Kill not guns, and people
From the beginning, just two examples from the hundreds that I have:
Example N 1. Citizen M. lived in the hatch of the urban heating system. However, in his meager possessions there were an F-1 grenade and a double-barreled shotgun of an 12 caliber. Once, walking around the city in a light drunk, M. fired into a huge mirror shop window, admired a waterfall of fragments and went to his hatch to rest, where he was successfully detained by police.
Example N 2. Citizen A. worked as a guardian of a gardening partnership, and here he lived without a residence permit. Once, on the territory entrusted to him, he found a stranger car, next to which a drunk company sat down for a picnic in the fresh air. A., as it should be, made a remark to violators and, as is customary in recent times, was sent to an address known from Russia for a long time. After that, our hero retired, but not where he was sent, but to his hut, where he had several RGD-5 grenades. Taking one of them, he returned, pulled out the check and gently blew up the car of the violators.
These simple examples are the best suited for checking on them the arguments of opponents of the right of citizens to own weapons. Recently, three State Duma deputies, including the head of the Security Committee, in one of the television programs voiced their proposals for regulating the market for firearms. Among those were: tightening the rules for issuing licenses for it, a special psychiatric examination of future buyers of weapons, periodic visits to the owners of guns by district inspectors, and the deputies themselves want the owners to occasionally retake exams on the rules of possession of firearms and traumatic weapons. The deputies spoke enthusiastically and were clearly pleased with their own proposals to make the collar of a citizen heavier, who already spent all his life in a narrow framework of prohibitions and restrictions. Why such a dislike for him? And how will these restrictive measures affect M. and A.? Which inspector will visit M. in the collector, who will send A. to the psychiatric examination. Who, finally, will deprive them of the right to have military grenades, the right that they themselves appropriated without any obstacles, and which the owners do not even think about?
It should be noted that M. and A. are not alone, they are representatives of a multi-thousand tribe of offenders who do not follow any rules and do not follow any laws! Alas, the legislators simply did not think about it. Because they simply do not know either the 1 example, the 2 example, or thousands of other examples, and in preparing for the transfer (more precisely, not in preparation), they did not bother to ask at least some texture to the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
And this is not an isolated case. Such legislative initiatives are always (!!!) offered without any reliance on statistics or any serious research. I have been dealing with this issue for more than 30 years, and therefore I speak, relying not on emotional reasoning, but on real figures, materials of criminal cases, opinion polls, long-term observations.
And the numbers say the following. In Russia, all 2% of legally acquired weapons are used to commit crimes. And all these 2% offenses committed on domestic soil are usually in the heat of passion, delirium tremens, or when the limits of necessary defense are exceeded. In street robberies, not even talking about exchanges on exchangers or contract killings, you will never find legal guns or carbines. Because no normal person will cut out of an officially registered weapon on him and go with him to rob collectors. We see the same picture in the United States, where it is easier to acquire weapons than ours, and until recently there were two times less murders. There, too, with all the abundance of possibilities, less than 2% of officially registered trunks get into crime reports.
Incompetent opponents of a short-barreled woman try to prove that for defense it is enough to have an already allowed self-defense weapon, traumatic weapons, stun guns, gas pistols, aerosols ... But when studying more than 500 criminal cases in which such weapons appear, I have not a single (!!!) fact I did not find a successful self-defense. But crimes with their use are not one and not two, but dozens. Because law-abiding citizens use the means of self-defense as required by the instructions and the law. That is, it is allowed to shoot from a gas weapon no closer than from a meter distance, it is impossible to shoot from a travmatiki in the head, in the face, it is impossible to shoot at the stop ...
These instructions were compiled by the Ministry of Internal Affairs on the basis of the conclusions of the Ministry of Health, which ensures that human health, even the criminal, was not harmed. But this is not about drugs and vitamins! It turns out that the law-abiding defenders with the help of non-lethal weapons obviously cannot inflict harm on an in-attack, So, the attacker is not afraid of such weapons!
The criminals just spit on all the restrictions. They shoot just in the support and in the head. I studied the real case: the victim, defensively, shot at the attacker from the gas revolver, as expected, from a meter distance. It didn’t have a proper stopping effect on the criminal, he took away the weapon, hit the victim with the handle on the head, and then shot point-blank in the face.
As a result, a man’s nose was pierced with a jet of hot gas, a sensorineural hearing loss developed, in other words, deafness, eyes were burned, the burn turned into conjunctivitis, and so on.
Now introduced additional restrictions on traumatics and pneumatics, there are reasonable, and there are stupid. It was forbidden to shoot from pneumatics in the places that were not designated for this, but there are simply no designated places. No, of course, it’s right that it’s forbidden to shoot just in the street, because we have enough fools. And they shoot cars from pneumatics, and animals, even people. But, taking into account the bitter experience, it is better to think that the pneumatics should not be sold to anyone! Let only adult residents of the area buy, according to their passport, which is recorded in a special computer database. This, on the one hand, disciplines the owner, and on the other, it allows to outline the circle of persons to be checked in the event of a crime.
But the biggest and most harmful nonsense, which shows that all arguments about tightening are aimed solely at squeezing money out of people, this is a requirement that civilian weapons owners (especially traumatizers) pass an examination on the rules of handling it every five years. Question: what is achieved by this exam? Maybe Aslan Cherkesov, who killed four shots to the head of a fan, Sviridov did it because he had not studied the law enough? Or a scumbag who blew out an actor Zibrov’s pre-exam? And in general, whether at least one murder, rape, robbery or banditry was committed because the criminals did not know that these actions were illegal and punishable ?!
So, on the basis of which reasons such a decision was made? What research is it based on? After all, proceeding from the AZ of such logic, it is necessary once every five years, and better each year, to take a paid exam for all citizens of the country on the knowledge of the criminal code. And not passing, to prohibit walking on the street and fined ... What is not a way to defeat crime? I give this idea to any deputy faction.
In general, there is really no problem of criminal trauma use. There are incompetence of some officials, who exaggerate the colors and force the situation to a bare place. One of the three deputies mentioned mentioned publicly stated that for one fact of legitimate use of traumatics, there are 99 criminal facts. This is, of course, complete nonsense, but the poor fellow told about police violations of the rules of carrying weapons, based ... on the series. In fact, there is no statistics on the use of trauma. Sometimes called 50 cases of its criminal use. In relation to the total number of non-lethal trunks, this is less than 0,1%, that is, it is a value that is less than the statistical error, which does not give any grounds at all to speak and draw any conclusions. For comparison: from 15 thousands of murders, about 10 thousands were committed using economic tools: kitchen knives, hammers, axes, chisels, etc. Perhaps there is much more reason for alarm, is not it? Here is the topic for another law:. I also donate to any deputy who wants to imitate a deep state approach to ensuring public safety. It is possible to issue permits for the right to buy knives and hammers for money, to arrange re-examinations ... Once in Okinawa, it was decided to have one knife in one village. He was in the central square, and an armed sentry stood near it. If someone from the peasants had to, for example, slaughter a chicken, he would go to this square and there, under the supervision of the sentry, cut it. You can, of course, follow this path, but the occupiers invented it, out of fear of the local population. It is better to accept the principle that Americans have been practicing for many decades:. And it is necessary to influence people, not weapons. Now we have the situation is exactly the opposite.
The hooligan, sticking to the wife of Andrei Zibrov, made a young man, a good actor, disabled for life. Deliberately causing grievous bodily harm from hooliganism is punished with imprisonment from three to ten years. Well, give a scoundrel - 10 or eight years! This will be a lesson for others. And he was appointed three years in a general regime colony, which means that in a year and a half he will be released on parole! Why such softness to a particular guilty? And where does such pressure on innocent people come from? After all, after such cases, the media with full force fall on civilian weapons, demanding toughening its sale, and even a complete ban! That is, essentially the principle:. It is absolutely clear that such decisions untie the hands of criminals, but they bind the law-abiding citizens hand and foot!
In the United States, opponents of fluency in weapons have a formally correct argument that a mass of stolen or simply lost legal trunks enter the black market. Usually, this is even called a figure, although no one can say exactly which document it came from. In fact, this figure is, of course, several times lower. According to official data, in 10 years, from 1993 to 2002, inclusive, 1,7 million reports about the loss or theft of weapons were received by the US police. Moreover, this number has decreased from year to year from 200 thousand in 1993 to 140 thousand in 2002. But we are not even the main thing. We have our own way, our crime is much easier to get weapons from military warehouses. In the search are tens of thousands of not even pistols, as in the United States, and machine guns, machine guns, grenade launchers! And no one wants to engage in tightening control over their storage: even the centralized registration of military weapons is missing! For service and civilian weapons, he is, but for combat - no! But the work should be carried out precisely from this end: they found a machine gun at the gangster, looked at his number, broke through what warehouse he was in, under what circumstances he disappeared, all this can be done in a few minutes. But this is just not doing. And everyone understands why ... Any society is designed in such a way that something can be stolen or lost in it, but this is not a reason to refuse from this subject at all. Cars also often steal ... Let's ban them - there will be no hijackings, no accidents, no raids ...
Another Russian peculiarity, on which the opponents of the free sale of arms especially stress. Russia is a drinking country, and drinking is strong. 18 liters of pure alcohol per capita, including children, women and the elderly. About a bottle of vodka per Russian per week. About 80% of crimes we have committed in a state of intoxication. From here, opponents of legalization make an interesting conclusion that instead of allowing weapons, it is better to fight alcoholism. And until the number of drunkards and alcoholics, we will not fall at least to the world average level, about any weapon for the population is out of the question. Formally, everything is correct here, but with one significant reservation, which immediately reduces all previous arguments to. Namely: people who drink, drug addicts, members of an organized criminal group, previously convicted and other marginal people acquire weapons without any particular problems. M. and A., who started this article, did not observe legal prohibitions, and in fact no one can restrict them. Therefore, speaking of the arming of the population, I mean law-abiding citizens, citizens with an impeccable legal reputation. But just these proposals and cause vehement objections! At the same time, I have not met a single recipe for the effective disarmament of fringe and criminals!
Incompetence rules the ball in all matters related to weapons. I deliberately do not use the newfangled term in this article, which was called traumatic — because it is wrong in essence and illiterate in content. Firstly, a traumatic weapon according to forensic standards is not considered a firearm, as it has a muzzle energy. Secondly, a firearm serves to defeat a living target, and a traumatika has another task: to disable the enemy. What changed the renaming? Now from or will not beat out an eye? Hardly. But when I wanted to buy cartridges for my own, the seller said that my license, updated a couple of months ago, is no good: it uses the old wording, and now the trauma is called in a new way ...
But in general, it’s not a weapon! In Switzerland, guns and machine guns are stored in houses, not to mention rifles. In Israel, young soldiers, boys and girls, walk around the city, including firing, with combat. And amazingly: no one shoots anyone, no one kills anyone ...
Yes, in fact, this is not surprising, if we recall that people are killed not by guns, but by other people. Only to alter bad people is much more difficult than to deprive the right to self-defense of good ones.
Example N 1. Citizen M. lived in the hatch of the urban heating system. However, in his meager possessions there were an F-1 grenade and a double-barreled shotgun of an 12 caliber. Once, walking around the city in a light drunk, M. fired into a huge mirror shop window, admired a waterfall of fragments and went to his hatch to rest, where he was successfully detained by police.
Example N 2. Citizen A. worked as a guardian of a gardening partnership, and here he lived without a residence permit. Once, on the territory entrusted to him, he found a stranger car, next to which a drunk company sat down for a picnic in the fresh air. A., as it should be, made a remark to violators and, as is customary in recent times, was sent to an address known from Russia for a long time. After that, our hero retired, but not where he was sent, but to his hut, where he had several RGD-5 grenades. Taking one of them, he returned, pulled out the check and gently blew up the car of the violators.
These simple examples are the best suited for checking on them the arguments of opponents of the right of citizens to own weapons. Recently, three State Duma deputies, including the head of the Security Committee, in one of the television programs voiced their proposals for regulating the market for firearms. Among those were: tightening the rules for issuing licenses for it, a special psychiatric examination of future buyers of weapons, periodic visits to the owners of guns by district inspectors, and the deputies themselves want the owners to occasionally retake exams on the rules of possession of firearms and traumatic weapons. The deputies spoke enthusiastically and were clearly pleased with their own proposals to make the collar of a citizen heavier, who already spent all his life in a narrow framework of prohibitions and restrictions. Why such a dislike for him? And how will these restrictive measures affect M. and A.? Which inspector will visit M. in the collector, who will send A. to the psychiatric examination. Who, finally, will deprive them of the right to have military grenades, the right that they themselves appropriated without any obstacles, and which the owners do not even think about?
It should be noted that M. and A. are not alone, they are representatives of a multi-thousand tribe of offenders who do not follow any rules and do not follow any laws! Alas, the legislators simply did not think about it. Because they simply do not know either the 1 example, the 2 example, or thousands of other examples, and in preparing for the transfer (more precisely, not in preparation), they did not bother to ask at least some texture to the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
And this is not an isolated case. Such legislative initiatives are always (!!!) offered without any reliance on statistics or any serious research. I have been dealing with this issue for more than 30 years, and therefore I speak, relying not on emotional reasoning, but on real figures, materials of criminal cases, opinion polls, long-term observations.
And the numbers say the following. In Russia, all 2% of legally acquired weapons are used to commit crimes. And all these 2% offenses committed on domestic soil are usually in the heat of passion, delirium tremens, or when the limits of necessary defense are exceeded. In street robberies, not even talking about exchanges on exchangers or contract killings, you will never find legal guns or carbines. Because no normal person will cut out of an officially registered weapon on him and go with him to rob collectors. We see the same picture in the United States, where it is easier to acquire weapons than ours, and until recently there were two times less murders. There, too, with all the abundance of possibilities, less than 2% of officially registered trunks get into crime reports.
Incompetent opponents of a short-barreled woman try to prove that for defense it is enough to have an already allowed self-defense weapon, traumatic weapons, stun guns, gas pistols, aerosols ... But when studying more than 500 criminal cases in which such weapons appear, I have not a single (!!!) fact I did not find a successful self-defense. But crimes with their use are not one and not two, but dozens. Because law-abiding citizens use the means of self-defense as required by the instructions and the law. That is, it is allowed to shoot from a gas weapon no closer than from a meter distance, it is impossible to shoot from a travmatiki in the head, in the face, it is impossible to shoot at the stop ...
These instructions were compiled by the Ministry of Internal Affairs on the basis of the conclusions of the Ministry of Health, which ensures that human health, even the criminal, was not harmed. But this is not about drugs and vitamins! It turns out that the law-abiding defenders with the help of non-lethal weapons obviously cannot inflict harm on an in-attack, So, the attacker is not afraid of such weapons!
The deadliest weapons in Russia, with the help of which two thirds of murders are committed in the country: an ax (1), a kitchen knife (2), a hammer (3)
The criminals just spit on all the restrictions. They shoot just in the support and in the head. I studied the real case: the victim, defensively, shot at the attacker from the gas revolver, as expected, from a meter distance. It didn’t have a proper stopping effect on the criminal, he took away the weapon, hit the victim with the handle on the head, and then shot point-blank in the face.
As a result, a man’s nose was pierced with a jet of hot gas, a sensorineural hearing loss developed, in other words, deafness, eyes were burned, the burn turned into conjunctivitis, and so on.
Now introduced additional restrictions on traumatics and pneumatics, there are reasonable, and there are stupid. It was forbidden to shoot from pneumatics in the places that were not designated for this, but there are simply no designated places. No, of course, it’s right that it’s forbidden to shoot just in the street, because we have enough fools. And they shoot cars from pneumatics, and animals, even people. But, taking into account the bitter experience, it is better to think that the pneumatics should not be sold to anyone! Let only adult residents of the area buy, according to their passport, which is recorded in a special computer database. This, on the one hand, disciplines the owner, and on the other, it allows to outline the circle of persons to be checked in the event of a crime.
But the biggest and most harmful nonsense, which shows that all arguments about tightening are aimed solely at squeezing money out of people, this is a requirement that civilian weapons owners (especially traumatizers) pass an examination on the rules of handling it every five years. Question: what is achieved by this exam? Maybe Aslan Cherkesov, who killed four shots to the head of a fan, Sviridov did it because he had not studied the law enough? Or a scumbag who blew out an actor Zibrov’s pre-exam? And in general, whether at least one murder, rape, robbery or banditry was committed because the criminals did not know that these actions were illegal and punishable ?!
The most innocent (for criminals), and therefore self-defense means sold without permission in Russia. So far, their ban is not in question. And what will happen in the future, who knows ... So: stun gun (4), gas spray (5), aerosol device "Shock" (6)
So, on the basis of which reasons such a decision was made? What research is it based on? After all, proceeding from the AZ of such logic, it is necessary once every five years, and better each year, to take a paid exam for all citizens of the country on the knowledge of the criminal code. And not passing, to prohibit walking on the street and fined ... What is not a way to defeat crime? I give this idea to any deputy faction.
In general, there is really no problem of criminal trauma use. There are incompetence of some officials, who exaggerate the colors and force the situation to a bare place. One of the three deputies mentioned mentioned publicly stated that for one fact of legitimate use of traumatics, there are 99 criminal facts. This is, of course, complete nonsense, but the poor fellow told about police violations of the rules of carrying weapons, based ... on the series. In fact, there is no statistics on the use of trauma. Sometimes called 50 cases of its criminal use. In relation to the total number of non-lethal trunks, this is less than 0,1%, that is, it is a value that is less than the statistical error, which does not give any grounds at all to speak and draw any conclusions. For comparison: from 15 thousands of murders, about 10 thousands were committed using economic tools: kitchen knives, hammers, axes, chisels, etc. Perhaps there is much more reason for alarm, is not it? Here is the topic for another law:. I also donate to any deputy who wants to imitate a deep state approach to ensuring public safety. It is possible to issue permits for the right to buy knives and hammers for money, to arrange re-examinations ... Once in Okinawa, it was decided to have one knife in one village. He was in the central square, and an armed sentry stood near it. If someone from the peasants had to, for example, slaughter a chicken, he would go to this square and there, under the supervision of the sentry, cut it. You can, of course, follow this path, but the occupiers invented it, out of fear of the local population. It is better to accept the principle that Americans have been practicing for many decades:. And it is necessary to influence people, not weapons. Now we have the situation is exactly the opposite.
The hooligan, sticking to the wife of Andrei Zibrov, made a young man, a good actor, disabled for life. Deliberately causing grievous bodily harm from hooliganism is punished with imprisonment from three to ten years. Well, give a scoundrel - 10 or eight years! This will be a lesson for others. And he was appointed three years in a general regime colony, which means that in a year and a half he will be released on parole! Why such softness to a particular guilty? And where does such pressure on innocent people come from? After all, after such cases, the media with full force fall on civilian weapons, demanding toughening its sale, and even a complete ban! That is, essentially the principle:. It is absolutely clear that such decisions untie the hands of criminals, but they bind the law-abiding citizens hand and foot!
The most popular in Russia models of “firearm of limited defeat” are: Osseo XB-4-1ML pistol-free pistol “Osa” (7), MP-80-13T traumatic pistol (or IK 79-9T pistol), Traumatic pistols (8), and traumatic pistols. Jorge "(9) and" Jorge-3M "(10), traumatic pistol" Thunderstorm "(11), traumatic revolver" Iceberg "(12)
In the United States, opponents of fluency in weapons have a formally correct argument that a mass of stolen or simply lost legal trunks enter the black market. Usually, this is even called a figure, although no one can say exactly which document it came from. In fact, this figure is, of course, several times lower. According to official data, in 10 years, from 1993 to 2002, inclusive, 1,7 million reports about the loss or theft of weapons were received by the US police. Moreover, this number has decreased from year to year from 200 thousand in 1993 to 140 thousand in 2002. But we are not even the main thing. We have our own way, our crime is much easier to get weapons from military warehouses. In the search are tens of thousands of not even pistols, as in the United States, and machine guns, machine guns, grenade launchers! And no one wants to engage in tightening control over their storage: even the centralized registration of military weapons is missing! For service and civilian weapons, he is, but for combat - no! But the work should be carried out precisely from this end: they found a machine gun at the gangster, looked at his number, broke through what warehouse he was in, under what circumstances he disappeared, all this can be done in a few minutes. But this is just not doing. And everyone understands why ... Any society is designed in such a way that something can be stolen or lost in it, but this is not a reason to refuse from this subject at all. Cars also often steal ... Let's ban them - there will be no hijackings, no accidents, no raids ...
Another Russian peculiarity, on which the opponents of the free sale of arms especially stress. Russia is a drinking country, and drinking is strong. 18 liters of pure alcohol per capita, including children, women and the elderly. About a bottle of vodka per Russian per week. About 80% of crimes we have committed in a state of intoxication. From here, opponents of legalization make an interesting conclusion that instead of allowing weapons, it is better to fight alcoholism. And until the number of drunkards and alcoholics, we will not fall at least to the world average level, about any weapon for the population is out of the question. Formally, everything is correct here, but with one significant reservation, which immediately reduces all previous arguments to. Namely: people who drink, drug addicts, members of an organized criminal group, previously convicted and other marginal people acquire weapons without any particular problems. M. and A., who started this article, did not observe legal prohibitions, and in fact no one can restrict them. Therefore, speaking of the arming of the population, I mean law-abiding citizens, citizens with an impeccable legal reputation. But just these proposals and cause vehement objections! At the same time, I have not met a single recipe for the effective disarmament of fringe and criminals!
Incompetence rules the ball in all matters related to weapons. I deliberately do not use the newfangled term in this article, which was called traumatic — because it is wrong in essence and illiterate in content. Firstly, a traumatic weapon according to forensic standards is not considered a firearm, as it has a muzzle energy. Secondly, a firearm serves to defeat a living target, and a traumatika has another task: to disable the enemy. What changed the renaming? Now from or will not beat out an eye? Hardly. But when I wanted to buy cartridges for my own, the seller said that my license, updated a couple of months ago, is no good: it uses the old wording, and now the trauma is called in a new way ...
But in general, it’s not a weapon! In Switzerland, guns and machine guns are stored in houses, not to mention rifles. In Israel, young soldiers, boys and girls, walk around the city, including firing, with combat. And amazingly: no one shoots anyone, no one kills anyone ...
Yes, in fact, this is not surprising, if we recall that people are killed not by guns, but by other people. Only to alter bad people is much more difficult than to deprive the right to self-defense of good ones.
Information