Military Review

Do I need to be afraid of "a man with a gun"?

98
Police are voluntary armed groups of citizens in places where state influence is weak or absent. In modern Russian, the word “militia” carries a slightly different meaning, and it would be more correct to translate this word as “militia”. And, since the problems associated with the arming of the population are often discussed at this resource, I would like to consider the mentioned public phenomenon in more detail.


Do I need to be afraid of "a man with a gun"?


The most widespread movement of "militias" has received in the United States, where it conducts its history from the time of the war of independence, from about 1775, when the armed settlers ’self-educated groups were ready,“ per minute ”to defend their home or to assist the regular army.


(Monument to the militia in Lexington, Massachusetts, where the first shots of the war of independence were played.)



In the United States itself, the attitude towards the militia is far from clear: many believe that these people put the interests of the individual above the interests of the state, they are not tolerant and do not accept multiculturalism and globalism. Others consider them to be the “last line of defense” against the American state, whose actions are sometimes aimed not at the benefit of citizens. The aspirations of the militias themselves are most fully expressed in the translation (perhaps not very precise), which I would like to quote here:

"Our goal is to return to the original ideas of the constitutional republic, such as it was to the founding fathers. To the individual freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, to the restrictions imposed by the text of the Constitution on the federal government.

We are patriots, but we don’t like what our government does. We believe in the American dream, in the right of private property, even if it is just a small house and two cars per family, a better life than ours for our children.

We believe in the eternal ideals that have made America a great power: Freedom, Justice, Morality, Respect for the Constitution. Progress in many areas could bring us closer to our dreams, but this did not happen ... We must bring America back to its original values ​​in order not to lose it!

Many years ago, Rousseau (not Abraham. - Approx. Author) said: America became great because it became a carrier of good. There will be no Good, there will be no greatness! You can verify this remark right now. Since the Second World War, despite the mountains of our high-tech weapons, money and power, we suffer one humiliating defeat after another. Our government protects the interests of transnational corporations, protects the price of the blood of our children, the loss of jobs, the decline in our standard of living.

The reasons for which we cannot win are for the vicious purposes of our government ... Our soldiers do not understand why they shed blood, our opponents know what they are fighting for, and they fight decisively and selflessly ... Such an opponent cannot be defeated! If you need examples, read about Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Nicaragua, Somalia, Iran ... Afghanistan and Iraq will soon be added to this list. We need to break this vicious chain and use our resources to make America the best country in the world! "

The list of "likely opponents" of the militia is quite diverse. In connection with the collapse of the USSR, his place of the “Empire of Evil” is gradually taking China. Here, North Korea, al-Qaeda, terrorists, Jewish world capital, and even the British royal family, allegedly secretly administering the States. With the disappearance of the threat of world communism, America has a new enemy - the New World Order, "which, for the sake of usurers and their minions, will finally bury traditional values," they say.



The exact number of militias is not taken to count one, it ranges from 30 thousands to half a million, and these are only overt supporters. Recently, in their ranks, politicians, military writers began to notice more and more often ... and the reason for this has not yet been revealed.

Military training of militias varies in level, but, in general, is regarded as not too high. That, however, may change in the near future, as their ranks are replenished with veterans of the army and marines who have experience in hostilities and are ready to share it with like-minded people. On arms of formations consist t. tactical carbines (self-loading, such as AR -15, М14 Garand, SKS, AK-oidy, "combat" shotguns), they use in their training army and police equipment. At the initial level, the militiamen are trained on orienteering, masking, shooting, survival in natural conditions, guerrilla tactics. Militiamen acquire all weapons, uniforms, equipment and ammunition at their own expense, although in some states money is allocated for this from the local budget. For participation in gathering, patrolling, protection of events and territory, money is not paid ... everything is exclusively on a voluntary basis.




The most active militia groups are organized in states bordering Mexico, which is understandable in general - the flow of illegal migrants is increasing year by year, and the border service is not able to cope with it.

“You have no idea what is happening here! Farmers living along the border, keep the defense themselves and voluntarily go into the militia,” says one of the ranchers. “This is a good idea - the militia! Moreover, no budget funds are needed to finance it! ”According to him, young people in the state find it difficult to find a job: vacancies are occupied by illegal immigrants, and his wife’s“ labor migrants ”almost robbed: the rescued militia patrol saved her.

"My guys in the squad are both farmers and veterans, people who are not afraid to use weapons," says the head of the patrol team, William Davis. persons. "

Arizona Governor Janice Brewer said: "What we have on the border of Mexico and Arizona is a rebellion! And we have thousands of volunteer patrolmen who have vowed to close the border ..."



Is it possible to create such a militia in Russia? Hardly ... There is no article in our Constitution, similar to the Second Amendment, and meanwhile, when the law enforcement system in the country is in distress, volunteers who work not for salary but for the safety of their families and their very existence could have a serious impact on the situation in the country. So should we be afraid of the "man with a gun"?
Author:
98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. erased
    erased 19 November 2013 08: 23
    25
    I completely agree with the American militia - the police! All that they say, all their problems, anxieties - just like ours. Yes, the Russian army does not howl around the world, but he has no less problems. The rest is the same.
    People protect themselves, their homes, possessions, friends from illegal actions of migrants, illegal immigrants and other criminal elements. Americans are easier in this regard - they have the right to purchase, store, carry and use weapons freely! And we have a full priest in this regard! Smooth-bore and rifled long-barreled rifles, rifles and carbines are allowed to be bought, but they cannot be taken out of the house (only for hunting). Short barrels are prohibited, long barrels are prohibited (WHY?) Stores with a capacity of more than 10 rounds. And most importantly - when you try to protect your home and life using weapons, you can get life. But the criminals do not bother with this garbage, rob and kill, rape for their pleasure. The police ... well, everything is clear here. The power ... is also clear here, the fact that the Russian government will NEVER allow the country's citizens to fully own weapons and use them for defense is especially clear. By the way, this is the answer to the question - are we free people ?! Is not it?..
    1. Generalissimus
      Generalissimus 19 November 2013 08: 40
      -9
      them a weapon?


      Are these "citizens" allowed to purchase stubs? And weapons in general?

      No thanks .. We don’t need such joy. Animals must not be given freedom.

      And to protect your home - keep Saigu at home. Or a pump. With buckshot. If you have big fears that they will break into you.

      Freedom is not that everyone can carry weapons.
      The freedom is to make your state responsible.
      It will not be safer on the streets to equip a layman — the USA is an example.
      It’s just that the massacre of everyone and between everyone will begin - we’ve got it, baseball bats have already become a problem, but do you want to distribute weapons?

      The law should regulate immigration, make visitors behave decently and so on. And the distribution of weapons is the last nail in the lid of the coffin of public safety.

      The free circulation of weapons is somehow justified in those countries where there is no problem with migration and there is a mature civil society.
      1. erased
        erased 19 November 2013 08: 51
        26
        The free circulation of weapons is somehow justified in those countries where there is no problem with migration and there is a mature civil society.

        The United States is full of migration problems, but weapons are on sale.
        It’s just that the massacre of everyone and between everyone will begin - we’ve got it, baseball bats have already become a problem, but do you want to distribute weapons?

        The presence of weapons does not determine the state of the slaughter. You can kill with knives, sticks, fists.
        Animals must not be given freedom.

        Who exactly do you call animals? Citizens of the country?

        The law is perfect, compliance by the state is perfect! But if the state does not protect, the citizen should have the right to do this.
        And I sincerely and disinterestedly wish you to be alone against two or three robbers. When they turn you into a piece of meat, you may recall your unwillingness to own a weapon. This will be the last thought, but sensible ...
        1. APES
          APES 19 November 2013 09: 11
          +5
          Quote: erased
          about his unwillingness to own a weapon


          This is not enough, we must be able to, and most importantly, be mentally prepared to pull the trigger

          Quote: erased
          I sincerely and disinterestedly wish to be


          Wish others what you wish for yourself

          sorry hi
          1. erased
            erased 19 November 2013 10: 56
            +6
            ... and most importantly, be mentally prepared to pull the trigger

            Sorry, pull the trigger. The trigger is another detail.
            Wish others what you wish for yourself

            Here you are right, no questions asked.
        2. Generalissimus
          Generalissimus 19 November 2013 09: 13
          +6
          The United States is full of migration problems, but weapons are on sale.


          It is also full of problems with its "free" use. They have such "Belgorod" shooters every week, a couple. Do you like free America so much? Drive.
          I was there - I didn’t like it. In Russia it’s better.

          The presence of weapons does not determine the state of the slaughter. You can kill with knives, sticks, fists


          Right. And with our tendencies, they will switch to gunshot fun, and they will come to machine guns. Better to decide the fist.

          Who exactly do you call animals? Citizens of the country?

          I have fully formulated, illustrating those whom I consider animals.
          Or, in your eyes, are these the citizens, the defenders of Russia?

          The law is perfect, compliance by the state is perfect! But if the state does not protect, the citizen should have the right to do this.


          Sorry, but this is nonsense.
          If the state has problems with putting things in order in an "unarmed" society, having armed it, it will completely lose control over the safety of its citizens.

          Namely, that "The law is wonderful, its observance by the state is ideal!"
          If you want to be free and respect yourself - achieve this. Then you do not have to be afraid of the shadow.
          Or are you hoping with a pistol in your trouser belt, is it safer to go out at night to the nearest cigarette store? smile So there, in the night, there will be many. We'll have to buy a bulletproof vest.

          And to you, I sincerely and disinterestedly wish to be alone against two or three robbers. When they begin to turn you into a piece of meat, you may recall your own reluctance to own weapons. It will be the last thought, but hello


          oh dear you are mine, do not need these horror stories, please. I got one against fifteen times once, so 20 years ago. And nothing - composure and poise brought the situation to a peaceful resolution. And it happened that one against three got into a meat grinder. And also nothing - good, the rich baggage from military service remained with me.
          I’ll tell you what, for your own good. Having serious skills in hand-to-hand combat, I will never risk my life and having assessed the situation, I’d better give everything of value myself if I see the futility of the fight. And I don’t see anything wrong with that.

          Having a pistol, I cannot protect myself to a greater extent - simply because the "robbers" with whom you scare me, like a little girl, may also have a pair of pistols. And if it comes to "meat", then the chances will be much less likely to remain alive.

          P.S. yes get out of hand. yes children, by golly ..
          I rarely comment on something, and I don’t participate in your rating races - I’m not interested.
          I do not live this forum life.
          I read articles and comments by competent people, of whom, unfortunately, are few here. The rest is on my side.
          1. Egoza
            Egoza 19 November 2013 10: 12
            +7
            Quote: Generalissimus
            I, having serious hand-to-hand fighting skills,

            "Announcement
            Attention! Those wishing to practice in the martial arts section have a bottle of ginseng infusion and nunchucks with them. In the section of Russian martial arts - a bottle of moonshine and a shaft! " laughing
            But seriously, really, weapons do not always help. And you still need to think to whom it can be issued. Given that you can buy everything for bribes, it is very utopian to hope that it does not fall into various scumbags.
            But article +. Moreover, I believe this is a very positive development for the United States. The people are beginning to see the light, despite the propaganda about messianism and "great democratic values", and do not want to fight any longer for no reason. And if, there people already want to return to their "beginning", then far from all is lost. They want to take the best that they had in the past, rejecting everything bad so as not to repeat their mistakes. By the way, we also want to return the USSR, rejecting the mistakes of the past, taking all the best. BUT! If we started to gather (through the vehicle), then the United States would most likely disintegrate into separate states. IMHO
          2. IRBIS
            IRBIS 19 November 2013 10: 23
            +2
            Quote: Generalissimus
            And with our tendencies, they will switch to gunshot fun, and they will come to machine guns. Better to decide the fist.

            I absolutely agree with you!
            Citizens! Look around you! Who do you want to allow weapons? Don't you feel sorry for your wives and children? Those who will not carry the trunk with them all the time. Have you not played enough "war" in childhood? Didn't the army have enough cartridges?
            1. Same lech
              Same lech 19 November 2013 10: 27
              13
              It's a pity of course.
              But if they will be killed by bandits what to do?
              It’s too late to call the police, it’s impossible to run away, passers-by are afraid to stick up for protection
              WHAT TO DO MY NATIVE YOU?
              1. IRBIS
                IRBIS 19 November 2013 11: 44
                +4
                Quote: The same LYOKHA
                But if they will be killed by bandits what to do?

                With what a fright would someone just start killing women with children on the street? Unless, of course, this is a scumbag with an authorized trunk or an intellectual, also with a legitimate short-barrel, whose wife cheated on her and moved off the roof because of emotions.
                Quote: The same LYOKHA
                passers-by are afraid to stick up in defense

                And so they will arrange a western?
                Quote: The same LYOKHA
                WHAT TO DO MY NATIVE YOU?

                To sit, hung with weapons and to grieve that some h (m) udak made a decision about self-defense and, due to congenital squint or downism, opened fire, accidentally hitting passers-by (kindergarten, playground, etc. )
                1. Generalissimus
                  Generalissimus 19 November 2013 12: 21
                  +4
                  laughing good

                  5 points. Humor in the subject. It makes no sense to argue.
                  It has long been noted that the arguments of the supporters of weapons are mainly based on how they represent themselves in these situations.
                  True, to their chagrin, among them, just the majority of those who will be allowed the last weapon, they sleep and see themselves with these weapons, and how they will walk and restore order: just a little, they will step on or push in the subway - immediately put in place the offender.
                  These guardians for safety and free circulation of weapons cause the greatest concern.
                  1. IRBIS
                    IRBIS 19 November 2013 12: 40
                    +3
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    It has long been noted that the arguments of the supporters of weapons are mainly based on how they represent themselves in these situations.

                    I agree. However, reality almost always does not coincide with ideas.
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    immediately put in place the offender.

                    Which may turn out to have a larger caliber barrel and a better reaction.
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    These guardians for safety and free circulation of weapons cause the greatest concern.

                    At the same time, they cannot simply and clearly say why the weapon is specific. One hypothetical "what if ...". However, after all, we lived in a country without weapons and without any special problems? Lived! And pretty good!
                    1. Same lech
                      Same lech 19 November 2013 15: 33
                      +2
                      Your arguments are only suitable in theory - again, you all align with one comb.
                      Further, those gangsters who have a firearm are also not fools (unless of course they are lawless) and will not wave them in vain.
                      I can hardly imagine that a bandit will go rob an old woman with a TT pistol.
                      But on collectors this happens all the time (although he is with arms)
                      We lived in the country calmly in due time because the police had the confidence of the people and it was pretty good at catching all kinds of bandits and gopstopnik.
                      Now the times have changed and wait until the police can finally work as in the old days there is no sense - various reforms of our perestroika only worsen the situation.
                      Therefore, these all kinds of explosions of the local population became more frequent against the lawlessness of crime and bandits of all stripes.
                  2. zmey_gadukin
                    zmey_gadukin 19 November 2013 14: 28
                    +5
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    just the majority of those who will be allowed weapons last

                    among them there are still many who saw weapons only in the picture or on TV ...
                  3. Same lech
                    Same lech 19 November 2013 15: 23
                    +3
                    Bullshit, you imagine people as you want to see, you do not have to come up with excuses for people who advocate legalizing weapons.
                    I never tried to own a firearm because it is a big headache in RUSSIA.
                    And it is just people like EVSYUKOV who have access to the firearm first of all who are more worrying.
                2. Same lech
                  Same lech 19 November 2013 15: 18
                  +4
                  With what a fright would someone just start killing women with children on the street?

                  Full of videos laid out by the people where all sorts of scumbags attack women, old people and just passers-by.

                  Something I did not see that those who have registered guns in droves run to shoot each other.

                  You never answered what to do when there is no other choice to engage in a fight with a gangster and when there is nothing at hand except a hehe book (for example) with a criminal code.

                  I never offered to shoot right and left — I just want to know how to save my life in a deadlock and my loved ones and not go to jail at the same time.
                  1. Starina_hank
                    Starina_hank 19 November 2013 18: 36
                    0
                    In normal states there are normal law enforcement agencies for this, and we are ready to arrange a small shootout with bandits and fill up a couple of random passers-by.
                3. Normal
                  Normal 19 November 2013 15: 23
                  +6
                  Quote: IRBIS
                  Unless, of course, this is a scumbag with an authorized trunk or an intellectual, also with a legal short-barrel, whose wife cheated on her and the roof moved out of emotions.

                  .....
                  Quote: IRBIS
                  And so they will arrange a western?

                  .....
                  vadimN RU December 18, 2012 11:03 ↑

                  Cases where mass murderers were stopped by armed citizens

                  - Shooting at Pearl School. Mississippi was stopped by Deputy Director Joel Mairik with an 45 Colt
                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting

                  - Two armed students stopped the shooter at the Appalachian Law School.
                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_S...of_Law_shooting

                  - The robber plans to shoot everyone in the store in Muskegon, pcs. Michigan, and enough money and jewelry to satisfy the "gnawing cocaine hunger" crumbled when one of the alleged victims began to shoot back.
                  http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citiz...amp;st=&ps=

                  - Shooting at Colorado Springs Church was stopped when an arrow shot one of a hidden weapon. Http: //blutube.policeone.com/police-traini...hurch-shooting/

                  - The shooting in the gun shop in Santa Clara in the 1999 year was stopped by an armed citizen after the shooter announced that he intended to kill everyone. Police found a list of intended victims in his car. In the end, only the shooter himself, Richard Gable Stevens, was shot dead.
                  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2911219/posts

                  - In December of the 1991 year in Aniston, pcs. Alabama, the holder of a license to conceal the carrying of weapons [a restaurant visitor] stopped armed robbers who drove workers and visitors, including his wife, into the refrigerator [refrigerator room]. He shot both robbers, killing one of them.
                  http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information...tem.asp?ID=1446

                  - July 13 2009, Golden Food Market, pcs. Virginia: the shooter tried to shoot several people, was stopped by an armed civilian, a holder of a license for hidden wearing.
                  http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/146...lives-takes-few - в Ирли, шт. Техас, вооружённый гражданин Вик Стейси выстрелил и остановил помешанного, который только что убил двух соседей и стрелял по полиции из винтовки.
                  http://www.ktxs.com/news/RV-PARK-KILLINGS-...2o/-/index.html

                  - The peculiarity of mass killings that were stopped by the citizens themselves is that they do not have time to become massacres.
                  1. Starina_hank
                    Starina_hank 19 November 2013 18: 42
                    +4
                    And where did the inadequate citizens get weapons (one was a drug addict, the other was crazy), were they bought at a store?
                4. The comment was deleted.
              2. Normal
                Normal 19 November 2013 14: 52
                +6
                Quote: The same LYOKHA
                WHAT TO DO MY NATIVE YOU?


                Well here is the answer:
                Quote: Generalissimus
                I will never risk my life and having assessed the situation, I’d better give myself all the valuable things if I see the futility of the struggle. And I do not see anything shameful in this.

                ......
                “But don't you feel sorry for your wives and children?”
                “But if bandits kill them, what should they do?”
                “With what fright does someone just start killing women with children on the street?”


                And if you want to rape your wife and daughter, then according to the logic of the pacifists, assessing the situation and seeing the futility of the struggle, you need to lower your pants and bend down. After all, pacifists do not see anything shameful in this.
                1. Generalissimus
                  Generalissimus 19 November 2013 15: 30
                  +5
                  And if you want to rape your wife and daughter, then according to the logic of the pacifists, assessing the situation and seeing the futility of the struggle, you need to lower your pants and bend down. After all, pacifists do not see anything shameful in this.


                  I had a commander in the army, he very much liked giving introductory notes along the way.
                  And he really liked to put these introductory subordinates into a dead end, complicating the situation more and more ..
                  Once I got under this business. The introductory notes were intelligence, and always ended with the question: your actions?

                  And so, in the process of these opening, when the partner was already killed, there were enemies around, all special equipment and weapons miraculously refused or were destroyed, and I was sitting in my underpants on a bare field, I only had to ask the commander: - Comrade Major, and what am I doing here then?

                  Your introductory comments and manner of distorting other people's answers smack of the same crazy absurdity.

                  But I will try to answer you.
                  First of all, you are not fucking hanging out with your wife and children in places where you will certainly be attacked with the desire to rape.
                  Brains should be enough not to hang around anywhere, and take into account the safety of your family.

                  This is the first.

                  Secondly, if you manage to substitute your family this way, and your wife and children will be raped before your eyes (you will excuse me for such examples, but I will answer you in your manner), then I think it’s more likely that this is before and your very own pistol is pushed into your own intimate place, which is valued for integrity. And, which is also more likely to do so, by inserting your short barrels into your ear. Do you not think that it is precisely you who will be given permission for a weapon, and your hypothetical rapists will be deliberately without it?

                  PySy: I would ask you not to get personal in the future. It does not paint you and from this you do not seem smarter or brutal.
                  Thank you in advance.
                  1. Normal
                    Normal 19 November 2013 17: 58
                    +1
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    I would ask you not to go personal in the future.

                    You are welcome. I can ask you the same, for if this is not a personal attack, then what ?:
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    Your introductory comments and manner of distorting other people's answers smack of the same crazy absurdity.

                    I did not distort your answers, only logically continued. Water was given to you by your commander (I had every right to do this), but I just assumed a very possible situation, and so as not to stay
                    in shorts on a bare field
                    in such a situation it is better to be armed. Don't worry about criminals:
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    they’ll probably do this by inserting their short barrels in your ear. Do you not think that it will be they who will give you a permit for weapons, and your hypothetical rapists will be deliberately without it?

                    If they turn out to be armed, then probably not officially acquired weapons. And they already have illegally acquired and they do not need permission. In this case, we are only talking about leveling the odds even a little. Yes, the criminals always have the initiative and the "right" of the first move. Well, it is all the more important for a law-abiding citizen to be armed in order to have at least some chance of a positive outcome of the case.

                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    First of all, you are not fucking hanging out with your wife and children in places where they will certainly attack you


                    You don’t need demagoguery, okay? If you live in Moscow, you cannot help but know that adjacent Friday metro stations and bus stop terminus become such places on Friday late at night.
                    I live in the suburbs and I had to meet my daughter in Moscow at the final late in the evening. I had seen enough of the dances of drunken horsemen and the courage of drunken Asians.
                    Quote: Generalissimus
                    Brains should be enough not to hang around anywhere, and take into account the safety of your family.

                    Thanks to the wise policy of the leadership, which lives behind high fences and with security, "anywhere" is now everywhere, except perhaps in Moscow within the garden.
                    But brains should be enough to understand that the security of the family of an armed person is slightly higher than that of an unarmed person.
              3. Starina_hank
                Starina_hank 19 November 2013 18: 24
                +1
                If there are three of them with trunks, then you need an automatic, otherwise you won’t be beaten off.
              4. Dezzed
                Dezzed 19 November 2013 21: 31
                +1
                The question is relevant. Can change government that is not competent in the issue of security of citizens.
              5. faraon
                faraon 21 November 2013 08: 04
                0
                The presence of a weapon does not correct the situation, it most likely aggravates it. If, God forbid, someone decides to cause you trouble, trust my experience., A gun will not help you in 99% of cases. This is a purely psychological tool in the hands of the average man, for complacency.
                again, in order to use weapons, one must be prepared morally, physically and legally, which not many can afford.
            2. Starina_hank
              Starina_hank 19 November 2013 18: 20
              +2
              But some did not serve in the army, it will be interesting for them to play, there is no mind!
              1. Ruslan67
                Ruslan67 19 November 2013 18: 47
                +4
                Quote: Starina_Hank
                And some didn’t serve in the army, it’s interesting to play with them,

                I asked one adiet: do you want to protect yourself or to commit murder through negligence? after he said Give me a TT and I don’t need the police in FIG fool Who served will understand immediately laughing and he hung request
                1. Apollo
                  Apollo 19 November 2013 18: 52
                  +4
                  Quote: Ruslan67
                  Give me a TT and I don’t need the police in FIG


                  Maybe parabellum ?! laughing
                  1. Ruslan67
                    Ruslan67 19 November 2013 18: 57
                    +3
                    Quote: Apollon
                    Maybe parabellum?

                    Well, if only an ambush awaits am and most importantly do not forget to sing louder by paying the waiter wassat
                  2. alone
                    alone 19 November 2013 20: 33
                    +2
                    Yeah, and you’ll have to go to the mountains)))
          3. zmey_gadukin
            zmey_gadukin 19 November 2013 14: 26
            0
            Quote: Generalissimus
            If the state has problems with putting things in order in an "unarmed" society, having armed it, it will completely lose control over the safety of its citizens.

            Plus!
        3. Xroft
          Xroft 19 November 2013 15: 12
          +2
          Quote: erased
          The presence of weapons does not determine the state of the slaughter. You can kill with knives, sticks, fists.

          http://www.rg.ru/2013/09/17/vintovka-site.html
          http://newsland.com/news/detail/id/1095402/
          http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D


          1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE_%D0%B2_%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB%D


          0%B5_%C2%AB%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BD%C2%BB

          Of course, the weapon does not determine! what do you! All cases in the USA are purely random! (and there are about 21 of them in the United States a year, it’s a slaughterhouse where 10+ innocent people are killed by a psychopath with a gun, not counting a THOUSAND crime where people die from gunshot wounds)
          We don’t need to legalize weapons, do you want to protect your family? correctly said take a saiga and let it be in your house (just protect the house)
          Not only does trauma happen to you? in Moscow you feel like a driver in the wild west (it’s good that not all cases are fatal, that you can’t say the same with the appearance of a gunshot for everyone)
        4. Vlaleks48
          Vlaleks48 19 November 2013 17: 45
          +5
          It’s not the weapon that kills, the non-human being that kills! What you saw in the photo to call the citizens of Russia the language does not turn around is a thief !!!
          This abomination grown by today's rulers and encouraged by the authorities! These idiots are used for all kinds of provocations.
          Weapons cannot be pleased, they must be sold under license to willing, tested and mentally healthy people. But this is exactly what we don’t want to do with those in power. Today, there are about 7 million barrels legally in hand.
          And strangely enough no one is afraid of him! So why don’t I add a revolver or a pistol to my hunting trunks ?!
          The villain does not need a license, and neither does the Evsyukovs, who will stop them ?!
        5. Starina_hank
          Starina_hank 19 November 2013 18: 15
          +4
          And why the hell is a state that cannot even protect its citizens from internal enemies?
        6. Revolver
          Revolver 19 November 2013 19: 03
          +1
          Quote: erased
          The United States is full of migration problems, but weapons are on sale.

          Not that completely free.
          You start by making an appointment with the police officer for the position of "firearms officer" in the local police about a meeting, and you get from him 3 sheets of questionnaires and applications, and 6 more sheets of instructions on how to fill out.
          You fill out, attach 3 checks (but not expensive - the total amount is less than $ 20), and again make an appointment with him to personally submit documents (by mail or through the policeman on duty do not accept). When serving, the fingerprint of the right index finger is taken. After that, the police have 6 weeks to review the application and check the biography (aren't they crazy? We judge? Arrests for drunk driving? Drugs? Malicious child support?)
          Yes, in the application you indicate the names of 2 "law-abiding citizens" - not relatives, so that they confirm their reliability. This is not a formality - the police will contact them and give them forms to fill out.
          And they also give a referral to a private fingerprint company (all + palms). It costs $ 120, fingerprints are sent to the national base for storage, and at the same time checks to see if these fingers lit up in a thread.
          Let's say everything is over. Again you make an appointment with the same officer, you get from him a "firearm purchaser ID" and written permission to buy 1 (one) weapon.
          With this you go to the store, pay, but you don't get the trunk. The obligatory 2-week "waiting period" begins, during which the store again makes some checks on its own, who knows what, databases. And only after that you get the trunk.
          And for each subsequent trunk - the same thing, with the exception of the buyer's card - it is reusable. You can only buy 1 trunk; I don’t remember how many months.
          And so, yes, it is freely sold. But not quite freely (see above) is bought. wink
          1. ParapaPanda
            ParapaPanda 19 November 2013 20: 15
            +4
            Sir, what state are you talking about? Do not mislead the public. in Arizona, where one of my brothers lives, weapons can be bought for um .. a day. Either my relative and several sites are lying to me, or you equal all the states under one comb.
            1. Revolver
              Revolver 19 November 2013 22: 10
              -1
              Quote: ParapaPanda
              Sir, what state are you talking about? Do not mislead the public.
              I did not generalize, but simply shared my experience. I so bought trunks in NY. AZ, TX, and several other states, more and more in the south and southwest, have more loose rules. By the way, you can buy assault rifles in the same place, and in other places there is a maximum of self-recharging, in particular, in the same NY where I lived before, and where I live now. And, say, in Washington, DC, as I heard (but have not tried) they say that it’s even more difficult, well, the truth is there is federal jurisdiction.
        7. revnagan
          revnagan 19 November 2013 20: 32
          +1
          Quote: erased
          And I sincerely and disinterestedly wish you to be alone against two or three robbers. When they turn you into a piece of meat, you may recall your unwillingness to own a weapon.

          Well, you just so ... Let it be honest, let the Generalissimo have a pump with buckshot. Houses. And "Saiga" to boot in the same place. And for the purity of the experiment, let the attackers have mounts and fittings, and their opponent, so and be, a bit (I'm kind). And see how he cope with the five alone
        8. Dezzed
          Dezzed 19 November 2013 21: 27
          +3
          Quote: erased
          The presence of weapons does not determine the state of the slaughter. You can kill with knives, sticks, fists.


          Right. But the machine is somehow easier.
        9. faraon
          faraon 21 November 2013 07: 56
          +1
          But if the state does not protect, the citizen should have the right to do this.

          Then another question arises: why do you pay taxes if the state cannot ensure your security. Sometimes even reckless legal acts are appropriate.
          Example: Israel 90% of the population is armed, there is free sale of weapons (naturally after obtaining a license), but there are also regulatory legal acts on the use of weapons. Yes, you object now that not everything is smooth with you, I agree, but these are not identical cases of adequate people. The constant preventive work of the police identifies these people and seizes their weapons.
          That's all. Just a licensing system needs to work at the appropriate level.
      2. APES
        APES 19 November 2013 09: 06
        +5
        Quote: Generalissimus
        there is a mature civil society.


        Where is it?
        1. Generalissimus
          Generalissimus 19 November 2013 09: 17
          +5
          Switzerland. For instance. Free circulation of weapons and a mature civil society, minimal problems with migration (although they appear). The logical result is a minimum of problems due to this notorious possession of weapons by "free" citizens.
          1. APES
            APES 19 November 2013 09: 56
            +3
            Quote: Generalissimus
            Free circulation of weapons and mature civil society


            I agree with you - the free possession of weapons in Russia will ensure the speedy building of a mature civil society.

            as one of the advantages will be, as you noted:
            Quote: Generalissimus
            minimum migration problems
          2. Starina_hank
            Starina_hank 19 November 2013 19: 14
            0
            I remember the situation from the Internet: three villages in the taiga, the total population of about 3500 people, according to the local registered hunting and rifled weapons of 1400 trunks (hunters-hunters), annually up to 80 people disappear in the vicinity.
      3. I am a Russian
        I am a Russian 19 November 2013 09: 17
        +3
        Quote: Generalissimus
        No thanks .. We don’t need such joy. Animals must not be given freedom.

        And to protect your home - keep Saigu at home. Or a pump. With buckshot. If you have big fears that they will break into you.

        Freedom is not that everyone can carry weapons.
        The freedom is to make your state responsible.


        I agree with you!
      4. Narrator.tales
        Narrator.tales 19 November 2013 11: 41
        +1
        What are you cons then put the man, fanatics of weapons. Really buy a saiga and rejoice, knives are not prohibited, here a classmate walks and nothing, another with a katana generally walks. It is a fact that all men should be able to own a weapon, but it is not a fact. Weapons are power, and power corrupts, should we not know, in OUR country, with our officials, ahah where to go far, "watchman's syndrome" with a minimum of power already shows everything. Give a man a gun, he will think of himself as God, but no one knows how to return life.
      5. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 19 November 2013 12: 26
        +7
        The people making this argument have a strange kind of mental blindness. After all, the weapon will not only be with him. You too! You, I hope, are a law-abiding citizen of the country? What's the matter then? Believe me, this "creepy" grin instantly disappears if a flock of such individuals stumbles upon a real effective rebuff.
        It is the belief that the enemy has bare hands (yes, be he Bruce Lee, there are about a dozen of them, and life is not a movie) releases this scum. And she instantly disappears, looking into the bore. Don’t be so ashamed ...
        1. IRBIS
          IRBIS 19 November 2013 14: 54
          +4
          Quote: Mikhail3
          After all, the weapon will not only be with him. You too!

          Are you sure you will have a legitimate pistol in your pocket? Will you surely get permission? Or do you have money to buy it? And where does the average family get money for weapons and their design - is this "pleasure" not cheap?
          Quote: Mikhail3
          Believe me, this "creepy" grin disappears instantly,

          Or amplified when reinforced by the trunk.
          Quote: Mikhail3
          if pack such personalities stumble upon a real effective rebuff.

          A flock? Who are you - a cowboy? Already one trunk will definitely be found, also legal. And he will kill you legally, because you will get your first one.
          Something like this, you are our brave ...
          1. Mikhail3
            Mikhail3 19 November 2013 19: 13
            +7
            Yes I am sure. I am for the law, so now I do not. Well, to be honest, I don’t really need it. I am not harmless and so, besides, I always preferred other weapons.
            Quote: IRBIS
            . And he will kill you legally

            Do you understand that this is practically a pathology? With regards to the fact that I got the first one and they shot me ... Have you been taught any of this? This is some kind of plague - there is a trunk among the pack of frostbites and I don’t see this person in the first place (damn it, it’s visible like a bonfire at night) and in the second he got it later and shot it first ?!
            Well, if this happened - then rightly so for me! If a man dares to own weapons - he is a warrior. And the duty of a warrior, especially a Russian warrior, is not to disgrace ancestors. Picked up a weapon - master all the skills! I didn’t take it, my hands are crooked, my brain is weak, my thump is crushing ... so then the bullet is the only true result. Death is far from the worst thing that can happen to a real person.
            First of all, my heart hurts not for people like me. We will scroll. Sick, old, women ... There is no protection for them. But there are attackers, and very often armed ones. And in the hop of safety, from complete impunity, from despicable will, they give themselves such permissions ... no court, no law can make up for the damage done to the weak and defenseless. Yes, and rarely defenseless before the court bring the case. It is difficult to speak from the grave of the prosecution .... And you don’t want to give them a chance.
            Because coward.
            1. Andrew-53
              Andrew-53 20 November 2013 00: 38
              +1
              I completely agree. On sabers, swords, etc. they wrote-Do not bare without need, do not invest without glory.
      6. Pushkar
        Pushkar 19 November 2013 13: 04
        14
        Photo of Ku-Klu-Klanovites show? Every country has a bunch of idiots. And they have had weapons for a LONG time. Further. If you have noticed, all American shootings were carried out in places where the carrying of weapons is prohibited (schools, universities, etc.). That is, the inhuman knew that people were defenseless and no one would respond with fire. When trying to shoot in other places, they were quickly "calmed".
        1. IRBIS
          IRBIS 19 November 2013 14: 47
          -4
          Quote: Pushkar
          all American executions were carried out in places where the carrying of weapons is prohibited (schools, universities, etc.).

          And we will be allowed?
          Quote: Pushkar
          When trying to shoot in other places, they were quickly "calmed".

          Examples? In relation to executions and murders because of "crap" they will clearly lose.
          1. Normal
            Normal 19 November 2013 15: 37
            +1
            Quote: IRBIS
            Examples?

            Higher for discussion.
            1. IRBIS
              IRBIS 19 November 2013 16: 51
              +1
              Quote: Normal
              Higher for discussion.

              I don’t see any examples when they are laying bandits. Reverse - as much as you like, for every taste.
              1. Normal
                Normal 19 November 2013 18: 12
                +4
                Quote: IRBIS
                Examples when they are laying bandits do not watch

                And from what to stack them? From a saiga standing at home in a safe?
                Quote: IRBIS
                Reverse - as much as you like, for every taste.

                Of the officially acquired and registered trunks? Give a link if there are as many as you like and for every taste.
                And the examples when the robbers and just not normal were stopped by armed citizens completely ... where the citizens are armed .... In the USA, no matter how we hate them.
                1. IRBIS
                  IRBIS 19 November 2013 18: 18
                  0
                  Quote: Normal
                  And examples when robbers and simply not normal were stopped by armed citizens completely ... where citizens are armed .... In the USA,

                  And I asked for examples from the United States when armed citizens stop gangsters. Only there are not many such examples compared to ordinary American executions.
                  1. Normal
                    Normal 19 November 2013 21: 38
                    +1
                    Quote: IRBIS
                    And I asked for examples from the United States when armed citizens stop bandits

                    And I cited the discussion above.
                    Quote: IRBIS
                    But there are not many such examples compared to ordinary American executions.

                    There are many more such examples than "ordinary American shootings". That is why they are not talked about everywhere and everywhere, since this is usually and normal, and mass shootings are becoming widely known and a huge resonance due to the fact that it is out of the ordinary.

                    Yes ... what about the link?
                  2. Revolver
                    Revolver 19 November 2013 23: 41
                    -1
                    Quote: IRBIS
                    And I asked for examples from the United States when armed citizens stop gangsters. Only there are not many such examples compared to ordinary American executions.

                    "A dog has bitten a man - not news. News is when a man has bitten a dog."
                    Likewise, a law-abiding citizen put a gangster on - not news, it goes on the 3-5-10-XNUMX pages of local newspapers in small print. Here the gangster or the psycho laid law-abiding, especially children - news for the first page of a national scale. Nobody would have heard about George Zimmerman if Negros ah, sorry, African Americans like Sharpton, self-appointed "civil rights advocates" of individuals of a certain color, did not try to play the racial card. then from what they have popularity and income. Result? Zimmermann was acquitted outright. And if not for the racial issue, he would not even be accused, and this news would have remained on the back pages of local newspapers.
      7. CHILD
        CHILD 19 November 2013 19: 36
        +4
        .... my friend is enough to rave .... Americans are wandering around with their weapons all their life .... and it’s hard to call them a mature civil society ... and we always make idiots out of us !!!! what are you !!! you’ll shoot each other !!!! stop it’s enough to make idiots out of people, during the time of the empire no one saw a problem in the possession of weapons by citizens! and our (ours ???))) the state does not trust its citizens with weapons ... but with this does not cope with the function of protecting citizens ...
      8. O_RUS
        O_RUS 19 November 2013 23: 58
        0
        Quote: Generalissimus
        The free circulation of weapons is somehow justified in those countries where there is no problem with migration and there is a mature civil society.


        there are enough such ear-hooks as in the photo. They definitely should not be allowed to the weapons store.

        Strange ... minuses that have instructed you. Is it really that someone from the members of the forum wants to meet a crowd of armed skinheads on the street?
      9. wasjasibirjac
        wasjasibirjac 20 November 2013 10: 41
        0
        Quote: Generalissimus


        Are these "citizens" allowed to purchase stubs? And weapons in general?

        such "citizens" do not have the habit of bothering with permission, and that's okay. and the weapon is already there.
    2. APES
      APES 19 November 2013 09: 09
      10
      Quote: erased
      that the government of the Russian Federation will NEVER allow citizens of the country to fully own weapons and use them


      Yeah, scary will rob their citizens
      1. IRBIS
        IRBIS 19 November 2013 18: 25
        +2
        Quote: APES
        scary will rob their citizens

        Just think what you wrote - "it will become scary." Who will get scared? Will gasoline and food prices stop rising? Will taxes go down? Will medicines become cheap? No, those who sell weapons and licenses will get richer. That is, those who are now, allegedly, afraid to arm the people.
        1. APES
          APES 19 November 2013 23: 52
          0
          Quote: IRBIS
          So you think


          Why is the government so worried about the weapon of the people, and the weapon does not have any criminal element? - the answer: the power has got used to the weapon at a criminal element.

          Seriously, the protest meeting of armed citizens about any lawlessness - riot police will no longer help, even the Kadyrava special forces will not save.

          For you to understand my position: I am against giving arms to anyone who dads - ideally I would let go of a civilian with full-time weapons and the right to carry and the right to vote (civil rights) - at this point - I would give the officers the right to carry them.

          Any "switch" of hot water - making a decision will think.

          in this situation - weapons are not for sale, licenses are not issued (issued for military service - as a reward and a badge (a citizen is ready to defend his homeland) and then, maybe not everyone)

          Do you think the prestige of military service will benefit from this? - I think the queue will be, and even not everyone will be taken. And the government will understand on whose bayonets it rests.

          Yours faithfully, hi
          1. IRBIS
            IRBIS 20 November 2013 09: 38
            +1
            Quote: APES
            Seriously, the protest meeting of armed citizens over any lawlessness

            This is not a meeting, but an armed uprising.
            Quote: APES
            Riot police will not help, even Kadyrav special forces will not save.

            Stop it! Any organized detachment of even non-specialists will pile up a mountain of corpses of civilians. Only if machine guns and grenade launchers are not available for sale.
            Quote: APES
            would give the right to be worn by officers of the armed forces.

            In no case! There is a very large percentage of us who are inadequate. I'm not kidding. Many of these "cuckoos" nest - Mama do not cry!
    3. Sasha 19871987
      Sasha 19871987 19 November 2013 10: 07
      12
      I go to the military patriotic club and we also have a kind of militia ... although from the point of view of the authorities we are extremists * ((((more than once the gentlemen from the Ministry of Internal Affairs arranged in our club checks on this basis ... eh. sorry of course. that such an attitude ...
      1. APES
        APES 19 November 2013 11: 41
        +9
        Quote: sasha 19871987
        in terms of power


        you are a danger to her (power)
    4. 225chay
      225chay 20 November 2013 08: 42
      0
      Quote: erased
      The power ... is also clear here, the fact that the Russian government will NEVER allow the country's citizens to fully own weapons and use them for defense is especially clear.

      Russian authorities are afraid of the armed people
      1. APES
        APES 20 November 2013 09: 27
        0
        Quote: 225chay
        Russian power


        The kindergarten teacher realized that the candies were with cognac, hearing that the children began to scold the current government.

        joke,

        sorry hi
    5. faraon
      faraon 21 November 2013 07: 43
      0
      Americans are easier in this regard - they have the right to purchase, store, carry and use weapons freely!

      Of course it’s simpler, but this prostate has its own regulatory laws, and that’s not to say that if you buy a gun or an automatic weapon, you can use it at your own discretion (I mean law-abiding US citizens) as you want, by no means, the days of the Wild West are long over .To get a license to purchase and find weapons you need to go through a medical commission, permission from the police, the appropriate course (where they explain to you the laws, rules of use and under what circumstances you can use it).
      In general, based on personal experience, you should not even get it out of a holster without good reason.
  2. Same lech
    Same lech 19 November 2013 08: 27
    26
    In RUSSIA there is no people's militia - there is a police that occasionally wakes up when another YEGOR SHCHERBAKOV is killed.
    In RUSSIA, you killed a bandit with self-defense, you are a criminal.
    In the USA, you killed a bandit with self-defense, you are a law-abiding citizen.
    Distrust of the authorities to their people is the source of people's distrust of the authorities themselves and will always be so (here I am a fatalist)
    1. Walking
      Walking 19 November 2013 12: 33
      +1
      It is necessary to introduce such a concept as a law-abiding citizen into the law.
    2. IRBIS
      IRBIS 19 November 2013 16: 49
      -2
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      In the USA, you killed a bandit with self-defense, you are a law-abiding citizen.

      And "law-abiding" American citizens are stacking piles of corpses. Either one frees one from the "influence of the devil" (a very good, in his opinion, mission), then something else "righteous" emerges in the brain. So we find out when the number of corpses obviously goes over the "normal" American statistics, they prefer to remain silent about isolated cases.
      There is a desire to shake all the time, while you are not with your family - so brave, with a big gun? Is the child at school, and the wife at work, and old parents?
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 19 November 2013 19: 22
        +7
        I would give you an example of a gang of TsAPKOV — which, by the way, was protected by just the representative
        law enforcement structure- (12 corpses with 4 children) is how to understand ....
        What am I supposed to call for help to this same roofer when a similar gang breaks into the house? That's just in this case the people should be able to shoot this evil and MORALITY and HUMAN LOVE are inappropriate here.
      2. Pushkar
        Pushkar 19 November 2013 22: 03
        0
        Quote: IRBIS
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        In the USA, you killed a bandit with self-defense, you are a law-abiding citizen.

        And "law-abiding" American citizens are stacking piles of corpses. Either one frees one from the "influence of the devil" (a very good, in his opinion, mission), then something else "righteous" emerges in the brain. So we find out when the number of corpses obviously goes over the "normal" American statistics, they prefer to remain silent about isolated cases.
        There is a desire to shake all the time, while you are not with your family - so brave, with a big gun? Is the child at school, and the wife at work, and old parents?
        Do not distort, we are not talking about loonies. And the old parent is me (66 years old). What prevents me from banging inhumans? At the beginning of the 90s a couple of such strong men broke into me, they did not like my son. I did what they put under our laws, shot a meter from a gazovichka in the eye. Until they died, they greeted them first until the end of their lives. Who is stopping in a weapons store to check visitors through a file cabinet and fully track the history of the weapon and its owner?
      3. Andrew-53
        Andrew-53 20 November 2013 00: 42
        0
        Do not trynd. Give statistics. Preferably about stacks. Very interesting to take a look.
        1. IRBIS
          IRBIS 20 November 2013 09: 29
          0
          Quote: Andrew-53
          Do not trynd. Give statistics. Preferably about stacks. Very interesting to take a look.

          Are you deafblind? Watch TV sometimes. News, preferably not TV shows. And then tryndim ...
  3. borisjdin1957
    borisjdin1957 19 November 2013 08: 27
    +3
    from the Don.
    it’s not yet evening! Until the people organize themselves, not counting the hunters. But no one knows how many illegal weapons are in their hands. And in case of unforeseen situations, I think the people will be able to unite!
  4. Troy
    Troy 19 November 2013 08: 33
    +9
    Previously, this function was performed by the Cossacks. Now there are no real Cossacks, but there are many volunteers who agree to purchase equipment at their own expense and to maintain law enforcement, and in the border areas to help border guards free of charge, but the state does not need it. But it’s more difficult to bribe a volunteer, he is for an idea, and not for money. I think that if the state reconsiders its attitude to DND, it will receive substantial assistance from the population in terms of law enforcement.
  5. makarov
    makarov 19 November 2013 08: 34
    +3
    You don't need to be afraid of a man with a gun, but you should beware. Earlier in the USSR, in order to discourage citizens from abusing alcohol, they even went on such an experiment. Scientists eccentric moved the idea that the people at the genetic level are still afraid of the royal archers. So they "piled" a bitter tincture with the name "Streletskaya", and the sticker depicted a popular princess with a gun. But the people reacted to this incorrectly, they just kicked out of the shops, the price was almost 2 times cheaper than vodka, but it was crazy.
  6. mak210
    mak210 19 November 2013 08: 42
    +5
    Second Amendment (1791):
    Since a well-organized militia is necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and carry weapons will not be limited.


    I believe that no one will say that Americans are not patriots of their America. Maybe this is the case? They are able and obligated to defend their rights, including with weapons in their hands.

    Mao Zedong. Strategic issues of the revolutionary war in China ...
    Every communist must learn the truth that "a rifle gives birth to power."
  7. domokl
    domokl 19 November 2013 09: 26
    +2
    Bullshit ... What kind of militia? Against whom? And why copy the great American people? Let them live there as they live. And let them take up arms too.
    From time immemorial in Russia, such tasks were carried out by Cossacks, combatants, and similar formations. Today, these formations are reborn and really serve in some places. And the task of the militia is somewhat different than its author described. What was written before the introduction of the contract army, now the main task is not protection from mythical enemies, but elementary military training. The usual army reserve, in case of war.
  8. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 19 November 2013 09: 32
    +6
    The people's militia is an absolutely logical and natural phenomenon.
    However, due to severe restrictions by the state of the rights and freedoms of its own citizens, both in this matter and in other areas, it becomes clear that the security of the ruling elite from the people is the most important task. And the safety of citizens is, on the contrary, a third-order question.
    As evidenced by such restrictions as the minimum store capacity, weakened trunks (for weapons based on the army), exams and re-examinations, and now the restriction on the number of trunks (1 smooth barrel and 1 rifled).
    Personally, I decided to get these two trunks for myself. For the life of my family is my first priority!
    It is unfortunate that the tasks of the state do not coincide with the millions of families of its citizens ...
  9. bairat
    bairat 19 November 2013 10: 01
    +7
    A normal thought: in each district a volunteer militia is formed, in case of an emergency they will help the Ministry of Emergencies or law enforcement. For anyone, this is better than sitting in apartments without even knowing their closest neighbors.
  10. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 10: 17
    0
    Normal adults want to protect themselves and their families, and adolescents and adults with a fragile psyche shoot at people in colleges, on holidays, in stores! NOT! Too many are still inadequate in the streets. The degree of corruption (a psychiatrist’s certificate can be bought corny, but given to the district police officer on the paw) does not give confidence that normal people will have weapons!
    1. bairat
      bairat 19 November 2013 10: 30
      +4
      inadequate people and psychos will not bother collecting certificates and bribing district police officers; they have simpler ways of acquiring weapons.
  11. nikolaev
    nikolaev 19 November 2013 10: 52
    0
    There can be no talk of any free circulation of weapons! And the militia is inevitable. And the sooner the less blood will be shed! The militia is the same special forces, not only on a salary, but with state support for weapons (even outdated, which is not used already in troops), while this is possible. Accordingly, the selection for the militia should not be frail, but multi-level, with verification of personal qualities. Serious training should be organized: political, physical, military. The leadership of the units should, of course, be carried out by verified and trained people. All this can be organized. Of particular importance should be paid to military-pariotic and humane education. That is: weapons can be trusted to worthy citizens who are not infected with chauvinism and committed to undeniable moral and civil values. The main goal is to protect, help, educate the population ( and a visitor, including).
  12. pahom54
    pahom54 19 November 2013 11: 04
    12
    What are we arguing about? Those who need weapons - bandits, psycho-maniacs - have long had it, having acquired illegally. And they will always have. A law-abiding citizen, therefore, can not have it. Strange logic.
    he will always find a weapon, and if he wants to kill someone, he will also kill with a stone-fist stick.
    But a normal person in our state does not have the right to protect himself. Yes, even if, on the advice of the members of the forum, someone will have Saigu in the house and the bandits will get into his apartment house, and he will kill one of them, I won’t be surprised that he himself will rattle for 10-15 years for excess etc.
    And again, about the "official" weapon ... Yes, we have cops-policemen, despite all the medical examination, clinical examination, a little silly or what? Examples of their use of weapons were ...
    So I’m for the granny, who sells dill potatoes from her garden, to have such a pistol, and for insulting or hitting, she could put such a bullet into the leg-arm-ass for a start . And then we will have a civil society.
    1. Starina_hank
      Starina_hank 19 November 2013 19: 22
      0
      And the old grandfather is a sawn-off shotgun so that he could fill up a couple of neighbors for a broken apple tree!
      1. AlNikolaich
        AlNikolaich 19 November 2013 22: 17
        0
        Quote: Starina_Hank
        And the old grandfather is a sawn-off shotgun so that he could fill up a couple of neighbors for a broken apple tree!

        A damn thing is not funny ... Or didn’t you get salt from a double-barreled gun from a guard of collective farm gardens?
  13. The fat man
    The fat man 19 November 2013 11: 05
    +1
    America and Russia comparisons are not quite correct
    in America there is no concept of national regions and there is no concept of separatism except for a little bit of Texas but not seriously
    How do you imagine the free sale of weapons in Dagestan and the Chechen Republic?
    1. Ugrumiy
      Ugrumiy 19 November 2013 11: 24
      +6
      And you don’t have to imagine, she’s already de facto there, a lot of people with trunks are hanging around!
      1. Walking
        Walking 19 November 2013 12: 38
        +5
        In Chechnya, Dagestan of Ingushetia, in every house there is a barrel and not one and not a shotgun but a full-fledged Kalashnikov. It’s enough to watch the video from weddings where everything that shoots goes like a salute.
        1. Very old
          Very old 19 November 2013 12: 45
          0
          And I’m even forbidden with a traumatic jeep
  14. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 11: 08
    0
    And who will determine whether he is "infected with chauvinism and committed to undeniable moral and civic values"? It is easy to distribute weapons, how will you pick them up later?
  15. nikolaev
    nikolaev 19 November 2013 11: 12
    -1
    In this regard, the Cossacks have accumulated a lot of experience that needs to be adopted. A very serious question that should be addressed by serious professionals and worthy citizens, and not amateurs like me. But even so, it is absolutely clear to the amateur that the existing realities need to be prepared ( in every sense) and the armed people's militia is now and will only increase. Even if the formation of a contract army (and, perhaps, in this case). The bottom line is that there is not enough money for a sufficient number of contractors. In Syria, Such a structure, sufficiently prepared, has led to many tragedies with civilians. The experience of the Kurds proves the need for the people's militia. If we do not solve this issue now, we will solve it later, but after numerous losses among our unprotected citizens, relatives, friends and relatives.
  16. nikolaev
    nikolaev 19 November 2013 11: 17
    0
    There can be no talk of any free circulation of weapons! And the militia is inevitable. And the sooner the less blood will be shed! The militia is the same special forces, not only on a salary, but with state support for weapons (even outdated, which is not used already in troops), while this is possible. Accordingly, the selection for the militia should not be frail, but multi-level, with verification of personal qualities. Serious training should be organized: political, physical, military. The leadership of the units should, of course, be carried out by verified and trained people. All this can be organized. Of particular importance should be paid to military-pariotic and humane education. That is: weapons can be trusted to worthy citizens who are not infected with chauvinism and committed to undeniable moral and civil values. The main goal is to protect, help, educate the population ( and a visitor, including).
  17. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 11: 24
    0
    Where the line between Nazism and nationalism is blurred, "rangers" will determine who is bad and who is good! In the United States, such law enforcement fighters shoot ordinary people for not following a command face down and hands behind their heads, just because who will seem suspicious to them! Another "rake" for society!
    1. vanaheym
      vanaheym 19 November 2013 12: 19
      +2
      Quote: Former Mariman
      law enforcement officers shoot ordinary people for not executing a command face down and hands behind their heads, only because who seems suspicious to them

      And in Russia - just because the Vodars got drunk, they feel they are the masters of other people's lives and know that nothing will fly back in response.
  18. vanaheym
    vanaheym 19 November 2013 12: 18
    +2
    For more than ten years I have owned several units of weapons, much more lethal than a pistol. For all this time, neither I nor anyone had any problems with me. Why do hoplophobes think that being the owner of the gun I will shoot at someone on the streets and that’s why I shouldn’t be given it?
    Given the fact that my shooting practice significantly exceeds the practice of the policeman to whom he is allowed?
  19. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 12: 28
    0
    Quote: vanaheym
    For more than ten years I have owned several units of weapons, much more lethal than a pistol. For all this time, neither I nor anyone had any problems with me. Why do hoplophobes think that being the owner of the gun I will shoot at someone on the streets and that’s why I shouldn’t be given it?
    Given the fact that my shooting practice significantly exceeds the practice of the policeman to whom he is allowed?

    Owning a weapon and walking around the streets armed with small arms (that is, militias) and determining who is who are two different things! Moreover, there are only one like you! And those who want to try on the image of "dredd judge" are the majority!
    1. vanaheym
      vanaheym 19 November 2013 12: 48
      11
      Quote: Former Mariman
      and to walk through the streets with armed small arms (that is, militias) and determine who is who, these are two different things!

      That is, a voluntary, conscious and armed community of citizens who are committed to ensuring order in the place where they live is bad?
      But these, the same armed - is this normal, because these are their national traditions?
  20. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 19 November 2013 14: 04
    0
    Article set of nonsense. As history shows, when it is really necessary in Russia, people's militias gather very quickly. 1612, 1812, 1918, 1941. And what the author calls for is called an illegal armed formation. Such people's militias have been chasing the mountains of the Caucasus for many years now. How they protect families and what it leads to when they are taken seriously can be found here http://topwar.ru/36145-organizator-terakta-v-volgograde-likvidirovan.html there and the videos and comments of citizens are very interesting.
    1. vanaheym
      vanaheym 19 November 2013 14: 15
      +2
      Quote: chunga-changa
      And what the author calls for is called an illegal armed formation.

      In the USA - the right to self-defense of citizens, including from their government, is recorded in their constitution.
      And for you, apparently, people who independently can and put things in order where they live, because the authorities and terrorists cannot do this - is it the same thing?
      1. chunga-changa
        chunga-changa 19 November 2013 14: 39
        +1
        But I do not live in the United States, and I have a slavery to God in the constitution that is written completely different. If you are not living here peacefully, no one is holding you, go to the United States there to defend themselves according to their constitution from their government as well. Then write how it ended for you and what time period was given.
        1. vanaheym
          vanaheym 19 November 2013 19: 51
          +2
          Well, yes, the government knows better how to protect a citizen from crime and the cops as well.
  21. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 14: 22
    0
    Quote: vanaheym
    Quote: chunga-changa
    And what the author calls for is called an illegal armed formation.

    In the USA - the right to self-defense of citizens, including from their government, is recorded in their constitution.
    And for you, apparently, people who independently can and put things in order where they live, because the authorities and terrorists cannot do this - is it the same thing?

    This is exactly what I expected from you. So the militia came up to them and what would they say “don't dance” or “don't speak your language” like that? Here you have nothing to do in the militia!
  22. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 15: 06
    0
    Quote: chunga-changa
    But I do not live in the United States, and I have a slavery to God in the constitution that is written completely different. If you are not living here peacefully, no one is holding you, go to the United States there to defend themselves according to their constitution from their government as well. Then write how it ended for you and what time period was given.

    That's for sure! Yes, they will command a muzzle into the ground just because they don’t like your look, and if you rock it, you’ll get a bullet in the ass (and not one)!
  23. ParapaPanda
    ParapaPanda 19 November 2013 15: 06
    +4
    My country can protect me from an external enemy. From a big internal enemy, but from every little thing I can defend myself.
    I tell: Krasnodar. some years ago. When I was a student in my studio, I had a neighbor from above, a drunken man of 30-40 years. He lived with an elderly mother. Below I lived, and my friend. Once his mother knocked on us and we went nuts. She had a hematoma on the floor of her head! They sat down, called an ambulance, and locked the door. The time is about 18 hours. I go out into the staircase, and there this * duck Naked (!) Under something, with a large kitchen knife!
    They called the police. I hear that people are starting to return home from schools, universities and work. Screams in the stairwell. I run out - there a neighbor runs away from him. Thank God my aunt ran away, otherwise b ..
    I think the type is dangerous, and the police do not know when it will arrive. It was necessary to do something.
    How wonderful the circumstances were that I turned out to be a militarist, moderately strong and trained man. And besides, I had body armor in the 2 class.
    I had to beat and run away, run away and beat, and scream to the neighbors so that they would not climb. And so for about forty minutes, until the police arrived. But he still ruined my vest.

    Summary: What if the aunt had not run away? And if the children from the 4 floor came to him?

    Z.Y. This was all seen by a neighbor who lives opposite, and he, for a minute, works in the organs.

    Give me a gun. It is more comfortable to wear.
  24. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 15: 20
    +1
    Quote: ParapaPanda
    My country can protect me from an external enemy. From a big internal enemy, but from every little thing I can defend myself.
    I tell: Krasnodar. some years ago. When I was a student in my studio, I had a neighbor from above, a drunken man of 30-40 years. He lived with an elderly mother. Below I lived, and my friend. Once his mother knocked on us and we went nuts. She had a hematoma on the floor of her head! They sat down, called an ambulance, and locked the door. The time is about 18 hours. I go out into the staircase, and there this * duck Naked (!) Under something, with a large kitchen knife!
    They called the police. I hear that people are starting to return home from schools, universities and work. Screams in the stairwell. I run out - there a neighbor runs away from him. Thank God my aunt ran away, otherwise b ..
    I think the type is dangerous, and the police do not know when it will arrive. It was necessary to do something.
    How wonderful the circumstances were that I turned out to be a militarist, moderately strong and trained man. And besides, I had body armor in the 2 class.
    I had to beat and run away, run away and beat, and scream to the neighbors so that they would not climb. And so for about forty minutes, until the police arrived. But he still ruined my vest.

    Summary: What if the aunt had not run away? And if the children from the 4 floor came to him?

    Z.Y. This was all seen by a neighbor who lives opposite, and he, for a minute, works in the organs.

    Give me a gun. It is more comfortable to wear.

    The article is not about the right to own a weapon for self-defense, but about militias armed with small arms and empowered by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Federal Migration Service! You own a weapon and no one argues, we are against armed "rangers" on the streets who will decide who is bad and who is good!
    1. ParapaPanda
      ParapaPanda 19 November 2013 16: 01
      0
      Is it in the streets? In the mountains. The police are in the streets, but in the villages? Sagra recall?
  25. dnh70
    dnh70 19 November 2013 15: 26
    +3
    Weapons are not allowed to slaves and residents of conquered countries! Carrying weapons is a sign of a free man at all times!
  26. zmey_gadukin
    zmey_gadukin 19 November 2013 15: 47
    +2
    Here's a hardingusha post in a nearby branch, though not about weapons and militias, but I remembered that he had a similar one. And there is his opinion.
    Let me quote myself a little
    For especially stubborn. I tell you what will happen after legalization.

    You will not be able to get to the cinema, supermarket or any other institution with a massive stay of people with weapons. You have nowhere to put the gun (frames, as in Ossetia, will be in front of the building), you turn around and stupidly leave the frame of the metal detector. Sooner or later you will stop taking it with you at all. Metal detectors and searches (yes we do not have the right to search, guards say, but we just won’t miss you without it) at the entrance to the market, supermarket, etc. stupidly shut up you and those who were against legalization, and generally all, and you will scratch your turnips - for what it was all? You will not carry the barrel with you and will be in the same danger as before.
    You won’t wear it for another reason that any soldier or police officer will explain to you. Losing a gun is such a bunch of problems that a civilian cannot imagine. But vividly imagine when legalized.
    And what is the profit? The barrel will be at home in your safe and you will get it out of there to clean and show the district police officer when he arrives with a check. And checks will be placed in connection with the legalization of tight control. And the precinct will not chop sticks in the fight against crime, but reporting how many checks they conducted. Legalize ;-)

    Update 2: Weapons not only do not guarantee you security, but also create the prerequisites for you to be attacked or robbed of your apartment just to squeeze it. In case of a casual attack, your weapon will go to the attacker with almost 100% probability. and now your trunk is an instrument of crime.

    http://hardingush.livejournal.com/24215.html
    1. ParapaPanda
      ParapaPanda 19 November 2013 16: 00
      0
      Shit question. Are we handing over bags at the entrance to the supermarket? Weapon lockers solve this problem!
      1. zmey_gadukin
        zmey_gadukin 19 November 2013 16: 05
        -1
        + 2 guards to the locker in every public place ... the country of the guards will turn out
        1. ParapaPanda
          ParapaPanda 19 November 2013 16: 09
          +1
          You are still stubborn. Supermarkets already have 2 security guards. And even more.
          1. zmey_gadukin
            zmey_gadukin 20 November 2013 16: 05
            -1
            Quote: ParapaPanda
            Supermarkets already have 2 security guards. And even more.

            and now in the subway, cafes, cinemas, shopping centers ... besides the usual security guards, pl 2 at least to the lockers ... lol
            1. ParapaPanda
              ParapaPanda 20 November 2013 17: 36
              0
              why can’t you put these 2x in cabinets?
    2. vanaheym
      vanaheym 19 November 2013 19: 50
      +2
      That is why they all have trunks - the tradition is such that it’s already there, but to the Russians - what are you, this is extremely bad.
  27. Vasilenko Vladimir
    Vasilenko Vladimir 19 November 2013 16: 02
    +9
    as long as there will be nonsense called "necessary self-defense", you can allow weapons, prohibit the sense of zero point fucking tenths, why do I need it if I can’t bang an adversary, only if in order for the bandits to take him and me out of him soaked.
    I don’t need a bagpipe, but the right to protect myself, my home, my family, and what I have on the farm, from dogs to axes
    1. erased
      erased 19 November 2013 17: 23
      +1
      Bravo! 100% accuracy! good
  28. Narrator.tales
    Narrator.tales 19 November 2013 16: 16
    +2
    When and if they are allowed to have a weapon, the bandits will only get more of it, they will be imprisoned for "exceeding self-defense" all the same, fanatics of weapons and little shooters will be able to go beyond the hunting \ shooting range \ underground. We have no tradition of carrying weapons, Cossacks? officers? it's all an army, one way or another, now the Cossacks are NOT an army, and not a militia, in general they are nobody. Allowing officers to carry weapons outside of service is completely, but only to them.
    Aligned to America? They jump out the window and we too? Next. There is simply no adequate argument for it. The fact that the government does not trust us is not an argument, not an argument about bandits, about the love of weapons (I can shoot) - in general, selfishness. The argument that the police are not working? The reasoning is in the style of our government, instead of improving the police - to allow weapons, it is no better than renaming the police themselves to the police. If you had any of you in the Duma, the result would be the same. and criticize the site would be the same.
    1. Ugrumiy
      Ugrumiy 23 November 2013 02: 04
      0
      Eh, they are not allowed to wear a "constant", they say that we ourselves will shoot ourselves or we will bang someone else ((But for some reason, girls from the traffic police and all sorts of the Ministry of Internal Affairs can.
  29. Misantrop
    Misantrop 19 November 2013 16: 32
    +1
    Quote: Narrator.tales
    There is simply no adequate argument FOR., That the government does not trust us is not an argument, not an argument
    It is not a matter of the weapon itself, but of the RIGHT to APPLY it while protecting its (and those close to it) life and dignity. Now you personally have right to besiege a boor, a bandit, a rapist and a murderer? To say more about, without props, helpers and crutches? Or is it left ONLY the right to screech louder (but not disturb the peace of others, otherwise they will be fined) and write pieces of paper to the "competent authorities"? And to pay them for the "independent" court to take your side, and not make you guilty ...
  30. Alexandr0id
    Alexandr0id 19 November 2013 16: 42
    0
    Unfortunately, we have such a people that even without trunks are dangerous to themselves. everything is nerves, in every second car a baseball bat, every third injured or knife. every fifth is insane, because either thumps or sticks out.
    to whom is there to distribute weapons?
    1. Misantrop
      Misantrop 19 November 2013 16: 57
      +2
      Quote: Alexandr0id
      everything is nerves, in every second car a baseball bat, every third injured or knife. every fifth is insane, because either thumps or sticks out.

      Well, where in this scenario are MASS massacres? Or do people still know how to control themselves even with such a degree of personal armament?
      1. Starina_hank
        Starina_hank 19 November 2013 19: 37
        0
        You can watch football fans.
    2. ParapaPanda
      ParapaPanda 19 November 2013 17: 22
      +1
      We have normal people. Prior to advice, weapons were legal - where are the battles?
      1. O_RUS
        O_RUS 20 November 2013 00: 18
        0
        Quote: ParapaPanda
        Prior to advice, weapons were legal - where are the battles?


        I agree with you - there were no battles. Just let's not forget that we treated each other better than now.
  31. _KM_
    _KM_ 19 November 2013 16: 42
    +4
    The "tolerant" have weapons, and the criminals too. And this is considered normal. But when the Russians talk about weapons and the militia to resist crime, this is fascism. :(
  32. Altona
    Altona 19 November 2013 16: 45
    +3
    The American National Guard, as I understand it, is a white conservative population, committed to traditional views, living in small towns and villages, earning a living from daily monotonous labor ... This population also does not like the twists of the Government, political intriguers and financial fraudsters- Wall Street speculators ... I think that in some kind of military confrontation, they, too, would be happy to shoot at first their fanatical oligarchs, who had long perverted the meaning of the American state and crushed it under themselves with false slogans ...
  33. Walking
    Walking 19 November 2013 16: 47
    +2
    By the way, did all white citizens notice blacks, there are no Latinos in the photo.
  34. tank64rus
    tank64rus 19 November 2013 18: 13
    +5
    We already have armed all-bandits, deputies, officials, artists and other "masters of life." Nobody knows exactly how many people illegally have, the Caucasus alone is worth it. Recently, a high-ranking police officer asked the "gentlemen deputies" to limit the possession of a premium weapon to two barrels. In general, if you take all this, it turns out that our population is well armed. The fear of the police before such a law is incomprehensible. After all, the meaning of this law is in the acquisition by a law-abiding citizen of the RIGHT to a weapon, and not in the OBLIGATION to have one. Now there is no point in acquiring weapons without revising the law on self-defense, in 90% of using it you will be guilty and looking for you with a rifled weapon control system is no problem, this is not a trauma. And all the hysterics of the "gentlemen" about this speak of one thing - we have a huge gulf between the "gentlemen" and the people. That's all.
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 19 November 2013 18: 57
      +1
      Quote: tank64rus
      After all, the meaning of this law is the acquisition by the law-abiding citizen of the RIGHT to arms, and not the OBLIGATIONS to have it.

      A bit of history (although maybe not quite the topic)
      “In 1601, a craftsman from Nordlingen named Hans Schwartz was arrested by the municipality for violating weapons laws. The problem was not that Schwartz kept or used illegal weapons. On the contrary, the crime was that he did not have a sword. Schwartz was just one of several local homeowners arrested that year for not fulfilling his duty to keep an adequate supply of weapons and armor. These people were given 14 days to "adequately arm themselves." In other cities, the presentation of certain weapons was a requirement for marriage. Throughout Germany in the Early New Age, those who did not fulfill the duty of storing and owning weapons received fines, went to prison, were expelled, and lost their citizenship status. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Italian humanist and diplomat Aeneas Silvio de Piccolomini wrote in 1444 about the Germans whom he visited with: “Every burgher in guilds has an armory at home ... the ability of citizens to handle weapons is extraordinary.” At the same time, local authorities also regularly restricted the right of some people to wear swords for various reasons. In 1543, an officer in Blaubern for life lost the right to wear a sword for attacking an opponent who had already fallen to the ground; in the same year, a baker from Augsburg was disarmed for having stuck a sword in the door; and in 1551, a peasant from the village of Haberschlaht was convicted of breaking his oath to never carry any weapon other than a bread knife with a broken tip. Other reasons for the ban on carrying weapons included not only disobedience to the authorities, but also financial irresponsibility, adultery, theft, idleness and beating of his wife. Obviously, in Germany in Early New Time, weapons symbolized more than just self-defense. ” (B. Ann Tlusty) stolen from Starc (on S. Sadov's forum)
  35. tank64rus
    tank64rus 19 November 2013 18: 29
    +3
    By the way, here is a closed instruction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine “Instructions on the right to purchase and wear devices of domestic production and these cartridges provided:
    - employees of the court, law enforcement agencies and their close relatives;
    - persons who participate in criminal proceedings;
    - people's deputies of Ukraine;
    - members of public organizations for the protection of public order and state borders;
    - military personnel, except for those who perform military service;
    - public servants;
    - to journalists. ”
  36. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 18: 53
    -1
    In the garden of elderberry and in Kiev uncle! An article about militias, and scribblers about the right to own weapons for self-defense!
    1. Egoza
      Egoza 19 November 2013 19: 03
      -1
      Quote: Former Mariman
      An article about militias, and scribblers about the right to own weapons for self-defense!

      Actually, it is understood that these very militias must also have the right to arms.
      But in my feminine opinion ... it’s not a weapon (whether it is or not). The point is READY TO PROTECT THE WEAK. Naturally, the family is sacred. I think that everyone will fight for his family. But it also happens that a healthy man, even with an injury, will pass by when a kid is offended, or the thugs at the same old granny tear out a bag ... No? And a man, even without a weapon, can intervene and protect, but he will WIN! IMHO.
  37. FormerMariman
    FormerMariman 19 November 2013 19: 17
    +1
    Quote: Egoza
    Quote: Former Mariman
    An article about militias, and scribblers about the right to own weapons for self-defense!

    Actually, it is understood that these very militias must also have the right to arms.
    But in my feminine opinion ... it’s not a weapon (whether it is or not). The point is READY TO PROTECT THE WEAK. Naturally, the family is sacred. I think that everyone will fight for his family. But it also happens that a healthy man, even with an injury, will pass by when a kid is offended, or the thugs at the same old granny tear out a bag ... No? And a man, even without a weapon, can intervene and protect, but he will WIN! IMHO.

    I'm not sorry for the beads, I'm sorry for the time! I WILL REPEAT IT ONCE AGAIN: THE SOCIETY IS NOT AGAINST POSSESSION OF WEAPONS FOR SELF-DEFENSE (I AM PERSONALLY ONLY), THE QUESTION INCLUDES WHICH CONSEQUENCES WILL BE IF I HAVE USED ARMENIANS WITH FIRST USERS AND A LOT OF IT! Just think it over!
    1. vanaheym
      vanaheym 19 November 2013 19: 48
      +4
      These citizens do not have the rights of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FMS. They have the right to civilly arrest a person who violates the law. This is one of the main provisions of Anglo-Saxon law that Americans actively use, regularly sending to the better world those who attack not personally, but other Americans who cannot defend themselves. They are not letting those illegal immigrants into biogas, but they are being handed over to the border guards, who already solve the problems further. Personally, I think that such methods are much better than, for example, waiting for the attire of cops to calm the point of sale of the shirka, which is regularly shared with them.
      In any case, both the Russian and Ukrainian states are afraid to give people the right to defend at least themselves, not to mention putting things in order on the streets.
  38. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 19 November 2013 19: 40
    0
    Do I need to be afraid of "a man with a gun"?
    And that they are afraid of him, he wants to shoot him, he wants to pass by.
    As you know, everyone has their own cockroaches in their heads. Accordingly, they all have their own thoughts. If a citizen’s cockroaches think about something, it’s practically impossible to convince him, I won’t. But I’ll write a few words.
    According to most short-gunners, the gun will bring a lot of joy and pleasant adventures to its owner, and he does not understand on what basis they are deprived of these joys. In the imagination, approximately such a picture is drawn. Invulnerable to insults to boors and harassment of cattle and gopnik, a citizen goes about his business as a sportswoman, an armpit pleasing heaviness xxx-xx causes a slight smile of superiority, seeing which beautiful girls immediately surrender to the main character. Nice picture, I like it too.
    It is not difficult to imagine what will happen in life, but we will not, everything has been chewed a hundred times for a long time. But there is one social aspect about which is somehow mentioned one-sidedly. The right to protect citizens from the encroachments of the state, for some reason it is given here as a good example. Let's remember last year. The movement of citizens called "white tape", let's say these citizens decided to defend themselves against the arbitrariness of the authorities with weapons in their hands. And that civil war is a good thing, there will be plenty of space to protect the family with weapons in hand. There is no work, there is nothing to eat, the children are dying, but the family is under reliable protection. Or let's say gays. Sexual orientation is not a disease and does not preclude buying weapons. The only restriction, the ban on advertising their orientation among minors, these citizens consider an infringement of their rights by the government. Now, if gays decide to defend their rights with arms in hand, then how, is it good? Here are the lovers of the American constitution and freedom, after all, logically, you should go to the barricades under the rainbow banners with joy.
  39. Fobos-grunt
    Fobos-grunt 19 November 2013 19: 51
    +1
    Minutans from Amer. English (The minitman) - a well-organized system of mobilizing professionals in case of emergency has shown its strength during the elimination of the consequences of natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina. Then they quickly managed to tidy up a gang of marauders with their fingernails and maintain order while eliminating the consequences of terrorist attacks in the United States. It would seem that the American experience is attractive for Russia as well, but the events of October 1993 put an end to the “Russian mini-coins”. Since then, CIVIL SOCIETY is only “clubs of cactus lovers” and single demonstration plantings of bribe takers
  40. bilgesez
    bilgesez 19 November 2013 20: 33
    +1
    Quote: Generalissimus
    The free circulation of weapons is somehow justified in those countries where there is no problem with migration and there is a mature civil society.

    Here they just need a weapon.
  41. zasxdcfvv
    zasxdcfvv 19 November 2013 20: 50
    0
    who needs a weapon, he has one.
  42. ekzorsist
    ekzorsist 19 November 2013 21: 45
    +6
    There are many disputes about the law on weapons and self-defense.
    Here are a lot of opponents and arguments, they seem to have as many and sensible all arguments as that, but here are some constantly slightly crooked ...
    For example, in Moldova and the Baltic states, for more than 20 years, there is a law on weapons and self-defense of citizens for more than XNUMX years ..., but somehow there is no mass slaughter predicted by all opponents of weapons among the civilian population, such as a neighbor's neighbor for a can of stew, etc. ..
    Conversely, registered weapons are more controlled and predictable.
    But for example, the same "injuries" are absolutely (at least 90 percent) not traceable ... there are no grooves on a rubber bullet, if a revolver or a guard (or the like), then there are no cartridges either ..., but there is a crime ! And seek, seek.
    Most of the criminals are already armed, without any laws and permits, and armed very, very well. I had to see their "arsenals" and believe the other operational department of the Organized Crime Control Department will envy them with undisguised envy.
    This begs the question - "And from whom then the law on weapons ???" From criminals? - No ! They have a lamp and moreover - unnecessary! The only ones who lose here, as always, are just citizens of their country! For every citizen a policeman (or a policeman ..., and by the way, what is the name of the police that does not suit you so much ???) you can't put it on for protection ... so what to do?
    Silently look at the violence and impunity of some and stupidly tedious to tell others how poorly and unpredictably registered weapons in the hands of others, while not giving them a single chance to choose?
    There are more than one thousand hunters in Siberia, and believe me, they have not only registered rifled hunting weapons ... but also always have "trochs for sebe" - and? Why, according to the logic of the ardent opponents of weapons, each other, and even three to four dozen people around each other, were not shot ... It's just nonsense !!!
    It is not necessary to row everyone and everything under the same brush. Remember in the 70s the cartridges from the "small" how mud it was, in any school there was a shooting circle, where AKashki were with milled trunks near the gas outlet pipe (but this did not make them safe !!!), however, they were also fired from in the school shooting range ... How were they stored?!? Now you remember, compare with today's bells and whistles, and it becomes funny - in a plywood cabinet in the military officer's office, which (both the office and the cabinet) were opened with a simple nail! And they didn't kill each other !!!
    So, the arguments against civilian weapons of any kind of self-defense are just a hoax and a one-goal game. We won’t give it to you, because it’s bad, and suddenly you cut yourself, and if you don’t cut yourself, you’ll break ... and in general you don’t need to! Give a choice, and people themselves will choose.
  43. kargrom
    kargrom 20 November 2013 00: 22
    +1
    An interesting topic, if only because it concerns each of us. We are all sons, husbands, fathers and a sense of confidence in the protection of our relatives is a fundamental factor for discussing this issue. Any man (I emphasize, any real Man) has something Yes, there is, well, it can't be. Obtaining a license for traumatics, having a couple of extinguished convictions, honestly, without money, believe me, it's real. For the money, if you like it or not, you will become a hunter ... Maybe twenty years, my pocket is burdened with zero tolerance , waving her right and left, even when drunk, does not arise any desire. We are used to sorting out on our hands, and if it’s really a problem, but in your heart you feel that you’re not doing it, then yes; he thinks once before removing it from the fuse, but heroin will not steam. Every Russian man must protect his family and the state must not hinder him in this.
  44. saygon66
    21 November 2013 05: 19
    +2
    -Yo-mine! Well, I did that ... That's right they say: you need to express your thought clearly ... It was not about the free sale of weapons ... Rather, it was about the fact that the slightest prepared people would come running to your cry - "Help" neighbors, and also quickly pulled their eyes on the poo to different "riders"!
    -It does not matter who it will be: bandits or "migrants" who are stunned by our tolerance ... Law enforcement officers often come to the victims to interview and promise "to find and punish everyone" ... And then, given our conditions, such formations will probably be under control of the relevant services. Do not offer armed anarchy!
    - I was very surprised by the comments of some comrades! "I went through the war, with weapons -" on you ", it's dangerous, and there is no need for you, Gomluks to give it to your hands ..." And you come and teach ... share your experience ... Lead, finally
    such a group of citizens - if special: there will certainly be a good deal! The state, of course ..., is responsible for everything ... But this is again "desirable", and "real" - there, in the gateway, with a bat.
  45. Rinat 1
    Rinat 1 22 November 2013 10: 01
    -1
    Interesting debate. Becoming the owner of a weapon, you will not have a 100% guarantee that it will help you. Because you will not always carry it with you all the time. Now in our society there is no culture of communication with weapons, except for a few hunters with weapons. By distributing trunks to people, we will be in danger in reverse, because some imagine themselves to be judges and performers and will shoot right and left. And finally, with our laws, even if it allows the possession of weapons, will you be ready to shoot a criminal? After all, even having protected yourself from it, you can legally get a very real term.
  46. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 25 November 2013 06: 25
    +2
    Quote: Alexandr0id
    Unfortunately, we have such a people that even without trunks are dangerous to themselves. everything is nerves, in every second car a baseball bat, every third injured or knife. every fifth is insane, because either thumps or sticks out.
    to whom is there to distribute weapons?

    This opinion instills power. Like, people don’t need it to roll, they say you can’t handle it.
    But for some reason he gives the same people an AK-74, puts them on boots and camouflage and sends them to the Caucasus to fight. And forgets that this is the people themselves "inadequate" and will shoot themselves and so on ... Don't you think that when words and deeds diverge, then there is a big lie ???!
    The lie you believe in?

    And now food is for you to think about. Will this inadequate hang around with a bat and put it in a traffic jam if he knows that a person can come out of any car (with an undeniable argument in his hands) and put his face in the asphalt? And if he is stupid, will he receive a bonus due from him from Plumbum?
    Remember, once and for all, a used dl o behaves like a used dl o only among those who are wearing "glasses" and with an encyclopedia under their arm. Among those who can put him in his place, this very b.y.dl.o sharply recalls the rich national culture and the great and mighty and exclusively literary.
  47. marader555
    marader555 20 February 2014 23: 40
    0
    A BARREL TO EVERY HOUSE !!!
  48. maroder555
    maroder555 2 March 2014 17: 09
    0
    each Slavic weapon in the house! and in some villages and "Kord" will not be superfluous. For 25-30 years, the Police have not been doing what they should, they do not provide order, but are engaged in a very versatile business.
    Therefore, everyone has the right to arms!
    For liberals and human rights activists - why not prohibit BMW X5 or Mercedes on which dozens of people are knocked down by any imperfections? moreover, these deficiencies do not bear any responsibility what they have done, there are many examples.
    but on weapons, all nonsense-prohibitions-fines can only be heard. Calm down.