada. But I’m talking about something else, which Are there any serious crimes in the United States using a LEGAL weapon from among all crimes? In other words, how is a permitted, legal weapon in the hands of citizens affecting the total number of crimes? What is the correlation between legal weapons in the hands of the US population (where arms legislation is milder than in Canada) and the level of crime in the country? So it is clear? And how can US citizens tighten arms laws FOR LEGAL OWNERS of weapons against this crime rate? Crime will fall if disobedient citizens to disarm? when in Florida they took from Cuba all who called themselves "Castro's political victims", crime in the state increased at times, especially the number of serious crimes-murders, wear and tear, robberies ... Florida authorities quickly orientated and allowed citizens wearing and self-defense with the help of a short barrel. And there was a miracle crime fell at times. And here you are "rubbing some game". Here it is interesting:
                      http://warrax.net/94/hop/nikonov.pdf
                      I will allow myself a few quotes:
                      "At the same time, in Moscow alone there were about 600 cases of legal self-defense, and only 70 were noted for the criminal use of traumatists. However, the same high-ranking cops with the stubbornness of the donkeys assure the press that if the Russians allow real pistols, with bullets not in 85 joules, but in 300 and quite identifiable, Russians will shoot each other right there.
                      Doesn't it seem to you that prohibitionists are simple?
                      But with a trick! Verbalizing their deepest fears, they also try to prove something with the help of numbers. But what about: they are beaten with statistics on the wort, they also need to respond with something similar to science.
                      I already mentioned in passing a small example of their futile attempts. Remember: “according to statistics, the inhabitants of a house with weapons increase their chance of getting a gunshot wound” ... Now it's time to dwell on their cheating speculations in more detail. Socialists have several favorite tricks by which they try to prove the unprovable.
                      The first reception - "Vali kul, so that it was worse." It consists in the following: prohibitionists scare the inhabitants by the number of people killed and wounded by firearms. For example: “Did you know that in the United States of America alone, one hundred thousand people become victims of weapons every year!” Cool, right? .. Either because of petty indigenous tricks, or because of their usual inability to distinguish between good and bad, left-wingers bring down in one heap both law-abiding people and bandits who shot each other in disassembly, and suicides, and robbers who were scammed defenders. In other words, a crazy arsonist, killed by a Texas farmer, falls into a bunch of “victims of firearms,” while a woman who has been raped and beaten to death with a pipe trumpet is not among the victims. Socialists do not see her point blank.
                      The second very common trick of prohibitionists is “worthless” statistics. That is, the numbers are bright, but not talking about anything. For example: look, leftists are delighted to say, here in this heavily armed state the crime rate is higher than there in that unarmed! .. But what is the consequence and what is the cause? In state X, crime is higher than in state Y because there are a lot of weapons there or, on the contrary, people are intensively armed there, because crime is high? Of course, the second answer is correct, because we know that legal weapons are practically not involved in crimes and, therefore, can not affect the growth of crime. But it can easily be slowed down, as the famous Florida experiment teaches us. Weapons were allowed - the shaft of crime was shot down. And in Washington, on the contrary: weapons were banned - crime jumped.

                      Take Texas, for example. There are a lot of weapons. But crime is high. From what? And because Mexico is across the river. But there is no fence at the border. And the rod from the south is illegal illegally on an industrial scale. This is a permanent export of crime in its purest form! At the same time, a rare Mexican runs to Alaska, Mexicans are thermophilic and settle mainly in the southern states. In Alaska, however, its “internal emigrants” are enough. I was once in an Alaskan prison. In order, so to speak, familiarization. Everything is pretty civilized, clean. Prisoners in yellow-orange robes cut through. But who is sitting there? Almost one hundred percent are one national minority. In prison, I met only a couple of white faces, and all the rest were narrow-eyed, drunken Aleuts. Indians, quite simply.
                      Another example of “worthless” statistics of leftists is the following statement: “It is dangerous to keep weapons in the house - 80% of murders in the USA were committed by people who were friends, family members or acquaintances of the victim.” So what? This is a global pattern: the lion's share of murders is a simple household routine, and the most dangerous people for you in this regard are acquaintances, relatives, wives, husbands, brothers. If you, of course, belong to the marginal layer, since it is they who, drunk, wet each other with terrible force. The only difference is that in Russia they kill each other with kitchen knives, irons and pans, while in the USA sometimes pistols are also used. At the same time, I recall that the overall level of homicides in America is lower than ours. "(Cit.)
                      Here there is about your favorite "statistics" that you can’t argue with. Well, I went to learn to think, to comprehend what I read, so to speak. It’s easier for you, because everything is clear right away. Here you are right from the first glance. A gift from you.
                      1. Constructor68 16 January 2020 18: 56 New
                        • 2
                        • 6
                        -4
                        So much empty bullshit - not too lazy to sit and write? Statistics say that in the US there are 6 killings per 100t. Person / year, in Canada 1. One, Karl! Everything is clear and understandable - the USA is 6 (six, Karl!) Times more than 100 murders. residents. No need to puff and pull an owl on the globe.
                      2. Fikys 17 January 2020 06: 58 New
                        • 4
                        • 2
                        +2
                        Quote: Designer 68
                        So much empty bullshit - not too lazy to sit and write?

                        A colleague didn’t write nonsense, but you just read it inattentively, there is also about your objection. Simply put: are you sure that if Canadian arms laws are introduced in the USA, crime will not become there, say, twice as much? Those. 12 times more than in Canada? And now the homework: Compare crime rates and gun laws in Canada and the Czech Republic.
                      3. Constructor68 17 January 2020 08: 02 New
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        -1
                        Simply put: are you sure that if you introduce Canadian gun laws in the US

                        I’m not going to predict the level of crime in the United States by tightening the legislation on the sale and storage of NGOs (this is an ungrateful thing), I just give a clear difference between the statistics of murders in the liberal USA (5,35) and non-liberal Canada (1,68). Portugal (0,6), Spain (0,63), France (1,35), Germany (1,18), etc. It was said above by another commentator, "the presence of weapons in the hands of the population and the freedom to sell them does not make people's lives safe." And all of you, with some kind of donkey persistence, are trying to prove that this is not so.
                        By the way, over the statement of this scribble above that only illegal weapons are used in crimes, I just laugh out loud. In the most high-profile crimes with massacres of the past 2 years in the Russian Federation (Kerch, Moscow), legally acquired weapons were used for themselves
                      4. Fikys 17 January 2020 09: 25 New
                        • 3
                        • 2
                        +1
                        Quote: Designer 68
                        I just give the argument a clear distinction between kill statistics

                        For the chronically misunderstood - once again, the last one: where did you get the idea that these statistics correlate with the liberalism of arms legislation ?! Have you ignored your homework? Not surprised because the result would not be in your favor.
                        Quote: Designer 68
                        it was said by another commentator, "the presence of weapons in the hands of the population and the freedom to sell them does not make people's lives safe." And all of you, with some kind of donkey persistence, are trying to prove that this is not so.

                        And I, as another commentator, will say this: "the lack of weapons in the hands of the population and the ban on their sale does not make people's lives safe." And you are all trying with some kind of donkey stubbornness to prove that this is not so. wink
                        Quote: Designer 68
                        In the most high-profile crimes with massacres of the past 2 years in the Russian Federation (Kerch, Moscow), legally acquired weapons were used for themselves

                        How many people were affected? And how much - in two years from illegal weapons? At the same time, neither one nor the other had any effective opportunity to protect their life and health, not through their own fault, but through the fault of our legislators, which is very strange, because from the point of view of the law, civilian weapons are no different (in the legal sense) from a personal car.
                        And the last one. A person who voluntarily renounces the opportunity to protect his life, freedom and honor on his own, is not worthy of them. I cannot respect such people.
                      5. Constructor68 20 January 2020 05: 41 New
                        • 2
                        • 3
                        -1
                        For the chronically misunderstood - once again, the last one: where did you get the idea that these statistics correlate with the liberalism of arms legislation ?!

                        For those who are in the tank, on an armored train, or who have not been accustomed to use their heads since childhood:
                        The United States has a population of 330 million, arms in hand - 270 million. Those. for each resident 0,8 trunk. Kills per 100 thousand inhabitants - 5,35. The proportion of murders with the use of weapons (including other murders) is 64%.
                        Canada - a population of 34 million., Weapons on hand - 2 million. For each resident 0,05 trunk. Kills per 100 thousand inhabitants - 1,68. The proportion of murders with the use of weapons is 28,5% of the total number of murders.
                        And in England, for example (even stricter with weapons), the share of killings with a firearm in the total amount is 4,5%. Moreover, the statistics of homicides in the USA and Great Britain are again NOT in favor of the USA - 5,36 and 1,2 per 100 thousand people. respectively. I give you the numbers, but I have silly rants about homework. Well, you are just a guru of a reasoned argument laughing
                      6. Fikys 20 January 2020 17: 45 New
                        • 0
                        • 1
                        -1
                        Quote: Designer 68
                        I give you the numbers, but I have silly rants about homework.

                        Do you want songs? I have them;)
                        Canada - a population of 34 million., Weapons on hand - 2 million. For each resident 0,05 trunk. Kills per 100 thousand inhabitants - 1,68. The proportion of murders with the use of weapons is 28,5% of the total number of murders, 0,48 per 100 thousand. residents.
                        The acquisition of weapons under license, storage in a safe, hidden carrying and use for self-defense is prohibited.
                        Czech Republic - population 10,6 million, arms on hand - 1,3 million. For every inhabitant of the 0,12 barrel. Kills per 100 thousand inhabitants - 0,6. The proportion of murders using weapons is 16% of the total number of murders, 0,1 per 100 thousand. residents.
                        The acquisition of weapons under license (very liberal, minimum requirements), covert carrying and self-defense are allowed.
                        Learn the logic from your daughter, you have this very bad, as well as self-esteem.
                      7. The comment was deleted.
                      8. The comment was deleted.
                      9. The comment was deleted.
                      10. The comment was deleted.
              2. revnagan 21 January 2020 17: 32 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Quote: Designer 68
                I give you the numbers, but I have silly rants about homework. Well, you are just a guru of a reasoned argument

                Well, here I give you the numbers. And it turns out that the number of crimes in England, where arms legislation is softer, crime is higher than in the States.

                And it turns out that armed citizens suppress some of the crimes on their own and the crime rate in the United States is lower than in England.
                https://visasam.ru/emigration/vybor/prestupnost-v-mire.html
                However, to whom I argue. Your position is clear: "there are two kinds of opinions - mine and your wrong." And even clumsy attempts to "poke" with elements of insulting opponents. That's all that you are capable of.
              3. The comment was deleted.
        2. AU Ivanov. 17 January 2020 17: 36 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          Switzerland 0.45. Despite the fact that citizens keep military weapons at home.
        3. revnagan 18 January 2020 16: 35 New
          • 1
          • 3
          -2
          Quote: Designer 68
          By the way, over the statement of this scribble above that only illegal weapons are used in crimes, I just laugh in my voice

          Leave the epithet for yourself, because apart from insults you have nothing to cover. And the one who laughs the last laughs well. I will continue to corner you: why do you consider cases from Russian practice when considering crime in the USA? And again, what is the percentage of these cases? in the general statistics of crimes? I’ll be happy to hear the answer, but I don’t understand it. I won’t. There will be new attempts of insults and jokes on your part, right? hi .
        4. The comment was deleted.
        5. The comment was deleted.
  • pru-pavel 17 January 2020 03: 50 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    In Canada, by the way, a short barrel is allowed. By the way, I recently watched a video as a Russian emigrant blogger bought TTshnik legally there. Crime there is associated with other factors.
    1. Ka-52 17 January 2020 04: 35 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      In Canada, by the way, a short barrel is allowed.

      and who wrote about the ban on firearms (rf short-barreled weapons) in Canada. Maybe show an excerpt from my comments, where I talk about it. Or, too, Pavel, “I hear a ring, but I don’t know where he is”? It was written above about tougher (compared to American) legislation in the field of sales and ownership. Underlined and highlighted in bold, especially for you
      Crime there is related to other factors

      What does the nature of crime and this issue?
      1. revnagan 18 January 2020 16: 40 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        Quote: Ka-52
        and who wrote about the ban on firearms (rf short-barreled weapons) in Canada. Maybe show an excerpt from my comments, where I talk about it. Or, too, Pavel, “I hear a ringing, but I don’t know where he is”? It was written above about tougher (in comparison with American) legislation

        Excuse me, do you write from two different accounts under different nicknames? Are the Ka-52 and Constructor - 68 the same person? But this is not accepted on the site
        1. Constructor68 20 January 2020 05: 50 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          Excuse me, do you write from two different accounts under different nicknames? Are the Ka-52 and Constructor - 68 the same person? But this is not accepted on the site

          You can declare every sane person on this site my clone? laughing it will probably be a new way to deal with dissent. Sew faster complaints.
  • revnagan 16 January 2020 13: 46 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    Quote: Hunter 2
    There will be (suppose by your whim) a shotgun on his hands, they will find something to replace him with.

    It's easy. I can rivet on my knee, for example, a slingshot with a dart (look on Yu-Tube). Quietly, deadly. leather, steel rods and electrodes, tool-grinding machines and files (or better, the whole metalwork tool) laughing .Wow, how much work is forbidden to the hoplophobes.
  • Irokez 16 January 2020 14: 22 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    Quote: Hunter 2
    the ability to get armed rebuff - reduces the number of crimes in general and killings in particular

    You just want to believe in it about the imaginary protection and the reduction of murders in particular. Gunshots are weapons at a distance (this is not a melee with a knife or fork) because the fear of rebuffing is not great, not to say about cold steel.
    A person in an emotional breakdown and under emotions doesn’t care which weapon to use cold or hot, and the attacker, criminal, terrorist has a difference because he wants to live and therefore it is planned to kill at a distance with firearms, explosives, poisoning and the like.
    You, as an American, are obsessed with your LAW (LAW, LAW, LAW), to have something or someone, but please have the LAW, but ordinary citizens also have the RIGHT to walk among non-dangerous people (who do not have dangerous things), and have The RIGHT to safety and the absence of danger from dangerous objects.
    You look at the problem and the LAW from your side, and I urge you to look at the other side of the problem and the same LAW when the absence of dangerous toys reduces the number of cases of its use and even if there is a smaller percentage of deaths from these toys, but it is relevant and it also needs to be try to reduce.
    A weapon is a subject of increased danger for an easy, quick and safe murder and it is harmless if it lies on the bottom of the ocean or in the thickness of the earth, decays or rusts, but in the hands of a person it is dangerous from all sides for both those around it and the owner himself for making a decision on him application lies in the bowels of the brain (Soul) and depends on emotions, desires, intentions, conditions or orders from outside. Therefore, a person is not 100% able to fully control himself because of emotional, age-related, situational or psychological factors, and accordingly there is no 100% guarantee that he will not shoot.
    In addition, weapons can be stolen, lost, forgotten, misused (toys, bragging, prestige) and from this they can be used by others who do not control themselves or who intentionally use someone else's, and you will pay for it. You will not control everything and even argue about it is not necessary that everything is safe and controlled.
    But yes, you have the LAW, but the LAW will also have you in situations that you did not think about. To have a right does not necessarily mean to use it, for this reason and a head are necessary and expediency. It's one thing in the taiga, field, in the forest (hunters where it is even survival and work) where the population density is minimal and another thing in the village (toy and prestige and LAW) where the density is high and there is a risk of killing in a society raging with emotions, feelings and interests .
  • Korax71 16 January 2020 19: 02 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    If you follow your logic .... at one time we were taught to purposefully send a person to a better world using any improvised item, right down to the teeth laughing that is, I need to amputate at least one arm and leg upon retirement or dismissal, and a false jaw instead of teeth ???? because you never know what, but how do I apply the acquired skills to innocent people. what am I for? a weapon is a tool, it does not push the trigger on its own, it should be done by a person.
  • Irokez 16 January 2020 11: 26 New
    • 5
    • 13
    -8
    Quote: Hunter 2
    sticking out your Wishlist - no need to encroach on My Rights

    These are your Wishlist, not mine. You ask yourself whether you personally want a weapon or I want this for you. Look who buys it and to whom it warms the Soul (but it kills someone). This is exactly what Wishlist lovers, and not the bulk of the people.
    1. Sirocco 16 January 2020 11: 37 New
      • 10
      • 5
      +5
      Quote: Irokez
      Who buys it and to whom it warms the Soul (but kills someone).

      Who do you think in Moldova who buys a short barrel? And how did you joke over the Moldavians at one time? Plus, in the Baltic republics it is also possible to purchase short-barreled weapons. Now about hunting weapons, how often does this happen with legal weapons? And how often do people die in traffic accidents and most importantly how much ??? We may prohibit the use of personal vehicles, we will not buy it either. You do not interfere with flies with cutlets. This is not the problem in this case. and something like that in this plot. When there is no protection from the guardians of the law, then such a popular law enters into force.
      1. Ingvar 72 16 January 2020 11: 44 New
        • 9
        • 5
        +4
        Quote: Sirocco
        in Moldova, who buys a short barrel?

        In Italy, the same weapon is permitted, and this is with Italian temperament. And nothing, the number of murders has not increased. For other reasons, we forbid weapons, but they justify it with these that they will shoot everything in a row.
        1. Sirocco 16 January 2020 14: 07 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          I read on Sibnet the reason why a person flew off coils.
          The man who shot two people in the magistrate court of Novokuznetsk was a victim in a conflict between neighbors in which an angry tractor driver rammed the house.

          The name of the shooter, who on Thursday mortally wounded the bailiff and sent the woman to the hospital, is Artem Pakalov, local media write. In the summer of 2018, neighbors attacked him in the village of Kurtukovo.

          The man claimed that he was first hit by a young man on an Audi. Then a relative joined the conflict with a forklift. At first he tried to run into a neighbor, and then rammed the gate to the garage.

          The police opened criminal cases under Articles 167 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (intentional destruction of property) and 119 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (threat of murder). In the electronic database of the magistrates' court of the Novokuznetsk district, the accusation appears only on the first article.

          The judge invited Pakalov to reconcile with the family of the accused, wrote Kuzbass Telegram channels with reference to their own sources.
          1. Hunter 2 16 January 2020 14: 58 New
            • 4
            • 1
            +3
            Well, as required! Will a Healthy person kill two People because of a broken gate ??? Sick person! fool
            Now questions to the psychiatrist - who issued him a certificate for permission and to the district ... that he did not monitor the situation.
            1. Sirocco 16 January 2020 15: 04 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              Quote: Hunter 2
              to the district ... that he did not monitor the situation.

              Where have you seen the precinct in small towns? We have optimized the whole police force, you won’t find them during the day, either on the road or on paper, to get a certificate from a local policeman, I ran after him for 10 days, called up and caught me. This is not the USSR my friend. Well, knowing modern Russia, living conditions and human relations, which today are called man to man to wolf. Where is rudeness held in high esteem, and disrespect with unculture. What do you think a normal person will try to crush, and demolish the gate with a tractor to a neighbor? apparently pepekli peasant.
              1. Hunter 2 16 January 2020 15: 23 New
                • 4
                • 3
                +1
                Do you think a broken gate is a reason for killing two people? Dopekli - let him drink sedative! This is Imbecil, who will spend the rest of his life behind bars, and there he is dear.
                I have a house, just in a small village ... no problem - I find a local police officer, like me, so I don’t need to tell me how bad it is “in small towns” - you just need to work, and that local police officer is to drive service!
              2. Sirocco 17 January 2020 10: 33 New
                • 0
                • 4
                -4
                Quote: Hunter 2
                so I don’t need to tell you how bad it is “in small towns”

                Where do you live, if it’s not a secret))))) Purga don’t carry the district policemen very rarely sit in the office, you obviously do not live in Russia, since you flog this rubbish, the district policemen today can serve several settlements for an hour, did you know that? And the state system, unculture, rudeness, and other delights of capitalism in Russia are to blame for what is happening here, they create lawlessness at the entrance, a neighbor and a neighbor do not greet each other, they taunt each other who is better to find out at times. Zone and not country. And you hang me noodles.
              3. Hunter 2 20 January 2020 06: 18 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                You reduce your ardor. You carry the blizzard. If you don’t have the opportunity to find a local police officer (if you have mobile connection) he has at least twice a week - a personal welcome! The fact that one imbecile shot two innocent people, is the system and capitalism to blame? Is everything OK?
                If you have chaos going on in the stairwell, fight it, and don't whimper on the site. In My Entrance - Everything is Excellent!
                Well, about the lack of culture and rudeness - re-read your comment and start with yourself!
              4. Sirocco 20 January 2020 16: 35 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                At the expense of ardor, but what will happen? Will you monitor the monitor? Did Honor Torture You? )))) You probably don’t know much about the real work of the district police officer, and do not carefully read my comments, read the comments in the comments above about your phone, and continue to teach your wife how to cook, not me, life. The fact that today man is wolf to man is guilty of the system and capitalist rails of the state, and your comment above is an example of this. Goodbye.)))
      2. Ingvar 72 16 January 2020 15: 41 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Quote: Hunter 2
        Sick person!

        A sick system where truth can not even be found in court.
    2. Ingvar 72 16 January 2020 15: 35 New
      • 0
      • 6
      -6
      Yes, people in despair are capable of extremes. Partly, “our” government is therefore afraid of arming citizens.

      It's a pity man, they’ll put me in jail.
      1. revnagan 18 January 2020 16: 48 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        Quote: Ingvar 72
        It's a pity man, they’ll put me in jail.

        It’s a pity for the bee. You’ll at least understand the essence of what is happening. There are not collectors, but neighbors whom the bald ATOshnik with a machine gun regularly robbed (stole electricity).
        1. Ingvar 72 18 January 2020 17: 59 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: revnagan
          Do you even understand the essence of what is happening

          For what I bought, for that I sell it. And where is the confidence that this is an ATO driver, and not a collector?
        2. revnagan 21 January 2020 16: 59 New
          • 0
          • 2
          -2
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          not a collector?

          https://zbroya.info/uk/blog/18366_u-kiievi-zlisnii-borzhnik-za-zhkg-vistriliv-u-susida-iakii-khotiv-pereshkoditi-iomu-pidkliuchitisia-do-zagalnoyi-elektromerezhi-video/
          Here there is an article and a video. The site is Ukrainian, but there is a button for selecting the language (Russian / Ukrainian at the top right).
        3. Ingvar 72 21 January 2020 20: 24 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: revnagan
          Here is an article

          I can not go to this site. request
  • Tank hard 16 January 2020 11: 12 New
    • 7
    • 3
    +4
    Quote: Irokez
    It has not begun, but continues.

    Well, the Iroquois should know that in our realities the knife is much more killer than a pistol, and you don’t even need to undergo training ... request
  • Olezhek 16 January 2020 20: 04 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It has not begun, but continues.
    If more people are killed by a garden tool and screwdriver


    You are a wise man Iroquois.
    Now we are just going to listen to you. yes
  • tihonmarine 16 January 2020 10: 34 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    Quote: Hunter 2
    Continue your thought - say that you need to prohibit knives, axes, chisels, screwdrivers, the entire Garden Tool ... bricks and stones - to give in an account for builders!

    Brains need to be repaired, prohibitions will not help here.
  • Trotil42 16 January 2020 10: 38 New
    • 18
    • 3
    +15
    In Switzerland, the male population is armed without exception ... assault rifles and pistols (men from 17 to 34 years old) .. among teenagers from 13 years old, shooting competitions are held .. murder rates and crime are almost the lowest in the world .. In Russia, death by knife much higher than from a gunshot ... logic ... ban knives?
    Kuzbassovets himself .. well this is not the first shooting in court .. I remember and threw a grenade ... what do you want? We are the descendants of deportees and convicts ... so Siberia was mastered ... and now it is full of camps ... it’s customary to answer for the bazaar ... hot Siberian guys .. Of course I'm sorry .. there shouldn’t be such ..especially shoot at a woman .. generally nonsense ..
    1. Ingvar 72 16 January 2020 11: 49 New
      • 4
      • 3
      +1
      Quote: Trotil42
      especially shoot at a woman .. generally nonsense ..

      As it were, yes, but Malyshev wants to shoot.
      1. Trotil42 16 January 2020 14: 22 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        This is too soft ... even if in life only his programs are watched ..
  • Romka47 16 January 2020 10: 43 New
    • 9
    • 2
    +7
    The fact that the gun fell into the hands of a sick or socially “sick” one is a matter for local cops and a psychiatrist, and so, a bandit or a terrorist will get the barrel anyway, he does not need permission. Our Unloved friends from behind the hillock believe that wearing a firearm is generally the greatest right of a person, because "Colt equals all rights" by the way in America for one killed from a registered barrel, 50+ kills with a hammer (only with a hammer, and also in tops bats, knives / machete, transport)
  • Bshkaus 16 January 2020 10: 49 New
    • 12
    • 3
    +9
    Well, people are already shooting from hunting rifles.
    He said that it’s dangerous to have firearms even for hunting

    If he began to shoot in the courthouse, then from the "offended" who did not find the truth there.
    “A similar case was with Motya Soplivy:” the man came to take the last one, he locked the apartment from the inside with a key, a key through a window, poured gasoline and burned himself along with the bailiffs.
    1. Sling cutter 16 January 2020 11: 19 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      Quote: Bshkaus
      Bshkaus

      Brave man !!!
    2. Ingvar 72 16 January 2020 11: 53 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Quote: Bshkaus
      it means from the "offended" who did not find the truth there.

      But she is not there. By the way, quite a while ago there was a case when a peasant shot the head of the administration. In the Rostov region In my opinion.
    3. loki565 16 January 2020 20: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Yes, here is the usual way of life, I didn’t get along with my neighbors, they broke a bicycle, etc., etc.
  • Incvizitor 16 January 2020 11: 07 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Danger to let the courthouse with guns.
  • Vol4ara 16 January 2020 12: 48 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Quote: Irokez
    Well, people are already shooting from hunting rifles.
    He said that it is dangerous to have firearms even for hunting, but no they say that it is for protection.

    It took me about 10 minutes to find a site with trunks on the darknet.
  • loki565 16 January 2020 13: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    If the bailiff first shot and then talked, he would have survived. In the United States, they immediately open fire to defeat when trying to get a weapon in the wrong place. We are likely to get to this too.
    1. Alex Justice 16 January 2020 17: 50 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Well done, hero!
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • orionvitt 16 January 2020 13: 31 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: Irokez
    people shoot from hunting rifles

    A commonplace thing, but it’s not weapons that fire, but people. In my deep understanding, one of the sides of the problem is the degradation of the health care system, and its nominal part, which deals with psychiatry. Under the Union, there were district psychiatrists whose duties were to prevent and identify mentally ill people. With subsequent treatment (maybe even compulsory) and mandatory registration. You can call it “totalitarianism” and “violation of human rights,” but they did not open fire on the streets and in the courts. (It happened in the army, and quite often, but this is another question). Now, either until the patient himself goes to the doctor, or until he starts to shoot, no one will move. And here is the result, lunatics walk the streets, and dare not touch them, they are the same people. Yes people, but sick. And healthy people should be engaged in them, otherwise the whole society will fall ill, as in the west. One case with Breivik is worth it. And nothing, he sits for his own pleasure in a three-room cell with Internet, cable TV and all amenities.
    1. Genry 16 January 2020 15: 59 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Quote: orionvitt
      Crazies walk the streets, and don’t dare to touch them, they are the same people.

      There are no completely healthy people. There are only unexplored.
      1. orionvitt 16 January 2020 16: 02 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Genry
        There are no completely healthy people. There are only unexplored.

        So check it out. Then write about the results.
        1. Genry 16 January 2020 16: 33 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: orionvitt
          So check it out. Then write about the results.

          What is your unstable psyche ....
          Ready to kill? am
  • Dart 16 January 2020 10: 07 New
    • 24
    • 13
    +11
    Why is it always that the motives of the detainees are not covered in such cases ... cowardly like that, are the authorities afraid of lynching, or are these cases often just criminal protests against the authorities? Out of the blue, the cuckoo is ripping off people ...
    1. evgic 16 January 2020 10: 15 New
      • 8
      • 12
      -4
      Some kind of strange protest. I don’t agree with the court - it’s more like a judge of shading, but an outsider and a witness are killed. Strange protest, weird. But the fact that a person has lived to 45 has remained d_e_b_i_lom juvenile in the soul, it looks like that.
      1. bessmertniy 16 January 2020 10: 20 New
        • 8
        • 7
        +1
        This is just the main problem - so that the weapon does not fall into the hands of d-e-b-and-l-o-in. negative Again, if a person needs treatment for this, then he must be treated.
      2. Bshkaus 16 January 2020 10: 58 New
        • 19
        • 3
        +16
        But the fact that a person has lived to 45 has remained d_e_b_i_lom juvenile in the soul, it looks like that.

        study social psychology using the most common textbooks. A person is pushed to radical actions only by extreme despair, when there is nothing left to lose.
        After the death of my grandmother, my mother was given an inheritance and the amount of 6 thousand after 60 months. A year later a subpoena came to the court that the money was issued illegally and are pension accruals that social workers did not block. Well, that’s okay, they didn’t notice the joint, they even officially let it go legally, and the last one is naturally mother. Naturally they sued, naturally the raven didn’t gouge out the raven’s eyes and the judge covered the officials and none of those who committed negligence in the work was punished, although he should be responsible for his actions.
        And then the fun began, of course she didn’t feel sorry for her, but ALL began to be removed from her !!! contrary to the law, no more than 50%, okay, Lord be with them, there is money in the family.
        But when, after paying back the money in a year, they started REPEATING !!!! to shoot by the same court decision - it was already an overkill!
        Well, the mother has a family, children, a husband, and a lonely pensioner would simply be killed by this attitude.
        So I am not surprised at the surge of extremism, the boiler begins to boil, the lid begins to rattle.
        1. evgic 16 January 2020 20: 36 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          That is not the topic of your case at all. But to me, one bad person is sharpening the letter g for the amount, well, a large one, for the performance of work, and I spent quite a lot on these works. Documents are in order, acts, invoices. But for some reason, for five years, the court has been dragging on either me or him. And I have a gun. Yes, and there are problems with finances. So if I fill up the judge, the bailiff, the secretary tomorrow, and whoever gets caught along the way, they will write me off for boiling the boiler !? It’s your lid rattling, collect the monnets and in the taiga there is a gun there - the prosecutor’s bear. And I don’t want even close organisms similar to this d_eb_i_la to go, and those who justify them too.
      3. hhurik 17 January 2020 17: 54 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Nothing strange: there is a long-standing conflict between the chairman of the SNT (the victim) and the inadequate family who bought the house in a partnership.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fHXlMRqxU&feature=emb_title
        The victim, apparently, was planning to bast his offenders (husband and wife) and a judge for the company. Regarding the restoration of justice - well, as he understands it.
        However, he did not have very good results: he killed a completely stranger (bailiff) at the entrance to the courthouse, the offender just wounded, the judge jumped off the topic, and it turned out that the villainous husband was not in the courthouse at the time of the commission of socially dangerous acts.
    2. loki565 16 January 2020 20: 23 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      And in every news you want to leave the fan ???))) The custom of everyday life that started with a broken bicycle ... Yes, they did in the news, but you only see what you like about the campaign)))
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4rVZ7-JBTw
  • evgic 16 January 2020 10: 08 New
    • 9
    • 4
    +5
    What kind of case was this considered in a magistrate’s court? Do you feel sorry for two human lives and your lifelong freedom for it?
  • Pedrodepackes 16 January 2020 10: 09 New
    • 9
    • 6
    +3
    fired a second shot at a 43-year-old female witness,
    this is not a solution to the problem, although I don’t know the motives of his crime, maybe he is a criminal, but our judicial system sometimes works in such a way that I want to sympathize with this criminal.
  • parkello 16 January 2020 10: 09 New
    • 6
    • 6
    0
    some kind of mass psychosis .... people are slowly going crazy. or they are brought request
    1. tihonmarine 16 January 2020 10: 38 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      Quote: parkello
      some kind of mass psychosis .... people are slowly going crazy. or they are brought

      This psychosis swept the whole world, and we don’t need to talk about America anymore.
      1. parkello 16 January 2020 10: 41 New
        • 2
        • 3
        -1
        so I say massive ... we are also not uncommon when they shoot. but those even had motives. although they were doubtful.
        1. tihonmarine 16 January 2020 10: 48 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: parkello
          so I say massive ... we are also not uncommon when they shoot. but those even had motives. although they were doubtful.

          Well, in Soviet times, they occasionally shot. I myself remember two such cases.
          1. parkello 16 January 2020 13: 42 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            in Soviet times, even if they fired, for clearly expressed reasons and motives ... and so, just like that, to shoot, I only began to notice the last 10 years.
            1. tihonmarine 16 January 2020 14: 12 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: parkello
              in Soviet times, if they fired, then for clearly expressed reasons and motives.

              This is so, or simply "blowing the roof." My friend's father was the chairman of the village council, a chauffeur came to him who shot down a woman to death, shot his father, his daughter jumped out the window, set fire to the house and shot himself. Demolished in full. In the second case, a brightly cut out cause, but a total of 6 corpses. That was in the late 60s.
              1. parkello 16 January 2020 21: 05 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Well, it happened yes. But it’s extremely rare .. this is the very old grandfather ... shell-shocked from the war .. yes. we have such a whole relative lived in the village .. then the son will shoot his father at him from MP-39. in his fence .. and the wall .. well, they got up different things ... but this is rare ....
            2. AU Ivanov. 17 January 2020 17: 40 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              And they didn’t shoot at us. We have one figure hacked with an ax three, including the district (the end of the 70s). And he was stopped only by a hunting citizen with buckshot in the legs.
              1. The comment was deleted.
  • prior 16 January 2020 10: 10 New
    • 15
    • 7
    +8
    The article does not indicate the reasons for the act.
    From scratch, they do not commit such actions.
    So the Russian reality and the judicial system brought this to the peasant ....
    1. bessmertniy 16 January 2020 10: 23 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      And then a woman !? request Yes, and the man whom he sent to the other world! The act is inadequate and the culprit should be responsible for what he has done.
      1. revnagan 16 January 2020 13: 58 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        Quote: bessmertniy
        And then a woman !?

        Perhaps she is a malicious perjury. And the guard simply "interfered" with the restoration of justice. request .
  • Sling cutter 16 January 2020 10: 13 New
    • 9
    • 4
    +5
    This is a consequence, but it is necessary to look for reasons, cause-effect relationships have not yet been canceled.
  • knn54 16 January 2020 10: 16 New
    • 2
    • 6
    -4
    WHERE was the protection or NOT POSITIVE?
    1. Sling cutter 16 January 2020 11: 25 New
      • 10
      • 11
      -1
      Quote: knn54
      WHERE was the protection or NOT POSITIVE?

      In Soviet times, no one guarded the courts, or the district executive committees, or other government buildings. And now the linear police department is surrounded by high fences with the Bruno spiral and anti-tank hedgehogs before entering the checkpoint with the Schmeiser, in the courts and administrations documents are checked by parasites in bronics for a decent and stable salary at our expense.
      1. Golovan Jack 16 January 2020 12: 09 New
        • 12
        • 12
        0
        Quote: Stroporez
        In Soviet times, no one guarded the courts, or the district executive committees, or other government buildings

        In Soviet times, you, for example, would have already sat here somewhere in the White Pillars area in a special institution for your own chatter.

        That's why he "did not guard."
        1. Olezhek 16 January 2020 19: 39 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          In Soviet times, you would, for example


          And did you personally live in Soviet times?
          Or retell terrible tales of liberals?

          For children and liberals I inform: the USSR of the 70s and 80s was an order of magnitude
          more humane society than modern Russia.

          it’s just that you won’t understand this.
          1. Golovan Jack 16 January 2020 19: 45 New
            • 5
            • 8
            -3
            Quote: Olezhek
            Did you personally live in Soviet times?

            you lover do not understand this

            I am 58 without a week. Any other questions, Olezhek? wink
            1. Olezhek 16 January 2020 19: 49 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              I am 58 without a week. Any other questions, Olezhek?


              Age does not always bring wisdom ... am

              The USSR was, oddly enough, a much calmer and safer society.
              And scaring someone with something is not worth it.

              Yeah - he shot off after one shot, who is against Brezhnev ... wassat
              1. Golovan Jack 16 January 2020 19: 52 New
                • 5
                • 5
                0
                Quote: Olezhek
                The USSR was ... a much calmer and safer society

                It's hard to argue with that. I was not going to.

                But screaming out loud what “Stroporez” proclaims here was not recommended at all. And it was fraught, sideways. "Highly bright" were leveled by the system, just not autopilot. Will you argue? wink

                And I, in fact, only spoke about this. Personally, "Stroporezu", for which you fit in here - I still do not understand.
                1. Olezhek 16 January 2020 19: 58 New
                  • 2
                  • 1
                  +1
                  But screaming out loud what “Stroporez” proclaims here was not recommended at all. And it was fraught, sideways. "Highly bright" were leveled by the system, just not autopilot. Will you argue?


                  I will not say "for very bright"
                  Although they are leveled by any system, as a rule.
                  But under the Savets government, everyone was spitting on drunken cries of an ordinary locksmith
                  It was possible to live a lifetime and in general did not intersect with the "totalitarian system"
                  No, if a person climbed into power / made a career / wanted to stage performances ...
                  here he began to have problems

                  In Ust-Uryupinsk you could ride your entire conscious life heading out along the lake for a weekend in a drunken state and all did not care ...


                  That's why he "did not guard."


                  In Moscow - the capital of a superpower - it seems like 30 people went with security ...
                  that’s why I fit in.
                  And the doors were cardboard ...
                  1. Golovan Jack 16 January 2020 20: 02 New
                    • 6
                    • 7
                    -1
                    Quote: Olezhek
                    But under the Savets government, everyone was spitting on drunken cries of an ordinary locksmith

                    Are you talking about Stroporeza? Strong good laughing

                    Quote: Olezhek
                    And the doors were cardboard ...

                    It's true. But there were much fewer "bright ones", IMHO, for the whole Union, than now they hang out in the VO alone. Precisely because the system "filtered" them, and now it’s like publicity: I want to shout what I want.

                    Personally, I really dislike this. All. The answer is finished hi
  • Kerensky 16 January 2020 10: 25 New
    • 11
    • 3
    +8
    Yes, only from my practice:
    1. Judge, guided by a deep inner conviction ....
    2. ... does not accept the evidence provided ...
    3. ... doesn’t see any reason not to trust the words (not testimonies!) Of the police, and therefore the reasons for calling them to court as witnesses (otherwise the lawyer will ask an uncomfortable question, embarrassment can come out)

    No, there are normal, fair judges somewhere. It cannot be that they were not at all!
    1. Stena 16 January 2020 10: 31 New
      • 7
      • 3
      +4
      Quote: Kerensky
      Yes, only from my practice:
      1. Judge, guided by a deep inner conviction ....
      2. ... does not accept the evidence provided ...
      3. ... doesn’t see any reason not to trust the words (not testimonies!) Of the police, and therefore the reasons for calling them to court as witnesses (otherwise the lawyer will ask an uncomfortable question, embarrassment can come out)

      No, there are normal, fair judges somewhere. It cannot be that they were not at all!

      Absolutely true!
      And there’s a plan. And bonuses for him. And this plan needs to be implemented by both the police and the courts.
      It doesn’t matter what the accused says and what evidence he gives. As well as his lawyer.
      He is guilty, only because I want to eat, oh, sorry - I’ll fulfill the plan and get the prize.
      Anyone who has ever come to justice of the peace - he knows - what and why.
      It's a shame only very much.
      Apparently this is the reaction.
      1. hohkn 16 January 2020 14: 56 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        Quote: Stena
        And there’s a plan. And bonuses for him. And this plan needs to be implemented by both the police and the courts.

        Planning is, of course, as without it. But not at all costs. And bonuses do not depend on this very plan. Bonuses can only be stripped when a severe reprimand is slapped, and even then for two months. And then again you regularly receive.
        Quote: Stena
        Anyone who has ever come to justice of the peace - he knows - what and why.

        It was a deal. Neither did I convince the judge, nor did she. The case concerned an accident. And buried in connection with the expiration of the statute of limitations.
        1. Stena 16 January 2020 15: 13 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: hohkn
          It was a deal. Neither did I convince the judge, nor did she. The case concerned an accident. And buried in connection with the expiration of the statute of limitations.

          Happy for you.
          Is the judge a woman? Lucky you.
          But when the judge is a creature with signs of a male, and even a former investigator, then the options for a successful outcome for you are about 0%. Whatever evidence you bring in court.
          An example - an audio recording - is not valid without expertise. We will not listen to it since it was recorded without demand from the other side.
          Video recording is not valid because there is no permission for video recording.
          When you say that the police have official permission for audio-video shooting - they say - and we do not have Moscow ...
          Option - apply sequentially to the city, arbitration and Supreme courts. Perhaps somewhere at the level of the Supreme Court there is truth. That's just health, nerves and money - ...
          Quote: hohkn
          Planning is, of course, as without it. But not at all costs. And bonuses do not depend on this very plan.

          The judge yourself? Or from internal organs?
          Then I will not explain anything to you, as an affiliate.
          But for people who are not initiated, the plan-stick system dominates. And if the lawyer did not have time to agree or convince the judge of the futility of bringing your case to court, then you need either a lot of money or a very good friend at the top. Otherwise - a fine and / or bunk.
          1. hohkn 16 January 2020 15: 20 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Quote: Stena
            The judge yourself? Or from internal organs?

            Not anymore. Retired.
            Quote: Stena
            dominated by the planning and stick system

            I can tell a lot about this same planning-stick system. He once served as an opera. I don’t know whether it will tell you something or not, but they opened the doors for me, as soon as I called my name. And the information on his territory was not 100% owned, of course, but close to that.
            1. Stena 16 January 2020 15: 34 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: hohkn
              Not anymore. Retired.

              Faced with judges women and judges with signs of male gender.
              Now, if the former investigator - then "write lost." Any more or less intelligible arguments and proceedings - it does not smell there (according to the administrator).
              I'm afraid to imagine what's wrong with it.
              Women - no matter where you go.
              And if it is connected with juvenile justice, then it is to blame immediately and without options.
              Quote: hohkn
              I can tell a lot about this same planning-stick system.

              Why then write what
              Quote: hohkn
              Planning is, of course, as without it. But not at all costs.

              As soon as the question concerns the police and the judges themselves, then any.
              1. hohkn 16 January 2020 16: 38 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Stena
                Now, if the former investigator - then "write lost."

                Yes, there are all sorts. In particular, we have a former investigator of the UROPD (Office for the Investigation of Organized Crime), a man who retired and worked as a judge to the utmost age. I can’t say anything bad about him. Everything depends on the person.
                Quote: Stena
                As soon as the question concerns the police and the judges themselves, then any.

                Once again, it depends on the person. I had a case (at that time “deliberate grievous bodily harm”, Article 108), when my leadership was “appointed” by my leadership. I did not get involved, I found the true culprit. It turned out to be the son of the victim (by the way - "a very respected person"). True, after this incident, I would have been "eternal old" (the "ceiling" of the district department of opera, without any hope of getting at least an older opera), if the SOBR had not been created at that time.
                1. Stena 16 January 2020 16: 47 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: hohkn
                  I had a case (at that time “deliberate grievous bodily harm”, article 108), when my leadership was “appointed” by my leadership. I did not get involved, I found the true culprit.

                  I am glad that there are honest people.
                  Quote: hohkn
                  Everything depends on the person.

                  There are a lot of good people, only you have to face, basically, with ...
                  Tell me, from personal experience - a minor (a female in a company of 3 other representatives of a female sex worker) curses in public places (places for children in McDonald's).
                  To polite requests to stop - there is no reaction.
                  You can call the police, but most likely they won’t either have time, or you yourself will find yourself guilty.
                  Are there any options?
                  1. hohkn 16 January 2020 17: 03 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    In addition to calling the police, I can’t advise anything. To climb without authority is fraught. Here you need to have the experience of "unsubscribing." But it’s better to prepare the witness base for the arrival of the police, otherwise the call may end in zilch. Moreover, witnesses who are not afraid to write and go to court (if necessary, judges sometimes practice calling witnesses in administrative cases).
                    As an option - also a video. True, the court does not always take it into account.
                    1. Stena 16 January 2020 17: 10 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Quote: hohkn
                      In addition to calling the police, I can’t advise anything.

                      Thank. That is an option - no matter what the child is amusing. Or look for other places, for these are occupied with more "worthy" ...
                      Quote: hohkn
                      To climb without authority is fraught. Here you need to have the experience of "unsubscribing."

                      Right. True, there is an option "did a quiet thing - and leave quickly and boldly."
                      Thanks for the tips.
                      Do you yourself think that with this approach, when it’s not possible to do the job, ears are tearing - is there any kind of respect for elders? Public order?
                      1. hohkn 16 January 2020 19: 58 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        Quote: Stena
                        Thanks for the tips.

                        Yes, not at all, actually.
                        Quote: Stena
                        Do you yourself think that with this approach, when it’s not possible to do the job, ears are tearing - is there any kind of respect for elders? Public order?

                        Of course not. But I can’t imagine how to instill culture in the younger generation. A personal example can only affect your children and grandchildren. And the rest is sideways.
    2. tihonmarine 16 January 2020 10: 40 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: Kerensky
      No, there are normal, fair judges somewhere. It cannot be that they were not at all!

      But it’s not the judges who suffer, but ordinary people.
      1. Kerensky 16 January 2020 10: 45 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        But it’s not the judges who suffer, but ordinary people.

        I agree. Including from the actions of judges. Compare the statistics of acquittals and convictions, greatly surprised.
        1. tihonmarine 16 January 2020 10: 51 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Quote: Kerensky
          Compare the statistics of acquittals and convictions, greatly surprised.

          I haven’t read statistics, but I think there are more convictions than acquittals.
          1. Kerensky 16 January 2020 11: 01 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            more convictions than acquittals

            Not that word! The vast majority (but this does not happen in nature).
            Again from personal practice:
            The acquittal. "Due to the lack of evidence."
            That is, the judge did not say, "he is not guilty." He said, "you could not prove." And if I had not been on a subscription, but in a pre-trial detention center, we would have been blown up with the "name of the Russian Federation", guided by a deep inner conviction ....
            1. tihonmarine 16 January 2020 11: 41 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              Quote: Kerensky
              That is, the judge did not say, "he is not guilty." He said, "you could not prove." And if I hadn’t been on a subscription, but in a pre-trial detention center, we would have been blown up with “the name of the Russian Federation”

              And the man would not have been planted for anything. In general, instead of "justice" acts "crooked justice".
              1. The comment was deleted.
    3. hohkn 16 January 2020 14: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Kerensky
      No, there are normal, fair judges somewhere. It cannot be that they were not at all!

      Of course I have. And I even know some. Just when you come across, you are sure to find one who has a place not at the table, but in the cell.
  • TokarevT 16 January 2020 10: 46 New
    • 8
    • 3
    +5
    Apparently, taking into account the situation of the people and the prospects for changing this situation, this same people came to the conclusion obvious to themselves in this situation:
    endure to the end, and when there is nothing left to lose, get in-stock gifts and give to any already power-holding or their entourage, who will be in the zone of reach.
    Such a court is by analogy: a piece of the system - there is a whole system in miniature.
    It is strange that a wave of similar precedents has not yet arisen among cancer patients or pensioners, many of them openly talk about this among themselves.
    In this case, it would be necessary to place bunkers around the State Duma and the Federation Council, and deputies would have to get separate underground metro lines directly from the house, night clubs and brothels for their broods would probably have to be located inside military bases or units of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
    1. Jack ivanov 17 January 2020 00: 53 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Killing people is just killing. It’s not divine. Not in RUSSIAN.
      1. TokarevT 17 January 2020 07: 46 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Glad to welcome!
        And how, from your point of view, should be:
        a) divine;
        b) in Russian?
  • Tank hard 16 January 2020 11: 15 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    Looks like a peasant ...
  • Graz 16 January 2020 12: 18 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Well, this act is clearly not from the bulldozer, the motive is 100% and maybe even to a specific person, to this very witness the claim had
    In short, you need to know the background of the act
  • Alex Justice 16 January 2020 17: 41 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yesterday I was in the Melbourne court. The security is excellent, 4 people inside and in front of the entrance is a policeman. Bags under x-ray, passage through a magnet.
  • frizzy 16 January 2020 18: 30 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    I read, read and read komenty again and still didn’t understand whether to take me a short barrel or not. They offer a cheap price for 1.5 green kosar.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • evgen1221 17 January 2020 06: 00 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It’s not the weapon that is guilty, but the unsettledness of life, the unfairness of laws and their non-fulfillment by those who are more equal than others and also ignorance. Like it or not, but everything rests on the upbringing of a person again.