Metro attack: an alternative course of events
Quite recently, there was a case of beating in the Moscow metro of a young man who stood up for a girl. This situation has raised a wave of discussions in the media and in the power structures. We can say that this time everything ended relatively well - the girl who interceded for the girl was provided with the necessary medical care and deserved honors, the thugs will receive long prison terms.
But let's imagine that the development of the situation in the metro would have happened according to slightly different scenarios.
1 script
A young man would have a legally wearable weapon limited lesion (OOP), in other words - "traumatic".
After he noticed the company's defiant and aggressive behavior, their harassment and threats towards women, he reprimanded them.
Then the situation developed rapidly - the thugs switched to a new victim, verbal threats were immediately made about mutilation, murder. All this was accompanied by a movement towards the young man. One of the attackers put his hand into his pocket, trying to remove the knife (or pretending to have one).
The young man acted quickly and efficiently. Taking into account the threats expressed, the movement in his direction and the possible presence of weapons, he immediately took out the pistol, pulled the bolt, loudly and clearly pronounced the command "stop, I will shoot."
This did not stop the attackers, they tried to surround the defender, one of them pulled out a knife. Considering that the knife posed a mortal threat, the defender performed "Mozambique" - fired two shots to the body and one to the head of the attacker with a knife. This did not stop the other two attackers; they were probably under the influence of drugs.
The defender fired four more shots: two at the body of each of the attackers. One of the attackers immediately fell, the second tried to continue the attack, as a result of which he received two more bullets in the lower limbs.
As soon as the aggression stopped, the young man immediately called an ambulance and police officers.
As a result of self-defense, the attacker with a knife received grievous bodily harm - he lost an eye. The second received penetrating wounds to the stomach and lung. The third attacker died when one of two bullets fired in the legs punctured his femoral artery.
2 script
The young man would have with him a folding knife, not related to melee weapons, which can be carried without any licenses and permits.
After he noticed the company's defiant and aggressive behavior, their harassment and threats towards women, he reprimanded them.
Then the situation developed rapidly - the thugs switched to a new victim, verbal threats about injury and murder were immediately expressed. All this was accompanied by a movement towards the young man. One of the attackers pulled out a knife.
Considering the numerical superiority of the attackers, the fact that one of them was armed with a knife, as well as the lack of self-defense in the defending weapon, he decides to use a knife for self-defense. One of the attackers, armed with a knife, rushed forward and tried to stab the defender in the stomach. He intercepted the hand and, in turn, struck several blows in the area of the upper chest and neck of the enemy. The first attacker dropped the knife and ran to the side, he was bleeding heavily.
The other two tried to go in from the side, grabbing the defender by the arms, and take the knife away from him. However, the young man broke free and delivered several blows to the body of each of the attackers, after which they stopped the attack.
As soon as the aggression stopped, the young man immediately called an ambulance and police officers.
As a result of self-defense, the attacker died with a knife from blood loss, two others received penetrating wounds into the abdominal cavity - one of them had his spleen removed.
3 script
The young man would not have had any weapons or items to use in this capacity, but he was a Candidate Master of Sports (CCM) professional boxer.
After he noticed the company's defiant and aggressive behavior, their harassment and threats towards women, he reprimanded them.
Then the situation developed rapidly - the thugs switched to a new victim, verbal threats about injury and murder were immediately expressed. All this was accompanied by a movement towards the young man. One of the attackers pulled out a knife.
The defender struck a series of quick blows to the head and body of the attackers, after which the aggression stopped due to the loss of consciousness by the attackers, the young man immediately called an ambulance and police officers.
As a result of self-defense, one of the attackers died, two others received severe concussions and fractures of the skull bones.
Aftermath
And now the question is, what consequences would the implementation of one of the above scenarios lead to?
Would there be headlines in the newspapers about interceding for the girl?
Would representatives of the authorities and the public honor him?
Hardly.
Most likely, we would see headlines like “Another shooting in the Moscow metro”, “Stabbing with shooting in the Moscow metro”, “Three were shot in the Moscow metro”, and everything in the same spirit. And the defender so effectively would not receive honors and awards: at best, an article for exceeding self-defense, and at worst, more serious articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
And the same journalists who are now writing laudatory praises to the young man who interceded for the girl, would write about the need for new restrictions on the carrying of weapons, prohibitions, tightening and other things in the same rhetoric.
Self-defense is a rather specific situation. Everything happens very quickly. In accordance with the rules of any fight, the one who strikes first has a significantly greater chance of winning. It is logical that after a strong blow to the jaw or head, no self-defense may follow, but a visit to the intensive care unit or the morgue will follow.
But, from the point of view of the servants of the law, the one who struck first is most often to blame.
Although, in fact, Russian legislation is quite adequate and does not require waiting for an attack, but calls for an assessment of all the circumstances of self-defense, in reality it is often easier for law enforcement agencies to find the one who struck first guilty and not understand all the intricacies of the incident.
How many of these situations occur throughout the country, those that do not fall into the camera lenses and do not receive the attention of the press?
There is no such information. But there are official statistics from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, according to which in 2020, as a result of criminal encroachments, more than 22 people died, the health of over 000 people was seriously injured.
How many cases of self-defense in these statistics are qualified not even as an excess, but as premeditated murder, attempted murder or grievous bodily harm?
How many criminal episodes have ended successfully for criminals because their victims were afraid to exceed this invisible and intangible threshold of "exceeding self-defense"?
In a situation with an incident in the Moscow metro, criminals should get the most out of it, although this is far from a fact - time will pass, the noise will subside, an appeal will be filed, and you see, it's not an attempted murder, but petty hooliganism.
And how are such crimes qualified in cases when they do not come under the attention of the press?
How often do the attackers, who have often crippled their victims physically and mentally, get really serious sentences?
In general, sometimes one gets the impression that the state is extremely loyal to inveterate criminals - rapists, pedophiles, murderers, but at the same time ordinary citizens who have broken the law, sometimes even by accident, are punished to the maximum.
The reason?
In the subconscious sympathy of some law enforcement and judicial officers with criminals, what is called “merging with the crime,” or does the money from the common fund fall into the right hands?
No, hardly - who needs low-level criminals, are they not thieves "in law"?
Or maybe the primitive cycle "stole - drank - to jail" is just convenient for law enforcement agencies?
Criminals sentenced to relatively short terms again commit crimes without being distinguished by special intelligence, they quickly fall on the hook of law enforcement agencies, again receive a short sentence, and so on in a circle, maintaining the statistics of detection at a high level ...
Conclusions
What conclusions can be drawn from all of the above?
1. Radical steps must be taken to decriminalize self-defense. The concept of "excess of self-defense" should disappear in principle - either the fact of the attack is confirmed, and then the defender has the right to inflict any harm on the aggressor, or it is not self-defense. And first of all, it is necessary to implement this in relation to situations with the penetration of criminals into the home. There are simply no other options. Effective self-defense can only be preventive. In other cases, the advantage is kindly given to the criminals.
2. It is necessary to strengthen responsibility for the commission of violent crimes, predominantly by repeat offenders and especially by a group of persons - they should have no future, life-long isolation without options, and ideally the death penalty.
For example, returning to the incident in the subway, does anyone have the illusion that after five, ten or twenty years in prison, these geeks will become normal people?
No, this is just a reprieve until they come out and maim or rape someone else. The oldest of the attackers is now 26 years old - after 20 years in prison it will be an adult, seasoned, 46-year-old, embittered, not socialized man.
3. It is necessary to ensure the maximum openness of the judicial system - all cases of violent crimes should be posted on a specialized Internet resource - this will both reduce the likelihood of unfair conviction for "exceeding" self-defense, and promptly draw public attention to unnecessarily lenient sentences handed down to rapists and murderers. In addition, public disclosure of the identities of convicted rapists and murderers will allow people to understand who lives next to them - I think many would like to know if a previously convicted pedophile or murderer will settle next to them.
And this is not a complete list of measures that need to be taken to decriminalize our society and increase the protection of ordinary citizens from criminal encroachments.
PS Leaving in danger
Separately, it is worth mentioning those males who fled to the opposite end of the subway car. I am sure that the identity of most of them is quite realistic to establish. After that, it is necessary to weed out minors, those who are old or sick, and identify physically strong individuals who are capable of intervening in a fight in that situation. Then it is necessary to involve them under article 125 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - "Leaving in danger". Let it be a fine, but the message itself should be quite obvious.
Information