Military Review

The length of the barrel does not matter

160
Civilian weapon should be completely different from the battle


Legalization of short-barreled weapons has many adherents and opponents. Being a supporter of legalization, the author of this material suggests looking at the problem from a slightly different angle.

The term “shortbore” sounds rather slyly, because the barrel length is not the most important parameter of the weapon’s characteristics, the main ones are bullet speed and mass (energy), caliber, number of cartridges that provide the killer and stopping effect of the bullet and the probability of hitting the target.

The length of the barrel does not matterExample - Makarov pistol (PM): the initial speed of a bullet is 315 meters per second, the mass of a bullet is 6,1 grams, the energy is 300 joules, the target range is 50 meters, the slaughter range is 200 meters, the number of cartridges in a cage is 8 pieces. There are models of pistols and revolvers with lower and higher combat characteristics. All of them are designed for use in hostilities and as a civilian weapon of self-defense have significantly inflated characteristics.

Consider a horizontal shot from a height of 1,5 meter (the height of an outstretched arm). A PM bullet, having an initial speed of 315 meters per second, will fall to the ground, flying approximately 150 meters. In the event of a miss, it can hit completely random targets and turn the defender into the defendant for serious articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Such a weapon can not only be defended, but also used for purposes far from self-defense. It follows from this that it is not worth using civilian revolvers and pistols as a self-defense weapon.

It is necessary to create a special civilian self-defense weapon, simple, possessing a high level of readiness for use, effective at short distances (up to 10 meters), followed by a sharp drop in speed and energy (slaughter ability), from which it is impossible to penetrate body armor of the 1 class of protection.

History knows examples of the creation of specialized weapons. These are “Velodog” revolvers, the name of which indicates the area of ​​their use - the protection of cyclists from dogs that did not immediately accept a new type of movement. But soon most dogs got used to cyclists, and the attempt to use the Velodogs for self-defense did not develop due to its poor stopping power due to the small caliber and low initial speed of the bullet.

A variant of civilian weapons may look like this: a smooth-bore revolver with the number of cartridges in the drum 4 – 5 pieces, caliber - 15,5 millimeter, the initial speed of the bullet - 175 meters per second, the weight of the bullet - 20 grams, energy - 300 joules. A bullet fired from such a revolver from a horizontal shooting height of 1,5 meters will fly to the ground less than 90 meters before falling to the ground. The large diameter of the bullet will provide a significant loss of its energy at a distance, but at short distances the stopping effect will be greater than in faster speed bullets of a smaller caliber. With short distances, using a smooth barrel will provide sufficient accuracy of shooting, and the self-coil drum circuit is safer and will increase the speed of production of the first shot. In addition, traumatic, signal and other special cartridges can be found in the drum, which can be selected by simply turning the drum. This will make the weapon truly universal.

Civilian weapons must be radically different from combat weapons, they must have such characteristics that will guarantee the prevention of threats to the life and health of the defender, to minimize threats to others and the possibility of their use for criminal purposes.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/19829
160 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. anomalocaris
    anomalocaris April 12 2014 07: 33
    +30
    The author of the article is not a sexy pervert. Just imagine a 20-caliber pandora in the form of a 5-charge revolver as a weapon of self-defense for constant wear ... Comrade smokes hard grass.
    1. maks-101
      maks-101 April 12 2014 15: 29
      +7
      one must be kinder, and not insult each other
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet April 12 2014 20: 25
        0
        A comrade from "feelings" put it that way. Indeed, how to carry such a fool ???
    2. luiswoo
      luiswoo April 12 2014 18: 00
      +9
      Why present? :)

      Although everything has long been invented:

      The 16 caliber hunting pistol is likely to be safe for hunting and self-defense.
      In fact, a real addiction is a cartridge, which is not a fact that will break winter clothes. And if there are not enough cartridges, you need to at least be sure that this boar cartridge will fail, and not to guess whether it will break through the sheepskin coat or not.
      1. luiswoo
        luiswoo April 12 2014 18: 18
        +2

        a similar unit from the movie "Ghost and Darkness"
        http://guns.allzip.org/topic/36/1088220.html
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. bubalik
        bubalik April 12 2014 22: 21
        +4
        luiswoo RU  Today, 18: 00 ↑


        ,,, not to you personally luiswoo RU, but to the image in the photo ,,Billy, we’ve slept a fly !!! laughing
    3. allexx83
      allexx83 April 13 2014 00: 40
      +3
      20 gauge - bust, but the 32nd or 410th - there are wonderful samples, I would not refuse. But the question is - hunting cartridges can be charged much more than that. Including bullets breaking through almost any armor. And the main issue is trunk identification. Conclusion - a weapon of self-defense (from the point of view of the police) - only rifled.
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris April 13 2014 05: 03
        0
        Well, at 32 or 410 it is more than problematic to charge something "that will break through any body armor", especially with a short barrel. All the same, the energy potential of these calibers is not very large, and the dimensions of a revolver for such a cartridge will not be very small.
      2. fif21
        fif21 April 13 2014 13: 16
        +3
        Quote: allexx83
        Conclusion - a weapon of self-defense (from the point of view of the police) - only rifled.
        Yes, it is unnecessary to dissemble. Who would buy self-defense weapons that would only make the attacker angry? The question here is that there are plans to replace the PM with the Yarygin pistol, it will cost good money, but what to do with the millions of PM? So there is a struggle between those who want to sell the PM to the population and those who are afraid of the armed people. And the concept of a self-defense weapon is the same as a humane neutron bomb. It is unnecessary to powder the brains of people - non-lethal weapons of self-defense do not exist.
      3. The comment was deleted.
    4. dmitreach
      dmitreach April 13 2014 01: 44
      +3
      Cheat Vi still want from a friend who wrote about Makar this:
      the number of cartridges in the clip is 8 pieces.

      Knowments, so to speak.
      PS
      Lawmakers also confuse the trigger with a hook, which is why laws are the same as the author’s fantasies.
      Materiel need to know.
      1. Slavs
        Slavs April 13 2014 09: 18
        -1
        ?? And how many rounds are there ?? Or are you confusing PM with PMM? Or are you talking about the store?
        1. KBACYPA
          KBACYPA April 13 2014 10: 27
          +4
          I think so, comrade means that the store and the clip are still different things. The magazine is a mechanism for supplying cartridges, and the clip is a plate accelerating the magazine's equipment.
        2. fif21
          fif21 April 13 2014 13: 20
          0
          Quote: Slavs
          ?? And how many rounds are there ?? Or are you confusing PM with PMM? Or are you talking about the store?
          he is about the store fool
    5. Alex 1977
      Alex 1977 April 13 2014 15: 40
      +2
      Quote: anomalocaris
      The author of the article is not a sexy pervert. Just imagine a 20-caliber pandora in the form of a 5-charge revolver as a weapon of self-defense for constant wear ... Comrade smokes hard grass.

      I agree.
      Also self-cocking - does he even imagine the effort on the trigger?
      Well, the fact that the Makarov pistol turns out to be well loaded already speaks of Boris Loznevov’s deep knowledge of small arms weapons.
      I propose to rename the article to - the muzzle size does not matter.
      Or here - There are models of pistols and revolvers with lower and higher combat characteristics. All of them are designed for use in hostilities and as civilian self-defense weapons have significantly overestimated characteristics.
      But Glock thinks differently.


      And somehow it looks like an author's gun.
  2. saag
    saag April 12 2014 07: 36
    0
    prohibit nafig, road showdowns with the use of weapons is a favorite fun
    1. O_RUS
      O_RUS April 12 2014 10: 38
      -4
      Quote: saag
      prohibit nafig


      ban
      1. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali April 12 2014 11: 16
        +26
        Quote: O_RUS
        ban

        And do not let go! And also to prohibit the sale of knives, axes, ropes and so on and so forth ... Yes, and also everyone who goes out into the street must be bound.
      2. IGS
        IGS April 12 2014 12: 45
        +6
        Yeah, do not forget the knives. And then America is always cited as an example, and there, a schoolboy put knives as if he was with a machine gun. And enough not to respect your people and consider them to be, he has no mind, and therefore do not give up arms.
        Prohibit injuries, but allow short barrels. And what about the article is nonsense, but why not the fortieth caliber? And it’s better to just allow hunting cuttings wassat
        1. shishkin7676
          shishkin7676 4 February 2016 18: 44
          0
          For pilots, an aluminum bullet of 1,6 grams was invented, 800m / s. (9x19)
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali April 12 2014 11: 14
      +2
      Quote: saag
      prohibit nafig, road showdowns with the use of weapons is a favorite fun

      Well, work on yourself. And do not present your personal opinion as the opinion of society.
      1. Baikal
        Baikal April 12 2014 18: 23
        +1
        It’s hard and long to work on yourself. Much easier to buy a barrel.
        Charged - and you are already a cut above and to the right.
        1. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali April 12 2014 20: 39
          +3
          Quote: Baikal
          It’s hard and long to work on yourself. Much easier to buy a barrel.

          As for the physical condition, not everyone can become "Apollo" and "Terminator" in one person, and not everyone has such an opportunity, you must admit, it is difficult to require a woman with asthma to resist or run away from a robber. It is difficult to demand that even a veteran CTO in the Czech Republic run away from an attacker, because running on prostheses is very difficult. So yes, it's easier for them to buy CSR.
          Quote: Baikal
          Charged - and you are already a cut above and to the right.

          Do not distort - not higher and to the right, but only equal in opportunity.
          1. nerd.su
            nerd.su April 13 2014 20: 57
            -1
            Do not put pressure on pity, this does not add weight to arguments.

            Equal in opportunity? That you distort. Armed man has great potential.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. okunevich_rv
          okunevich_rv April 14 2014 06: 24
          +1
          The one above is easier to aim :)
  3. pv1005
    pv1005 April 12 2014 07: 38
    +12
    Weapons may vary. But law enforcement practice and the interpretation of the term self-defense are the same, both to the meekbridge and to the kitchen knife.
    1. tokin1959
      tokin1959 April 12 2014 08: 58
      -4
      kitchen knife designed for cutting bread, etc.
      the gun is for killing only.
      do not confuse these things then.
      1. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali April 12 2014 11: 21
        +11
        Quote: tokin1959
        a kitchen knife is intended for cutting bread, and a pistol - only for killing. Do not confuse these things then.

        Naturally not worth confusing. That's just a gun, this is the same tool as, for example, a chisel, screwdriver, or mount. And these tools, in the presence of malicious intent, are actually no less dangerous than a gun. And the same gun, in the absence of intent to commit a crime, is dangerous no more than the tools discussed above.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet April 12 2014 20: 28
          +8
          It is convenient to open "Makar" beer - a tool!
        2. nerd.su
          nerd.su April 13 2014 21: 04
          -1
          Quote: Rakti-Kali
          And the same gun, in the absence of intent to commit a crime, is dangerous no more than the tools discussed above.

          And accidents, careless handling, inappropriate storage? A guaranteed excess of self-defense? Do you think car owners who shoot down people to death have a malicious intent? No, we have, as a rule, drunkenness at the wheel, negligence, non-compliance with the high-speed regime and other traffic rules, an accident.
          Is it worth it to stimulate the birth rate by maternal capital, increasing mortality by the resolution of the short trunk?
      2. revnagan
        revnagan April 12 2014 11: 51
        +11
        Quote: tokin1959
        kitchen knife designed for cutting bread, etc.

        But it’s possible to kill. And they kill with knives more than from a firearm (in everyday life).
        Quote: tokin1959
        the gun is for killing only.

        Why "only"? You can open beer and chop nuts ...
        1. Pablo_K
          Pablo_K April 12 2014 15: 02
          -3
          Quote: revnagan
          Why "only"? You can open beer and chop nuts ...

          is it more convenient to open beer with a open-end wrench than macar, how to open TT beer?
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet April 12 2014 20: 33
            +2
            God be with him with TT, we once, for lack of TT, opened beer with an engagement ring. The explosion of Russian inventive thought, always rescued!
          2. fif21
            fif21 April 13 2014 13: 26
            +5
            Quote: Pablo_K
            how to open TT beer?
            That's why it was removed from service, it is difficult to open beer wassat
          3. The comment was deleted.
      3. uzer 13
        uzer 13 April 12 2014 12: 49
        +8
        The gun was made for firing a bullet, and for the killing the gallows, the guillotine and the electric chair were made. Well, the car can still be counted there, the statistics are known to everyone.
      4. Palomnik
        Palomnik April 13 2014 19: 50
        +2
        And on the roads how many people die, then cars must be banned for personal use
        1. nerd.su
          nerd.su April 13 2014 21: 07
          -3
          Quote: Palomnik
          And on the roads how many people die, then cars must be banned for personal use

          No cars should be banned, but no shortcuts allowed. Why, in addition to cars, introduce another source of increased danger?
          1. Orakul2000
            Orakul2000 April 16 2014 00: 28
            0
            Nerd, do botany and not weapons. Let it be known to you, dear don, that in the United States in states where the free possession and carrying of weapons is allowed, the crime rate is many times lower than in states where the free carrying of weapons is prohibited. With free carrying of weapons, criminals themselves will think 10 times about how fraught they can be succumbed to the temptation of easy money.

            With respect.
        2. okunevich_rv
          okunevich_rv April 14 2014 06: 28
          0
          All to transfer to bicycles wink
        3. okunevich_rv
          okunevich_rv April 14 2014 06: 28
          0
          All to transfer to bicycles wink
          1. nerd.su
            nerd.su April 14 2014 08: 46
            0
            "I never, never repeat myself, never repeat myself"

            Well, it's you too radical smile Although for the summer period it would be right! Especially in cities where there is no metro!
  4. homosum20
    homosum20 April 12 2014 07: 42
    +4
    To forbid road dismantling, nafig. Using weapons is not fun!
  5. homosum20
    homosum20 April 12 2014 07: 50
    +21
    Only my personal experience is nothing more. Applicable individually.
    I have been wearing wasp-4-pb for about 4 years. I did not participate in road showdowns, largely because of a calm attitude, lack of fear for them. Inadequate behavior legitimizes the fear of being humiliated, the fear of someone else's aggression, the feeling of one’s own weakness and defenselessness. Someone goes and engages in manual-machinery, turning himself into a weapon. I acted easier and more economically (in time) - I bought a citizen. weapons.
    Common sense is nothing more.
    But it is necessary to ban road showdowns. Weapons are not fun. A ban on weapons does not mean a lack of weapons. The energy of a bat is much higher than the energy of a bullet from an injury.
    1. okunevich_rv
      okunevich_rv April 14 2014 06: 32
      0
      The sapper blade has proved its superiority over other types of knives in the Second World War and some local conflicts, I demand an urgent ban :)
      1. Orakul2000
        Orakul2000 April 16 2014 00: 33
        -1
        Dear, do not confuse the sapper blade and the infantry. The sapper blade, unlike the infantry, is not sharpened.
    2. okunevich_rv
      okunevich_rv April 14 2014 06: 32
      0
      The sapper blade has proved its superiority over other types of knives in the Second World War and some local conflicts, I demand an urgent ban :)
  6. saag
    saag April 12 2014 08: 05
    -3
    Quote: homosum20
    And it is necessary to ban road showdowns

    Well, forbid, but how will control be carried out? It’s the same as banning the mentality that appeared after the year 91, it’s easier to cancel among citizens the circulation of weapons with criminal liability for carrying them.
    1. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali April 12 2014 11: 23
      +1
      Quote: saag
      it is easier to cancel among citizens the circulation of weapons with criminal liability for their carrying.

      Easier. But is it smarter?
  7. Shallow
    Shallow April 12 2014 08: 08
    -8
    "The legalization of short-barreled weapons has many adherents and opponents. Being a supporter of legalization, the author of this material offers to look at the problem from a slightly different angle."

    Help legalize TT. You are for the LEGALIZATION of weapons! Where to legalize it? And walk with him in Moscow without fear of meeting with a policeman.

    Karoche - YOU HAVE BLOCKED WITH YOUR LEGALIZATION. You yourself don’t know what you want ...
  8. saag
    saag April 12 2014 08: 09
    +8
    Quote: Shallow
    You yourself don’t know what you want ...

    Money
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 14: 17
      0
      our gunsmiths and the budget, and I don’t see anything wrong with that
  9. La-5
    La-5 April 12 2014 08: 44
    +8
    I do not see problems in the design of the gun and the use of a cartridge. In some countries where pistols are permitted, cartridges are either not combat-friendly or structurally unsuitable for combat models. Why reinvent the wheel, we have the same PM allowed for private security companies, but under the 9 * 17 Browning cartridge, which is weaker than the PMV cartridge, here it is quite suitable for the self-defense of citizens.
    1. serega.fedotov
      serega.fedotov April 12 2014 10: 58
      +11
      In my opinion, reducing the charge will create self-defense weapons from attack weapons! For example, a traumatic if you act with him according to the law, self-protection is IMPOSSIBLE! But for an attack, the BREAKING law machine fits perfectly! Plus the human factor:
      This is also NOT a REAL weapon and you can shoot!
      Weapons must be weapons! So that everyone knows, IT KILLS!
      Although it is possible to introduce a special caliber in order to prevent foreigners from immediately overwhelming our market with their scrap metal!
      1. fif21
        fif21 April 13 2014 13: 38
        +1
        Quote: serega.fedotov
        This is also NOT a REAL weapon and you can shoot!
        I agree completely hi And then comes belated awareness in court, but it's too late. And those who are trying to convince people that pneumatics, traumatism, it’s like not a weapon, but also a little stick for self-defense are to blame am
      2. The comment was deleted.
  10. lexx2038
    lexx2038 April 12 2014 08: 45
    +11
    They want to create another device that will be perceived by the average man as a toy and not a weapon, and therefore there is no responsibility whatsoever. But a real gun - you’ll think a hundred times before you pull it out, not even use it.
  11. AARP
    AARP April 12 2014 08: 46
    +13
    Definitely need to legalize the firearm! Yes, there will be killed, crippled .... but after some time, the notorious hit will look dubious even in road dismantling, at least in the doorway of the house at midnight. I have a trunk legal. For all the time I have never used it. Although there were reasons.
  12. Greenhorn
    Greenhorn April 12 2014 08: 49
    +32
    Allow normal combat short-barreled and don't do nonsense. To instill a culture of handling weapons. Demand that people undergo real (and not just a tick) and serious training in the possession of weapons with the subsequent delivery of standards. Organize shooting ranges and shooting ranges where those who wish could hone their skills. Do many of the owners of rubber arrows really own them? Even if today a person has a "trauma", where can he train with him? I myself have long wanted to buy a firearm, but it is the lack of the opportunity to train regularly that stops it.
    The problem is not in the length of the barrel, but in the brains of the one who holds the barrel. A normal person, even having a PC, will not just fire up. Thugs who are accustomed to firing at the "offender" just for a sidelong glance or an unpleasant word addressed to themselves in the new conditions will not heal for a long time, and the remaining three times think before grabbing the trunk.
    1. AARP
      AARP April 12 2014 08: 51
      +9
      I support on 100%.
    2. Max otto
      Max otto April 12 2014 09: 58
      +15
      I support. The fact is that the illegal elements have a short barrel, and so they do not need permission, but law-abiding citizens definitely do not have it. I think that if you don’t trade permissions and don’t give everything to everyone - right and left (that is, suppress the initially corrupt component in the process of obtaining a license), then there will not even be an increase in the level of incidents involving firearms. But the hooliganism will already be more humble, because you can run into.
      1. serega.fedotov
        serega.fedotov April 12 2014 11: 06
        +6
        That's right! It's not a weapon, but the laws governing the purchase and treatment of it! And don’t need to scare the corrupts, now if you have money you can get a legal barrel! That is, those who can get weapons for money can already get it! -also!
        1. kavad
          kavad April 12 2014 11: 29
          +8
          Exactly. First of all, the regulatory framework should be brought to mind. And then five gopniks will attack, one you shoot - you will be imprisoned! And the remaining gopniks will joyfully claim that you yourself were the first to start.
          And as for the fact that "shoot each other" - there are much more knives and pans in the country! My wife works in the operating block - every day and more than once they bring in crippled people after kitchen showdowns. Knife mostly, but there are also victims of rolling pins / pans.
          So let's ban them!
          I have many hunters - friends, each with at least 2 guns. Nobody shot anyone, although no hunts could do without drunkenness.
          1. Walking
            Walking April 12 2014 14: 37
            +3
            [quote = kavad] That's it. First of all, the regulatory framework should be brought to mind. And then five gopniks will attack, one you shoot - you will be imprisoned! And the remaining gopniks will joyfully claim that you yourself were the first to start. / Quote]

            There is a bitter joke about this, so that you will not be blamed and could not be checked, there should be no witnesses left.
            1. KBACYPA
              KBACYPA April 13 2014 10: 37
              +3
              Joke? When I was a policeman, we were told at all official briefings about minimizing the consequences, and outside of the briefings, experienced people said: "Get it down tight. I will not write the corpse to the prosecutor's office." And they also added something like "our shot is the second, but you shouldn't let the first one"
      2. okunevich_rv
        okunevich_rv April 14 2014 06: 49
        0
        I completely agree with you, at the moment the Ministry of Internal Affairs does not even have information about the approximate amount of illegally stored weapons in the population, and for committing illegal actions it is better to trim smooth-bore and it’s not possible to come up with. I believe that the law on short barrels needs to be considered, namely, about storage but not free carrying, perhaps this will be the way the culture of handling weapons is inculcated. I express my opinion on the rights of a law-abiding owner of hunting weapons, who have never thought of directing him towards a person, I have a purely sports interest in the short-barrel for shooting at a shooting range. By the way, we have few shooting galleries, but this is an entire industry.
      3. okunevich_rv
        okunevich_rv April 14 2014 06: 49
        0
        I completely agree with you, at the moment the Ministry of Internal Affairs does not even have information about the approximate amount of illegally stored weapons in the population, and for committing illegal actions it is better to trim smooth-bore and it’s not possible to come up with. I believe that the law on short barrels needs to be considered, namely, about storage but not free carrying, perhaps this will be the way the culture of handling weapons is inculcated. I express my opinion on the rights of a law-abiding owner of hunting weapons, who have never thought of directing him towards a person, I have a purely sports interest in the short-barrel for shooting at a shooting range. By the way, we have few shooting galleries, but this is an entire industry.
    3. Bayonet
      Bayonet April 12 2014 20: 37
      +3
      Quote: Greenhorn
      To instill a culture of handling weapons.

      And also - a culture of drinking, because most crimes are drunk.
    4. Alex 1977
      Alex 1977 April 13 2014 16: 12
      +8
      Quote: Greenhorn
      Allow normal combat short barrels and not engage in nonsense.
      The problem is not in the length of the barrel, but in the brains of the one who holds the barrel. A normal person, even having a PC, will not just fire up. Thugs who are accustomed to firing at the "offender" just for a sidelong glance or an unpleasant word addressed to themselves in the new conditions will not heal for a long time, and the remaining three times think before grabbing the trunk.
  13. saag
    saag April 12 2014 08: 57
    -5
    if you’re not a member of a gang and you’ll walk with a barrel, you’ll be banged for the sake of that barrel,
    1. anomalocaris
      anomalocaris April 12 2014 09: 28
      +1
      It is speculative enough. Or will you stand still while they bang you?
      1. serega.fedotov
        serega.fedotov April 12 2014 11: 13
        +4
        And if you introduce a law according to which the carrying, storage, and theft of a weapon is equated with an attempted murder?
    2. IGS
      IGS April 12 2014 16: 31
      +12
      you first and bang for the sake of this trunk, behind on the head with something raking
      Women can't wear gold jewelry ... only a Zaporozhets car ... damn it, it can't be ... rarity ... request bang like a BMW. wassat
      What you say is an old bike. Like the fact that we shoot each other. Maybe everything is easier? Owning a short barrel is a kind of privilege, a sign of belonging to the elect (whether chosen?), Those who say that it is impossible, usually have permission to carry weapons. So maybe it’s enough to consider yourself higher and more reasonable than others? Moreover, this is a lot of a large part of our country. Or is it a fear of losing something that does higher than others, since nothing else stands out laughing
      PS I do not like weapons, and they will not be in my house. But everyone decides for himself, having the right. And to humiliate our citizens, to put it mildly, we will say that they are not quite reasonable, stupid and have not grown yet ... this is without comment.
    3. Bayonet
      Bayonet April 12 2014 20: 40
      0
      That's right. One friend, frankly not frail, was cracked on the back of the head and the hat was taken away.
  14. AARP
    AARP April 12 2014 08: 59
    +6
    If every second, third or fifth has a trunk, then it is doubtful that someone will want to pester you.
    1. saag
      saag April 12 2014 09: 01
      -10%
      The same was said before the release of traumas and injuries, and they continue to kill today, you, all who stand up for weapons are ready to sacrifice themselves for the sake of this "high" idea?
      1. anomalocaris
        anomalocaris April 12 2014 09: 32
        +7
        There is a slightly different situation with injuries. They are not taken seriously. So scorching for the slightest reason.
        And let's ban the free sale of kitchen knives? Indeed, according to statistics, it is the kitchen knife that is the deadliest weapon in our country.
      2. Max otto
        Max otto April 12 2014 10: 01
        -14%
        Quote: saag
        The same was said before the release of traumas and injuries, and they continue to kill today, you, all who stand up for weapons are ready to sacrifice themselves for the sake of this "high" idea?

        To buy a trauma, you do not need permission, even a frostbitten psycho can buy it, do you catch the difference?
        1. Letun
          Letun April 12 2014 10: 28
          +4
          Quote: Max Otto
          To buy a trauma, you do not need permission, even a frostbitten psycho can buy it, do you catch the difference?

          That’s why you write something that you don’t know?
          http://arsenal2.ru/m/5382/instruktsiya_po_polucheniyu_litsenzii_na_trawmatichesk
          oe_or.html
          1. Max otto
            Max otto April 12 2014 12: 43
            -3
            Quote: Letun
            That’s why you write something that you don’t know?
            http://arsenal2.ru/m/5382/instruktsiya_po_polucheniyu_litsenzii_na_trawmatichesk


            oe_or.html

            What I do not know? Psycho does not need any permissions! He incorrectly formulated a few, but this does not change the picture.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Letun
              Letun April 12 2014 20: 26
              +3
              Quote: Max Otto
              What I do not know? Psycho does not need any permissions! He incorrectly formulated a few, but this does not change the picture.

              How does it not change? You specifically wrote that a psycho can be given trauma without breaking the law. This is not true, because you need a certificate from a neuropsychiatric dispensary (one of the documents). What do you mean "This does not change the picture"? You don't need permission to be a psycho, it's true, but to buy a trauma you need permission. In the same way, it will be needed to buy military weapons.
        2. Cnbv
          Cnbv April 12 2014 12: 17
          -3
          Did you yourself understand what you wrote?
        3. The comment was deleted.
      3. IGS
        IGS April 12 2014 16: 58
        +8
        By the way, you did not notice that ALL the arguments in favor of the ban are based on the diminution of the mental and moral qualities of your fellow citizens?
  15. Sadikoff
    Sadikoff April 12 2014 09: 00
    +15
    At the Amer Forum, in the debate, we posted statistics on killings, we are ahead of the rest. I signed the petition for permission to wear short barrels. The weapon gives strength but also responsibility, licensing, medical commissions, safes, a cartridge case and other things will help to become a Russian responsible person. I repeat , we are leaders in the killings now, there’s nothing to lose even if a jump is possible at first. The Moldovans go with weapons according to the law, but haven’t we reached this point?
  16. AARP
    AARP April 12 2014 09: 06
    +9
    Our society was deliberately weaned from weapons. I showed my father the trunk, he already shied away to the side. Then he said: - No, I'm better in the face ...
    1. predator.3
      predator.3 April 12 2014 10: 36
      +2
      Quote: AARP
      - No, I'm better in the face ...

      I also adhere to this theory!
  17. GRIGORY
    GRIGORY April 12 2014 09: 10
    +16
    The article is complete nonsense. A person should have the right to protect his life by all means. Why reinvent all sorts of traumatic injuries again. And as for the law on the legalization of short-barreled rifled weapons, let them first adopt the normal law on self-defense and let them minimize the hit of weapons to all kinds of dollars.
    1. Walking
      Walking April 12 2014 14: 18
      +2
      The most important thing is that the Law on Protection is normal, working so that there would not be such situations when using weapons to protect oneself, family, home, friends became by the will of investigators, police accused, it is necessary to break this stereotype in law enforcement agencies which is easier to attract almost innocent than to figure out in business.
      1. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali April 12 2014 14: 35
        -1
        Quote: Hiking
        Most important protection law is normal

        The law on self-defense is already normal. And even the Plenum of the Armed Forces made recommendations on its use - see here - http://www.consultant.ru/law/hotdocs/21127.html
        However, there are problems with local enforcement. Why? Because a significant part of the judges comes just from law enforcement agencies, already having the appropriate professional deformation (specific professional type of person).
        1. Viktor.N.Aleksandrov.
          Viktor.N.Aleksandrov. April 12 2014 23: 59
          +4
          No need to talk about professional deformation. I served in the Ministry of Internal Affairs for 25 years, the last position was the head of the investigation department. But I am for the legalization of the short barrel!
          1. okunevich_rv
            okunevich_rv April 14 2014 07: 06
            0
            Dear Victor, let you, as a seasoned, professional person, ask a provocative question, suppose you as a citizen armed, having entered the porch you found a maniac, pedophile behind actions of a depraved character over an adult. Your decision to detain the pedophile with confidence that they will release him tomorrow, or shoot him like a dog.
  18. psychologist
    psychologist April 12 2014 09: 20
    -10%
    with us, and without permission, scorching right and left !! and if allowed, then in the first days half of each other kills !! Well, then there probably won't be any queues right away!
    1. mpa945
      mpa945 April 12 2014 09: 42
      +7
      Since there is no legal, it means scorching from illegal.
      Who wears an illegal barrel?
      How does a ban stop the spread of illegal weapons if
      with us, and without permission, scorching right and left!

      Thus, the ban is not directed against illegal weapons, namely against legal ones.

      PS: I agree and support all measures with the exception of legal weapons falling into the hands of (in the case of the permission of the short barrel)
      1. mpa945
        mpa945 April 12 2014 09: 58
        +1
        Got a minus.
        It seems he wrote against "illegal" and "inadequate"
        Apparently the site is present ...
        1. Baikal
          Baikal April 12 2014 10: 56
          -10%
          The law, as it drew, as it turned, so it happened.
          A little more intelligible - if you are not seven spans in your forehead, you must understand that the first weapons to appear are the "inadequate". And only for this reason, normal people will also have to stock up on iron. And off we go.
          Against this background, a complete ban is just a panacea.
          Minus. It is for your personal inadequacy and immaturity.
          1. mpa945
            mpa945 April 12 2014 11: 21
            +5
            1. I did not insult anyone. Neither seven spans, nor otherwise.
            In my understanding, the law should be directed against access to weapons inadequate.
            The mechanisms are understandable.
            2. how
            a total ban is just a panacea.
            stops illegal immigrants?
            3. Sanctions for an illegal trifle compared with sanctions for its application. Who is this stopping?
            4. Arguments are important in any discussion. You can argue and disagree. Each position has the right to life, but reinforced by arguments.

            And the cons are undoubtedly significant arguments ...
            By the way, I do not use them against you.
            1. Baikal
              Baikal April 12 2014 11: 43
              -4
              1. I did not insult anyone. Neither seven spans, nor otherwise.
              In my understanding, the law should be directed against access to weapons inadequate.
              The mechanisms are understandable.

              1. So I will you the same way. But I am sincerely surprised that you can not understand elementary things. The law can be directed against anything. If you are legally forbidden to breathe tomorrow, nothing will change. "Mechanisms" are fine in theory. Realities can be very different.

              2. How does a total ban stop illegal immigrants?

              2. Nothing. "Illegal" is a law that has already begun. With all that it implies. There are also enough drugs around, let's also legalize it.

              3. Sanctions for an illegal trifle compared with sanctions for its application. Who is this stopping?

              3. You will be surprised. A lot of people are stopped. It is thanks to the "sanctions for illegal immigrants" that the population of our country does not have massive weapons on hand. See statistics on firearms of the country where the population is allowed to have weapons and compare with the situation in Russia.

              4. Arguments are important in any discussion. You can argue and disagree. Each position has the right to life, but reinforced by arguments.

              4. Exactly. See paragraph 3.
              1. mpa945
                mpa945 April 12 2014 11: 54
                +1
                1. I do not understand. Lack of law - better than having it?
                2. I fully agree with
                No way. "Illegal" is a law that has already begun. With all that it implies.

                But I did not discuss drugs. No need to attribute to me.
                3. I am not surprised. It is about this that I write that it is not necessary to record normal people in.
                And the statistics on Moldova, frankly, amazes me. In a good way.

                Something like that...
                1. Baikal
                  Baikal April 12 2014 12: 28
                  -4
                  1. No way, sir. We have a law prohibiting the shooting of firearms, which I support. And to which you oppose. Or we lost the thread of conversation)
                  2. The comparison, in my opinion, is very close. I didn’t ascribe anything to you, my statement.
                  3. So I agree with you on 273% that it is necessary to keep inadequate away from dangerous things. However, with all this, one must take into account reality.
                  4. Statistics on Moldova. By her, by the way, there are different opinions. And not everyone is magical. Well, God be with him, let's say they are really doing well. And now let's try to approach the law on legalization as a situation in the preparation of a business plan. That is, with the expectation of a negative outlook. I am sure that then none of us would want to read these statistics in the news.

                  To you personally - health and good luck.
                  1. mpa945
                    mpa945 April 12 2014 12: 48
                    +7
                    1. The prohibition law does not work in any way on "bad" people.
                    2. Even hypothetically legalization of drugs cannot protect anyone from anything. Therefore, drugs pass by.
                    3. Not allowing weapons to "normal" people, you enroll all of the polls in "Inadequate". And I'm trying to convey that "normal" people exist.

                    By the way, among the security officials there are also "inadequacies". They are responsible before the law for their actions. What is the problem with applying responsibility for one's actions to everyone? According to your logic, is it necessary to disarm the security forces too?

                    Once again. I do not advocate distributing weapons to everyone without exception. But restrictions should not be based on the thesis of inadequacy of the entire population.

                    And good luck to you.
                    1. Baikal
                      Baikal April 12 2014 19: 06
                      -3
                      1. Are you going to the "Avengers"? With all due respect, mpa945, do you have a strange feeling of awkwardness for what you have written?

                      2. Well, how is it ... Let's start with the simplest. It will fully protect the interests of those who want to sell these weapons. And (after all, it’s not enough) in order to advertise - to increase hysteria, that you (the weapon) need it, because they are abused.

                      3. But who argues with you about this? wink The point is not whether there are "normal" ones or not.
                      I propose to solve one problem, speculatively.
                      Think about how to distinguish between officials in hiring bribe takers и honest. And how can this be really carried out legally. And the mechanism of operation of such a system, capable of self-maintenance on a Russian scale.
                      Decide - the answer to the question "how to allow weapons only to normal people" will be very close.
                      1. mpa945
                        mpa945 April 12 2014 20: 01
                        +3
                        1. Are you going to the "Avengers"? With all due respect, mpa945, do you have a strange feeling of awkwardness for what you have written?

                        I haven’t written this anywhere. Apparently ashamed should be the one who writes.

                        2. Well, how is it ... Let's start with the simplest. It will fully protect the interests of those who want to sell these weapons. And (after all, it’s not enough) in order to advertise - to increase hysteria, that you (the weapon) need it, because they are abused.

                        As I understand it, this is about the resolution of the short barrel?
                        Well, and the ban protects the interests to a greater extent
                        unlawful.

                        And the officials in Moldova are all crystal clear honest? And people are just like us. And they did it all.
                        And we, in your opinion, have not been given. I hurt ... sad

                        I propose to solve one problem, speculatively.
                        Think about how to distinguish between bribe-takers and honest ones when applying for a job. And how can this be really carried out legally. And the mechanism of operation of such a system, capable of self-maintenance on a Russian scale.
                        Decide - the answer to the question "how to allow weapons only to normal people" will be very close.

                        A large number of young drivers do not have the necessary skills, in other words, they should not have, with a given level of training, they should not have received rights. And the traffic police leadership claims that driving schools are to blame. And the GDDD has nothing to do with it. Let's forbid to give out the rights?
                        After all, they still understand that it is the traffic police that "mows".
                        I have not indicated anywhere that without changing the legal and regulatory framework on this issue, it is possible to "distribute" permissions to everyone at once. This is not a question of today. But without deciding to move in this direction, we will not be able to expect tomorrow that the controlling bodies (including) will change in the right direction.

                        By the way, even today I know a couple of people who have a short trunk. At the same time, to put it mildly, it was conditionally legal to obtain permission. And everything else is completely legal. Both possession and wearing. Eve crime statistics "gray" trunks do not fall. Apparently legal possession is not for crime.
                      2. Baikal
                        Baikal April 12 2014 21: 07
                        -2
                        1. I haven’t written this anywhere. Apparently ashamed should be the one who writes.

                        The context is not exactly that, do not be like Europe, like "yes we said, but we didn't mean anything like that." The presence of a weapon implies its use. On-site enforcement is assessed exclusively SUBJECTIVELY by you personally. And only so.

                        2. As I understand it, this is about the resolution of the short barrel? Well, and the ban protects the interests of the more illegal.
                        all officials in Moldova are all crystal clear honest? And people are just like us. And they did it all.
                        And we, in your opinion, have not been given. I hurt ...

                        2. Let's try to look at it from a height from the height of the leaders of the state.
                        Russia vs Moldova. Personally, where will it be easier to put things in order, in a small room or throughout the airport? wink In addition, I remind you that your awareness of Moldova can be very incomplete, because opinions and figures are different.
                        Let's not forget that just 15 years ago, Russia virtually disappeared and was anarchy. Putting things in order in the country takes time and, I think, it is necessary to give this time to the state and help in every possible way.
                        There were fewer crimes in the USSR than now in Russia. Yes, the reasons for this are different. But! But then, were the authorities able to protect the people from criminals and not to give out weapons? And you are talking about inept drivers ... Maybe it makes sense to concentrate efforts on combating crime and bribery, than to create another legislative body for the control of legal weapons and then fight corruption there? ..

                        -------------------

                        Many of the actions of Russia's irreconcilable "partners" overseas work in many directions. I think that one of them is all kinds of legalization of weapons. Ample room for maneuver in the direction of chaos and creating tension + sales market.
                        I suggest you just look into yourself and understand if you need a weapon.
                        Or how did this idea come about.

                        I think that we have all discussed.
                      3. mpa945
                        mpa945 April 12 2014 21: 57
                        +2
                        The context is not exactly that, do not be like Europe, like "yes we said, but we didn't mean anything like that." The presence of a weapon implies its use. On-site enforcement is assessed exclusively SUBJECTIVELY by you personally. And only so.

                        These are your speculations, not my words. And no contexts. Here is my quote:
                        I believe that it is necessary to change many provisions of laws that tighten illegal actions. In this case, the law should clearly prescribe the criteria for correctness.

                        So, again by.
                        I suggest you just look into yourself and understand if you need a weapon.

                        I quote my quote to another opponent almost entirely:
                        In the case of permission, I do not think that ordinary citizens will massively run to get permits, and even more so to buy trunks.
                        But the very possibility of meeting an armed rebuff, it seems to me, should have a positive effect on
                        High crime, fight off hooligans? So it's not about "shooting" various kinds of gopniks and hooligans - this is a problem of society


                        Undoubtedly, the smooth barrel steers. Out of town, in the forest. But not everywhere. CSR - allows you to fill in the gap.

                        Showdowns are different. It’s better not to get into them than to get injured or CSR.
                        But here in St. Petersburg, two eagles, beat the passerby with bits. He prevented them from driving along the sidewalk. They beat him to death, in front of passers-by.

                        In your opinion, in such a situation you need to appeal
                        this is a problem of society, education and police

                        or are there any other options?


                        Many of the actions of Russia's irreconcilable "partners" overseas work in many directions. I think that one of them is all kinds of legalization of weapons. Ample room for maneuver in the direction of chaos and creating tension + sales market.

                        The presence of weapons in normal people, I read, plus not for them, but for us.
                        A wide opportunity to get an extra pendal from trained and trained citizens.
                        Yes, by the way, the liberals-only a ban. am Lustration hi
                      4. okunevich_rv
                        okunevich_rv April 14 2014 07: 24
                        0
                        I love weapons, I have always loved him, I feel aesthetic pleasure from contemplating it since at a tender age I held the gun in my hands. I have weapons, but thank God and had no thought about using them to the detriment of man. I believe the weapons are only verified and loyal to the ruling party :)
                      5. okunevich_rv
                        okunevich_rv April 14 2014 07: 24
                        -1
                        I love weapons, I have always loved him, I feel aesthetic pleasure from contemplating it since at a tender age I held the gun in my hands. I have weapons, but thank God and had no thought about using them to the detriment of man. I believe the weapons are only verified and loyal to the ruling party :)
    2. Partizan
      Partizan April 12 2014 18: 09
      0
      Quote: mpa945
      It seems he wrote against "illegal" and "inadequate"
      Apparently the site is present ...

      Yes, there are such a majority, but not real - "sofa".
  • AARP
    AARP April 12 2014 09: 23
    -3
    Well, good. Fools will immediately withdraw.
  • Free wind
    Free wind April 12 2014 09: 26
    +1
    I'm afraid to even ask, is 15.5 mm not a typo? If such a bullet hits a person, you will be guaranteed to receive a corpse !!!! The wound will be terrible. and even when hit in the leg, the opponent dies of blood loss. bones can’t be restored after hitting such a bullet. Will self-defense be harsh, don’t you find it? Well, in general, the attitude towards the wolves is ambivalent, too many inadequate people appeared on the streets of our country. There are some bits that are worth it. In cars, every third are. They are applied without any regret. I'm afraid to kill with my fist. And they beat with bits without a twinge of conscience.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 14: 00
      +1
      so if you already got a weapon, you need to be sure to turn off the attacker, not shoot with bullets from butter.
    2. K9_SWAT
      K9_SWAT April 13 2014 01: 16
      +2
      So they beat and shoot from injuries precisely because they do not take them seriously !!! The main thing for them to teach a lesson !!! Now imagine if this bloke will come to me even with a real gun, if it is at least a little sure that I have a gun and I can use it with the slightest creep in my direction? I doubt...
      And inadequate and filth divorced precisely because of impunity. As a rule, this offspring attacks the defenseless, taking advantage of the fact that the population has no rights and means for defense and therefore is afraid to defend itself. In addition, this beast perfectly learns its lessons. And if he is severely punished, then, of course, he will not improve and will not grow kinder, but already 100 times he will think to go "for business" or not ...
      1. Shallow
        Shallow April 14 2014 18: 38
        -1
        Why are people fighting? They don’t take seriously that they can be killed? They thought about it or dumb heads ...
  • Orang
    Orang April 12 2014 09: 28
    0
    English revolvers under cartridges 0.455 Vebley 0.38 Vebley approximately correspond to the conditions of the author of the article.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 13: 57
      +1
      stupid cartridges should be ordinary, only steel cores are forbidden
  • saag
    saag April 12 2014 09: 28
    -3
    Quote: AARP
    Fools will immediately withdraw.

    These are just the ones who will survive, you yourself know that it does not sink in the hole, and yes, if the proverb "smart people learn from other people's mistakes, not smart people learn from their own" against the background of the US example (the presence of weapons, their use under the existing ) does not go for the future, then this is an indicator of just the level of development
  • Owl
    Owl April 12 2014 09: 35
    +6
    Notes of a citizen having a distant view of the use of weapons from practice. Because of such fellow citizens, they offer a club for self-defense.
  • Denis Tatar
    Denis Tatar April 12 2014 09: 45
    -1
    Comrades, judge for yourself, will crime go down? No. What will change? Let's start firing more drunkenly at each other, that's all. There is no "culture of weapons", there is "CULTURE", or not.
    1. mpa945
      mpa945 April 12 2014 09: 53
      +2
      Excuse me, but you are now "drunk" throwing a knife? Are there "drives"?


      Yes, the law should provide a hard filter against any inadequacies.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. siberalt
        siberalt April 12 2014 11: 12
        0
        There is such folk wisdom - the law is not written on do * crayfish laughing
    2. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 13: 57
      +1
      Ie do you think the whole Russian people are drunk b.y.d.l.m.? but do not think that you are a racist and Russophobe?
    3. fif21
      fif21 April 13 2014 14: 27
      +1
      Quote: Denis Tatarin
      Comrades, judge for yourself, will crime decrease?

      Crime is increasing, law enforcement can not ensure the safety of citizens! You try to get through 02! And if they arrive, after what time? And they begin to work after committing unlawful acts. Even with existing legislation, I would rather stay alive and serve a prison term than lie in a cemetery. God created people strong and weak Mr. Colt equalized everyone. I am for equality hi
    4. The comment was deleted.
  • Baikal
    Baikal April 12 2014 10: 11
    -4
    Proponents of legalization once again suggest "looking from the other side".
    This is all verbal masturbation, gentlemen.
    Weapons are weapons. And it must be at the warrior... And there is no "culture" of weapons, see above about the verbal. More precisely, it is virtually there, while everything is more or less good in the country. But the unchangeable ass to come, hanging over the United States, I think, will very clearly show what this "culture" is worth. And how many lives it will take.
    So before choosing a beautiful tsatska, the author, look at yourself and your loved ones from this side:


    1. Orang
      Orang April 12 2014 10: 56
      +12
      Quote: Baikal
      Weapons are weapons. And it must be with the warrior

      The ax is with the carpenter, the awl of the shoemaker, the club with the pithecanthropus.
      The above photos are primarily a consequence of crime. There will be no gunshot-they will kill with something else, as in Rwanda. The main desire.
      The lack of firearms among the population and the law on self-defense are in the hands of only criminals.
      It is often said that street thugs will also have weapons. Only here the result of the shootout will be different than fist fights. The opportunity to get a bullet or get a denture from a layman, then recoup yourself on it, is there a difference? A pair of healthy bullies under gas can easily beat a passerby to death simply with their hands and feet.
      In the event of social cataclysms, gangs will be armed regardless of weapons laws. Unlike ordinary people.
      1. Baikal
        Baikal April 12 2014 13: 02
        -5
        The above photos are primarily a consequence of crime. There will be no gunshot-they will kill with something else, as in Rwanda. The main desire.

        Ummm ... Do you understand how, dear Orang, it was the topic of "firearms and crime" that was discussed in the post wink
        And then lovers of trunks will want large-caliber machine guns for self-defense. And someone will post photos of those killed from the machine gun. And the amateur will cynically notice that if there were no machine guns, they would have been killed by something else ...

        The lack of firearms among the population and the law on self-defense are in the hands of only criminals. It is often said that street thugs will also have weapons. Only here the result of the shootout will be different than fist fights.

        I will not even ask if the author of these lines ever tried to point a weapon at a person.
        1. Orang
          Orang April 12 2014 15: 17
          +1
          Quote: Baikal
          I will not even ask if the author of these lines ever tried to point a weapon at a person.

          I do not suffer from Tolstoyism, although I am an opponent of violence. 90 percent of the inhabitants will use a weapon, no matter what, even a plug, if there is a serious threat to life.
          With a machine gun you have too much (for the moment). That way you can get to the atomic bomb. Nevertheless, there is the concept of a personal weapon. hi
        2. Orang
          Orang April 12 2014 15: 17
          0
          Quote: Baikal
          I will not even ask if the author of these lines ever tried to point a weapon at a person.

          I do not suffer from Tolstoyism, although I am an opponent of violence. 90 percent of the inhabitants will use a weapon, no matter what, even a plug, if there is a serious threat to life.
          With a machine gun you have too much (for the moment). That way you can get to the atomic bomb. Nevertheless, there is the concept of a personal weapon. hi
    2. okunevich_rv
      okunevich_rv April 14 2014 08: 21
      +1
      Photos of corpses cut with a knife into the studio!
  • rodz
    rodz April 12 2014 10: 26
    +5
    The author seems to be not at all friendly with the PM ... starting from the contradictions with the characteristics: "the lethal range is 200 meters .... The PM bullet, having an initial speed of 315 meters per second, will fall to the ground, having flown about 150 meters ...." ... The destructive range of the PM is up to 350 m, and the maximum range of the bullet is about 800 m.
  • mongoose
    mongoose April 12 2014 10: 28
    0
    n-dya, as always, they pull out corpses, as if they don't fire at every corner, the prisoners have weapons, and our "authorities" since the time of the Jewish Marxists are afraid of the Russian People and do not trust him
  • Cruorvult
    Cruorvult April 12 2014 10: 39
    -4
    The scoop was not allowed and the criminal structures practically had no rifled weapons. IMHO to etom and it is necessary to stern.
    Those who forget:
    1 - legalization of ownership is not legalization of wearing
    2- even if there is one and the other you will have to carry a discharged gun, I don’t think that the gopta will yell at you from 50 meters that they will come right now and will dig you, there were even such checks, the knife is still faster than the gun at close range.
    3 - the legal side, sechays even at home if you injure someone, then the term shines on you.
    4 - with a minimum wage of 7 thousand, not everyone can afford to buy and train, the situation will be the same as with an injury when the Russian is not there and they drive the hacks as one, it’s such a hunch that it all fell for free.
    5 - this is statistics, in the United States every month and even more often after shooting at schools, they have even up to 15 thousand people dying in shootings and wearing is far from allowed in every state.

    Personally, a complete ban, but for the distribution of drugs like you need to weigh, IMHO it’s better to make a decent injury and control the distribution.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. siberalt
      siberalt April 12 2014 10: 54
      -4
      If you are afraid, go to the gym to the fight and boxing section. Or do not poke around where you were not called. No weapon will replace the head laughing
      1. mongoose
        mongoose April 12 2014 14: 05
        +2
        i.e. we do not need mathematicians, physicists, ballerinas? or do you really think that in Russia there should be ghettos where normal people have no move? are you racist
    3. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 12: 16
      +4
      why did you decide that the right to carry means a discharged weapon? and why did you decide that gopota are brave people? only implying the opportunity to get a bullet in the forehead 99,99% of them will be recorded in decent-law-abiding people
      1. Owl
        Owl April 12 2014 14: 56
        +3
        Fear for your life is the best "stopper" from criminal and hooligan acts.
      2. okunevich_rv
        okunevich_rv April 14 2014 08: 06
        0
        I’m not a murmur, but I took the weapons from idiots with my bare hands, so imagine what happens next to that character who until then had threatened weapons.
        Therefore, I suppose only storage and use in shooting galleries, in no case wearing short-trunks.
        In the case of a clash with a gopot, yes heaped but left alive.
        But in the case of a weapon seizure, heated hooligans, whatever they shoot, for the sake of wit and not the fact that the owner of the weapon will survive.
    4. K9_SWAT
      K9_SWAT April 13 2014 01: 49
      +3
      1) Legalization with the WEARING right !!!
      2) Why did you get that the barrel should be discharged? After all, we are talking about changing legislation. Accordingly, it is necessary to allow carrying with a cartridge in the chamber and on the fuse.
      3) We're talking about CHANGING THE LEGISLATION !!! And this topic must also be changed: is there a fact of an attack? All! You have the right to use absolutely any means without restrictions. And don't think about the consequences. Any injury or death of the attacker falls on the attacker. And no "strive for minimal damage", "girl, you yourself provoked the attack by walking alone." etc.
      4) Nonsense! If a man needs a weapon, he will get it! In addition, we are talking about ownership. Can then ban hunting? After all, not everyone can buy a gun for 100 thousand.
      5) And I read the statistics, which say that in those states where it is allowed less violence.

      http://orujie.mirtesen.ru/blog/43202710172/Lichnoe-oruzhie?utm_campaign=transit&
      utm_source = main & utm_medium = page_0 & pad = 1
  • DesToeR
    DesToeR April 12 2014 10: 43
    +7
    What difference does a bullet fly 150m or 90m? In the city, such a "thing" will still find a target. Today, more people per year die from road accidents than from gunshot and stabbing combined. Ban auto? But for a driver's license to study and a medical certificate are required, incl. and from a psychiatrist. The legalization of weapons is necessary, but it is impossible without serious training in how to handle them. We have to start from school. It's pointless to invent calibers and barrel lengths.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 12: 17
      -2
      yah??? are you going to shoot the crowd? bus stop? the city is full of obstacles for a pistol bullet, in the field it is even more dangerous
  • siberalt
    siberalt April 12 2014 10: 49
    -8
    Civil weapons - NO! Normal is useless, and d * uraks must definitely try it, starting with yard dogs. laughing
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. siberalt
      siberalt April 12 2014 11: 02
      -1
      Dear minus one, how old are you? I can teach you how to make a pugach. Time will not take much, and it will be safer for others. But the effect is awesome laughing
      1. mongoose
        mongoose April 12 2014 12: 19
        0
        I was the third who put a minus
    3. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 12: 18
      +2
      those. do you think everyone in Russia is crazy? racially inferior? Do not find that you suffer from a severe form of Russophobia and racism?
    4. Baikal
      Baikal April 12 2014 12: 44
      -7
      + 100500. Those who urgently lack live ammunition and rifled barrel - fewer militants and more real living women laughing
    5. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 14: 05
      -2
      Ie do you consider us abnormal? are you racist
  • chunga-changa
    chunga-changa April 12 2014 10: 51
    0
    Like all "amateurs" of short-barrel, the author, as usual, substitutes the meaning of things. The government trusts everyone and is not afraid of anyone. Stop whining, being afraid of them, the heroes who protect the girl from ordinary unarmed hooligans. Weapons are not prohibited, save up some money and please go buy. Only short-barreled weapons are prohibited. While short-barrels are prohibited, any sample without permission (service and award) is criminal and is perceived the same way. The fact that for the same reason our guys use the short-barreled only in films about cops and bandits is understandable to no one interesting. The authors, for the sake of their infantile desire to shoot with a pestle, propose to legalize short-barrels, obviously not understanding what will happen. The short-barreled weapon has two fundamental differences from the civilian weapons currently permitted. First, it is adapted for hidden wearing, second, it is intended only for killing people. Who needs these properties and why in everyday life is not difficult to guess. The same lessons will be grateful to tears, of course it is much easier to carry a short barrel with you than an AK. And the protection of family and property, which is so naively referred to, is easily carried out even with a primitive 12-gauge rifle with a shot cartridge, not to mention buckshot.
    As for the author’s ambitious offer, everything is simple here. The author, the fruit of your gloomy genius has long been realized and is freely sold under the Osa PB-4 trademark for example. But it’s clear that this is not at all that poor Russian craft, if it were called Wasp-4AP, then it would be a completely different matter.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. siberalt
      siberalt April 12 2014 10: 59
      -6
      Bravo! Plus with pleasure.
    3. Orang
      Orang April 12 2014 11: 09
      +2
      Quote: chunga-changa
      And the protection of the family and property that is so naively referred to is easily carried out even by a primitive 12-caliber rifle with a shot cartridge, not to mention buckshot

      At home, yes. And outside the house? It is clear that in most cases a healthy man will have enough gas spray and fists, but not always. About shoot each other, I do not believe. On hands is full rubber-shot and smooth-not shot the same. I suspect that, on the contrary, people will become more cautious and stop crawling into the bottle over trifles.
      1. mongoose
        mongoose April 12 2014 12: 21
        +2
        namely, they will think 10 times before insulting or waving a fist
        1. O_RUS
          O_RUS April 13 2014 00: 20
          0
          Quote: mongoose
          10 times think before offending or waving a fist


          Is it necessary to legalize gf for this? And try to reduce the scandal to nothing by words.
    4. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 12: 20
      +1
      oh how !!! and how saiga 12 will help you? left at home in a safe?
      1. O_RUS
        O_RUS April 15 2014 09: 15
        0
        Quote: mongoose
        and how saiga 12 will help you? left at home in a safe?


        you don’t leave your brain at home
    5. Baikal
      Baikal April 12 2014 13: 08
      -6
      I agree more than.
      By the way, yes, an important point. All these whipping up fears on adolescents and zombies that "hooligans" will respect and fear them at the sight of the trunk have a clear basis - money. Big arms business.
      1. okunevich_rv
        okunevich_rv April 14 2014 08: 19
        0
        I absolutely agree, hooligans immediately respect! they’ll come closer with the words what cool type you deserve respect and what an awesome barrel you have, probably very expensive and they’ll squeeze the barrel specifically (I would do that). Yes, and for the commercial interests of arms trading companies, you are very right.
    6. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 14: 08
      -1
      ie you feel sorry for the man who is trying to rape your daughter? wife? you in the end? are you not afraid that he has friends? finally having served in his opinion "nizachto" he will not come to kill your family? or hope the prison will fix him?
  • mpa945
    mpa945 April 12 2014 10: 57
    +6
    Strange ...
    Conclusions from the discussion:
    The weapons of the right sector are certainly bad. But the Lugansk Guard must be disarmed ...

    Really?

    The current "authorities" in Ukraine also think so.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 12: 22
      -1
      very accurately noticed
      Apparently, Russian People will have to take the Right to Arms by force, or the Right to Protect Life and Dignity!
      1. Baikal
        Baikal April 12 2014 13: 17
        -9
        That's when you and Guz People go to the state TAKE FORCE THE RIGHT TO WEAPONS, I will sit on the couch surrounded by buckets of popcorn and watch with a happy smile on TV how you will break the ridges with batons. And most likely - I’ll write it down to later review laughing
        And then, at an expensive price from the pre-trial detention center, you really run the risk of meeting Russians who will tear your sensitive unprotected intelligence and scratch your nose for your tricks.
        1. mongoose
          mongoose April 12 2014 13: 40
          -3
          Well, it’s not for you explicitly, non-Russian, to talk about Gusskost, since the Russian Banner is dumb for you
  • siberalt
    siberalt April 12 2014 11: 16
    -6
    If we pay the state for our inviolability and security, then ask from it. But do not engage in amateur performances, encouraging dealers in "civilian" weapons. Something like this.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 13: 41
      +3
      ie are you a supporter of the police state ?, so that there would always be a policeman next to you? and in bed with my wife?
    2. Walking
      Walking April 12 2014 14: 28
      +7
      Quote: siberalt
      If we pay the state for our integrity and security, then ask him.


      If your family suddenly suffers, God forbid that this does not happen when of course, it will be too late to ask the state
  • Nick_R
    Nick_R April 12 2014 11: 31
    -1
    I fully support the author. A healthy alternative to supposedly safe injuries, bats and saigas in the trunk (whoever needs it, they choose this now). We must not prohibit, but think about the safety of citizens, and not those who govern them on their behalf.
  • Yutas
    Yutas April 12 2014 12: 02
    +7
    Quote: Greenhorn
    Allow normal combat short-barreled and don't do nonsense. To instill a culture of handling weapons. Demand that people undergo real (and not just a tick) and serious training in the possession of weapons with the subsequent delivery of standards. Organize shooting ranges and shooting ranges where those who wish could hone their skills. Do many of the owners of rubber arrows really own them? Even if today a person has a "trauma", where can he train with him? I myself have long wanted to buy a firearm, but it is the lack of the opportunity to train regularly that stops it.
    The problem is not in the length of the barrel, but in the brains of the one who holds the barrel. A normal person, even having a PC, will not just fire up. Thugs who are accustomed to firing at the "offender" just for a sidelong glance or an unpleasant word addressed to themselves in the new conditions will not heal for a long time, and the remaining three times think before grabbing the trunk.

    Absolutely agree. I have been following this topic for a long time, I thought a lot.
    It’s not enough to own a weapon - you need to be able and psychologically ready to use it, otherwise you took out a barrel if necessary, and while hesitated, you’ve already been taken from him and you’ve got the ball. Therefore:
    - exclude the term "traumatic weapon" for self-defense firearms, since it is misleading, implying that it is not lethal;
    - organize appropriate shooting ranges, allowing not only to train the accuracy of shooting but also to hone application skills (interactive);
    - tighten control over the issuance of permits for weapons of self-defense and firmly suppress and punish any cases of illegal issuance of such;
    - when acquiring this weapon, oblige the owner to attend regular training sessions in shooting ranges at least twice a month;
    - appropriately adjust the legal framework for self-defense. I got into a strange house / car / encroached on my life / health - I got a bullet - it’s my fault. Criminals have trunks.
    In this way, we will get - self-confident citizens who are able to defend their lives and property with arms in their hands and will have the law on their side (Hmmmm, maybe the authorities are afraid of just that?). Bonus for the economy - income from the sale of weapons, ammunition, the use of shooting galleries.
    Well, and about a special weapon of self-defense - yes, it’s quite logical to make a cartridge that provides a lower lethal range while maintaining a sufficient stopping action in close combat.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 12: 23
      0
      absolutely support
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali April 12 2014 12: 44
      +1
      Quote: Yutas
      I thought a lot.

      Briefly and clearly - an almost ready-made program of action. It's a pity I can't put more than one "+".
  • Yutas
    Yutas April 12 2014 12: 04
    +4
    Quote: siberalt
    т

    Will you bail a policeman to every citizen? In the best case, they will catch and punish the guilty person after the fact. In the most sad case, the victim will already be neither hot nor cold ...
  • host
    host April 12 2014 12: 19
    +1
    Quote: anomalocaris
    The author of the article is not a sexy pervert. Just imagine a 20-caliber pandora in the form of a 5-charge revolver as a weapon of self-defense for constant wear ... Comrade smokes hard grass.

    A gang with kitchen knives (an example of stabbing in China) is just as dangerous. When using a kitchen knife there is no shot noise and you can cut in the crowd for a long time and quietly ...
  • uzer 13
    uzer 13 April 12 2014 12: 21
    +3
    Dear Mr. Lozneva, it’s somehow at odds with theory. Velodogs were popular because they turned out to be suitable for self-defense, especially later ones with an elongated cartridge. In the end, we all are no different from a big dog, if you look from this point of view. amused by his recommendations on the alleged characteristics of self-defense weapons. They exactly correspond to the characteristics of a dueling pistol, with all the ensuing consequences. There is a worldwide practice of using self-defense weapons: a 9 * 17 browning cartridge, any weapon suitable and legislation protecting a citizen, not a bandit. Statistics show that when using a knife for self-defense, the number of deaths is three times higher than when using a pistol. It is useless to defend yourself with an ersatz weapon like a traumatic pistol, most likely you will be killed in this case. two categories of citizens:
    the first is those who have it and thus want to get an additional advantage. The second category is an unprepared layman who is afraid of weapons panic. Moreover, it comes to insanity — housewives prefer to become victims of maniacs and bandits, but remain opponents of self-defense weapons, which they skillfully use comrades from the first category, when they falsify public opinion through surveys of the population, knowing who to contact with questions.
    You can’t be a little pregnant. You also can’t do with semi-finished weapons with self-defense weapons either or not. If someone doesn’t need a weapon, even if they don’t have one, nobody forcibly offers them to acquire unnecessary things. Only these comrades should not at the same time pass off your personal point of view as the ultimate truth.
    1. uzer 13
      uzer 13 April 12 2014 14: 36
      +1
      ***********
  • wei
    wei April 12 2014 12: 39
    +5
    It is necessary to create special civilian self-defense weapons, simple, with a high level of readiness for use, effective at short distances (up to 10 meters)

    yes no need for it
    you can kill with a brick ("wasp") matter in man
    the law should to a greater extent prescribe the use and not weapons (with its classification, combat, sports, hunting ... sorted out a long time ago)
  • Cruorvult
    Cruorvult April 12 2014 12: 53
    -8
    Ololo, here such cowboys gathered, there wasn’t any short-barrels in the scoop of citizens and there was practically no crime, now the weapon is an echo of the 90s, when it disappeared from parts of the boxes. It’s such a hunch that comrade Mongoose always wants to deprive of honor and dignity, and if suddenly someone shouts to MORZHOVY, he will immediately threaten a fireshot :-D
    Another nuance is our brave cops, now there is a situation, there is an army of 6 months and you are already a cop, with which I categorically disagree, they should be taken into account as well as other professions 4/6 years old, and if there is also a short-barrel wearing then they should be even more prepared, here about 2 months ago in the USA, a guy ran with a joystick from kynekt in the form of a pistol and got a bullet, I would have looked at you cowboys :-D Yes, and not so often right now and shoot, mostly custom-made, 70% + all for drunk.
    In general, I’m not having read about the armed population, but the point is the mentality, we still have to grow up to this and grow.
    1. mpa945
      mpa945 April 12 2014 13: 09
      +7
      It is unlikely that supporters of the permission of the short-barrel (for all, of course I can’t answer) mean selling to everyone without exception.
      At age 18 (according to law) all boys are adequate. Universal Military Duty Act. A year later become (after demobilization) affected in the rights?
      I can not find the logic.
      Or if we follow the thesis that all are "inadequate", then universal suffrage should also be abolished. For whom do we choose.
      I ask you not to evaluate how the call to recognize power as not legitimate.
      1. mongoose
        mongoose April 12 2014 14: 13
        0
        namely age qualification, medical follow-up and training are mandatory, as are liability insurance
    2. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali April 12 2014 13: 16
      +4
      Quote: CruorVult
      in the scoop there wasn’t a short-barrel of citizens and there was practically no crime

      First, not in the "scoop", but in the "USSR" or "Soviet Union". Have respect, if not for the state of the USSR and Russia, as its successor, then at least for the Russian language.
      Secondly, there is practically no correlation between the lack of civilian turnover of short-barreled weapons and the crime rate in the USSR. The low crime rate in the USSR is due to completely different factors.
      Quote: CruorVult
      Another nuance is our brave cops, now the situation, there is an army of 6 months and you are already a cop

      Year. In Russia, the term of military service in the army and military units is one year. And it was possible to become a "cop" (early-mid-90s, as I don’t know now) immediately after the KMB - for example, in a separate motorized police battalion, the rank and file of which were recruited with conscripts.
      Quote: CruorVult
      here, about 2 months ago in the USA, a guy ran with a joystick from kynnect in the form of a pistol and got a shot, I would have looked at you cowboys

      Well, if you Indians have a habit of putting a bolt on the orders of a policeman, and flapping wings with an object like a weapon, then you need to go there.
      Quote: CruorVult
      but this is a matter of mentality; we still have to grow up to this and grow.

      How does the mentality of Russians differ from the mentality of Americans or Moldavians or Finns?
      1. mongoose
        mongoose April 12 2014 14: 14
        -2
        well, we are "Jewish slaves" you did not know?
    3. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 14: 12
      -3
      there wasn’t such a separation in the scoop, and it wasn’t even the oligarchs, in the scoop the idler and the hard worker lived the same way, but don’t lie, the short barrel was a lesson and not a little, only then there was a tower for the murder, and it’s worth recalling the periodic revelry of banditry, in the Caucasus never stopped when
    4. Slavs
      Slavs April 13 2014 09: 40
      +3
      "cowboys", "no", "crimes", "this", "nuance", "categorically" .... A lot of mistakes ... Dear, if you want your opinion to be taken more seriously, work on your literacy. .. How old are you?
  • uicp
    uicp April 12 2014 12: 56
    -6
    The argument that the gopniks already have weapons, and that law-abiding citizens need it as an adequate response, has always surprised me. I personally have not heard about 100500 cases of using a short-barreled gop stop, auto disassembling, or drunken fights in taverns, but injuries are constantly used for these purposes, and now the question is: where do inadequate personalities get injuries in such quantities. From there, from where they will have short barrels during their legalization (stolen, lost, taken away and occasionally legally purchased), at the moment there are few combat pistols and their purchase will most likely result in a deadline, because the seller will be a cop. So gopoty and chock short-barrels will appear exactly at the moment they are legalized and they will begin to “get lost”, etc. in order to protect law-abiding citizens, it will be necessary to legalize something else, for example, military poisonous gases. Therefore, I propose not to conduct a consistent resolution of the entire nomenclature of army weapons, but to immediately give citizens a portable nuclear bomb, then the gopniks will think twice before squeezing the cell phone.
    Z.Y. I myself have three units of hunting weapons, including a rifled one, while I began to think about buying a rubber rein only after the citizens of our country began to actively use them as a weighty argument in various disputes, but have not bought it yet - expensive.
    1. mpa945
      mpa945 April 12 2014 13: 32
      +5
      The argument that the gopniks already have weapons, and that law-abiding citizens need it as an adequate response, has always surprised me.

      And the argument of the ban surprises me, for it acts only on law-abiding people.
      I personally have not heard about 100500 cases of using a short-barreled gop stop, auto-disassembly or drunken fights in taverns, but injuries are constantly used for these purposes,

      Yes, precisely because law-abiding people do not have this right, because they are law-abiding.
      So gopoty and chock short-barrels will appear exactly at the moment they are legalized and they will begin to “get lost”, etc.

      Everything is so good with them. Unlike law-abiding.

      I believe that it is necessary to change many provisions of laws that tighten illegal actions. In this case, the law should clearly prescribe the criteria for correctness.
      Tracing the use of legal weapons is much easier than illegal.
      Security officials have weapons. Did they destroy themselves? Or everyone around?
      There are rights, but there is also responsibility. But I do not accept the thesis about the total inadequacy of the population.
    2. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 14: 15
      0
      unlike you, I personally encountered this in 1996
    3. Baikal
      Baikal April 12 2014 18: 47
      -4
      Law-abiding citizens have a different stance.
      They definitely need to get into a shootout (!), Instead of sticking to the offender in the beard according to the old tradition and quietly get on the skis if the offender is significantly superior in strength.
      After all, they hurt honor, pride, human rights and all that ...
      Kindergarten, by golly.
      Avengers.
      1. Viktor.N.Aleksandrov.
        Viktor.N.Aleksandrov. April 13 2014 00: 30
        +3
        It is from this position that the courts proceed - "why did you use violence against the attacker when you could run away?" This is a slavish position, which is why all sorts of "sofa philosophers" have proliferated in our country, arguing about the dangers of legalizing short-stemmed.
  • stillrat
    stillrat April 12 2014 13: 02
    +4
    The article is delusional. The author tried to please both yours and ours, that is, supporters of the legalization of the short-barrel and opponents. Like any compromise, it is worthless. Now, in essence: a weapon (namely a weapon) of self-defense must meet the following requirements:
    1 Implement its function in a minimum time and with a minimum consumption of resources. (In simple words, "to bring down the scum from the first shot and on the spot" because the unfinished one can easily activate the suicide bomber's belt or, as an option, stab your daughter or wife with a fink.) partly meets this requirement, only a smooth barrel raises questions. Accuracy and accuracy raises questions. In other words, aiming a reptile at a blunt boss, you can miss and this mistake can cost you (you personally) dearly.
    2 To be as lightweight and compact as possible. Only in this case it will always be with you and will fulfill its main and only function. A healthy "fool" with a caliber of 15mm hardly meets these requirements.
    And the last armed people are the only guarantee of stability and prosperity of any state !!!
    PS An example of this is the event in Ukraine where a handful of m-kov put cancer and on the ears of the whole country. Horseradish Muzychko would be so funny there if he knew that he could run into an adequate answer at any time.
  • Krilion
    Krilion April 12 2014 13: 15
    +6
    Quote: anomalocaris
    The author of the article is not a sexy pervert. Just imagine a 20-caliber pandora in the form of a 5-charge revolver as a weapon of self-defense for constant wear ... Comrade smokes hard grass.



    before his eyes apparently stood such a picture:

    based on the meaning of the article - this is an ideal weapon for self-defense ...
  • Yutas
    Yutas April 12 2014 13: 31
    +2
    The views on self-defense differ somehow. Well this is not fighting - bring down immediately tightly. Why do you think the police do not use weapons (short guns) with a caliber of less than 9mm? Because the smaller one is ineffective - you plant a half-clip, and the attacker stabs you with a knife or shoots at you, and only then dies. It is precisely the large caliber that provides the STOPPING action - when you get a damn, I assure you, there will not be any resistance.
  • Cruorvult
    Cruorvult April 12 2014 13: 36
    -10%
    Lol, speaking of the fact that there were fewer crimes, I had in mind the short-barreled rifled weapon committed with the help of which I actually wrote above.
    I don’t know who you are holding here for the Indians, kid boy, ran around on the street with a joystick and caught a bullet.
    The mentality of all is different, it is not in vain that there is an atky expression as a mentality, for if it were the same for everyone, then there would be no concept. If in Isarel people live like in war, they serve 100%, then their attitude to weapons is completely different. In the United States, far from all states it is possible to walk with a gun, especially since the statistics of 15 thousand killed speaks for itself.
    About the 90s, there generally wasn’t enough to become an army policeman, for example, they did something like that, arranged their offspring, who they couldn’t get anywhere but didn’t want to join the army, in the traffic police.

    And I’m writing a scoop without mockery, I was satisfied with the attitude of the authorities towards the arming of the population at that time.
    1. mongoose
      mongoose April 12 2014 13: 43
      +6
      only usually killed in states in "weapon-free zones"
    2. mpa945
      mpa945 April 12 2014 13: 44
      +8
      How is the mentality of Moldavan different from ours?
      Note that I am not writing that it is worse. But why did it lead to positive shifts in them?
      Are we really worse?
  • shibi
    shibi April 12 2014 14: 22
    -3
    Quote: homosum20
    Only my personal experience is nothing more. Applicable individually.
    I have been wearing wasp-4-pb for about 4 years. I did not participate in road showdowns, largely because of a calm attitude, lack of fear for them. Inadequate behavior legitimizes the fear of being humiliated, the fear of someone else's aggression, the feeling of one’s own weakness and defenselessness. Someone goes and engages in manual-machinery, turning himself into a weapon. I acted easier and more economically (in time) - I bought a citizen. weapons.
    Common sense is nothing more.
    But it is necessary to ban road showdowns. Weapons are not fun. A ban on weapons does not mean a lack of weapons. The energy of a bat is much higher than the energy of a bullet from an injury.

    You haven't gotten into a showdown yet.
    The presence of a weapon implies its use.
    A demonstration of a weapon without its use involves opposition.
    The fly was drunk just in case.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Baikal
      Baikal April 12 2014 18: 20
      -3
      This is one of those points that supporters stubbornly refuse to understand. Although some have already "by force" gathered to take the right to wear laughing
  • mpa945
    mpa945 April 12 2014 14: 39
    +7
    Dear colleagues!
    A fairly rare phenomenon on Topwar is a similar division. And you know what caught my eye? Many lead the discussion quite incorrectly.
    I hate this, because I think that arguments should be evaluated, not opponents. I consider the transition to personalities unacceptable. I urge you to argue, but not to hang tags on each other. Even if the arguments are over.
    Good luck to everyone.
    1. Orang
      Orang April 12 2014 15: 24
      +1
      Support.
  • rces
    rces April 12 2014 15: 54
    +6
    The article is wonderful, the author has brilliantly described the performance characteristics of modern combat pistols and their capabilities, but it seems that he does not understand what he is writing about. Either he wants to come up with civilian weapons or not allow military weapons for use by citizens - this is what an article a gimmick - like let's think about civilian weapons, but just not allow military weapons for now. There is only one question, whether to resolve or not. The bandits will not look into your barrel and count the number of rifling there - either you use a weapon in a situation that seems to you to be life-threatening and you are legally responsible for the consequences of its use, or you use civilian weapons without fatal consequences and after that you are simply killed ... In the United States, there is a wonderful monument to the designer of weapons Colt, where it is written something like this that this pistol equalized all citizens in rights and created a true democracy. If our wonderful government is not able to protect its citizens, let the cops and bandits and just citizens finally be equal in rights. So that next time the police think about how to communicate with citizens so that they are not killed, as well as what will happen if they just pull out a pistol and point it at citizens without a legitimate motive. In a word, the reasoning of the author of the article about combat or not about combat weapons as the reasoning of an amateur "a weapon is created for murder or for intimidation." If the government is afraid of its citizens, for which there is currently every reason, then such articles will appear, but other zombie tricks will appear, only in order not to pass a law and not allow citizens to carry and use military weapons.
    1. Shallow
      Shallow April 14 2014 18: 45
      +1
      Article on LEGALIZATION of war trunks. For traumatic are already LEGALIZED! But the fighting - no. And just want to LEGALIZE them!

      You don’t understand Russian?
  • Per se.
    Per se. April 12 2014 16: 18
    +2
    The length of the barrel does not matter
    It doesn't matter what you kill, any item can become a weapon. "Short-barreled" or "long-barreled" is not the problem. Many have rifled carbines with optics and multiple-shot shotguns at home, have compact traumatic pistols, and have the right to self-defense. What is not, but there is no right to replace the judge and the executioner, personally deciding on the basis of the "law" who can be taken and shot. Not a weapon is dangerous, a substitution of the concepts of self-defense and lynching is dangerous. The supporters of the legalization of military weapons, or rather the supporters of the "license to kill", stubbornly refuse to understand this. And even though there is a stake on your head, there is no end to the verbiage about good and evil, scoundrels and heroes, talkative about equality and a "good word" with a pistol. You cannot forbid to kill, you cannot force to be adequate in defense, but you can forbid to have the right to legalized murder, namely legalized, and not accidental, forced. This is the main thing. Buy at least a large-caliber machine gun, have the right to self-defense, but do not have the right to the legal death penalty for others. Yes, the law should not punish those who defended the lives of their loved ones, but the same law should not allow death sentences to be passed on a personal understanding of the degree of threat, without trial and investigation. How to reduce crime, raise culture, how to interpret self-defense fairly and correctly — that's what is important, not how long the barrel is.
    1. Rakti-kali
      Rakti-kali April 12 2014 16: 54
      +6
      Quote: Per se.
      What is not, but there is no right to replace the judge and the executioner, personally deciding, on the basis of the "law", who can be taken and shot. Not a weapon is dangerous, a substitution of the concepts of self-defense and lynching is dangerous. The supporters of the legalization of military weapons, or, more precisely, the supporters of the "license to kill", stubbornly refuse to understand this.

      Do not substitute concepts. Proponents of legalization are not at all pimply young men entering puberty and dreaming only of self-assertion by means of weapons. Permission of civil turnover of CSR does not give a "license to kill" - there is a Criminal Code to decide the legality of using CSR, there is a decision of the PVS, there is a court. CSR itself only makes it possible with a high probability to successfully repel a surprise attack or even prevent it (as the statistics show in the US states where the carrying of weapons is allowed, the number of violent crimes is lower than in the states where the carrying of weapons is prohibited and continues to decline). At the same time, CSR turnover should be strictly regulated, and citizens wishing to receive permission to wear CSR must undergo rigorous testing and high-quality training.
      As for the condom, they should be banned. Absolutely. Absolutely. For guaranteed protection with their help (in accordance with the rules) is impossible, but to kill - like two fingers "on the asphalt".
      1. Per se.
        Per se. April 12 2014 18: 29
        +1
        Quote: Rakti-Kali
        CSR itself only gives an opportunity with high probability to successfully repel a surprise attack or even prevent it
        It is very difficult, if not impossible, to repel a surprise attack. As for the crafty statistics in the United States, as far as it can be believed, let the experts argue, especially, there are examples in countries where weapons are prohibited. Let's decide against whom this very CSR will be effective, against feral dogs, homeless people, juvenile punks with sticks or bandits armed with knives and the same pistols, terrorists with machine guns? People who are afraid to reprimand rude youngsters without a pistol will continue to be afraid with a pistol, they will always need a privilege to safety (only they should have a pistol in the whole world). In general, the possession of a pistol is not a semblance of a "nuclear shield" for the state, it is a legal dead end, it is impossible to reduce security in society by increasing the risks of using weapons. You are talking about control and verification, well, we cannot put things in order with road accidents (with all control), we cannot put things in order with injuries, but with military weapons everything will fall off from space ... Finally, how to understand "guaranteed protection "? Combat weapons (as opposed to hunting and sporting weapons) have only one purpose - the destruction of the enemy. If one demonstration was enough, they would buy toy dummies, that is, one type of weapon is not enough, as well as not enough noise or traumatic effect. What remains, shoot first on the spot? Maybe the problem is different, and it is solved not by arming society, by increasing tension in it, but by disarming criminals, preventing crime and delinquency itself? Otherwise, the Wild West would be the standard of calmness and culture.
        1. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali April 12 2014 22: 09
          +3
          Quote: Per se.
          It is very difficult, if not impossible, to repulse a surprise attack.

          Here are the links to the videos found on the tube for the query "robbery shootout caught on tape":
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=910ErU69QfE
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkkoryfF8XU
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVN3nqlIIzo
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRG5fj1di9k
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnL05eLaTjQ
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9ZEbyDee8A
          You can immediately see that the people on the video who decided to resist the ghouls are at least special forces with at least 10 years of experience, waiting for the enemy’s attacks any minute ... In other words, you are talking nonsense.
          But what happens when unarmed victims fulfill all the requirements of a robber - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-xrnT2e0xM
  • Cruorvult
    Cruorvult April 12 2014 16: 35
    0
    He studied at the ECB from 02 to 04 years, 2 times, ran up, once walked home along Lunacharsky towards Lenin, came up behind, took his elbows as he was warming, 5 people, 2 times walked from the megadrome 3 hours at 5-6 in the morning, on Posadskaya St. I met a guy, in Mestre he asked me to smoke, said I don’t smoke, got a sucker, I see from the corner of my eye on the other side the second kid, 2 meters tall, will overshoot, okay, I almost reached the yard. In both cases, we didn’t help the gun at all, but in the first case we would have squeezed it out. The problem is not the availability of weapons, the problem of the attitude to the problems of another person, now there is a tendency that people are indifferent. For example, a mother took a heart out of a classmate in the center of the city, she fell and lay in the winter for 2 hours, no one came up - she died. I don’t understand what will change from the availability of a gun in your pocket, they won’t beat, they will shoot, they won’t fit. My opinion is that some people lack something to feel like a real man, and they think it's a gun.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. fif21
      fif21 April 13 2014 15: 02
      +1
      Quote: CruorVult
      I don’t understand what will change from the availability of a gun in your pocket, they won’t beat, they will shoot, they won’t fit. My opinion is that some people lack something to feel like a real man, and they think it's a gun.
      You did not have a real danger of your life, you can escape from the gopniks! And no one forces you to buy weapons! But how to protect yourself to people who, due to life circumstances, have serious enemies?
      1. Keeper
        Keeper April 13 2014 16: 46
        0
        And really our valiant security bodies must protect! And do not be afraid to contact them! Checked!
    3. taksist
      taksist April 13 2014 23: 39
      +1
      If these "guys" could only assume that you have something to defend yourself with in your pocket, they would not come up to you.
      1. Shallow
        Shallow April 14 2014 18: 41
        -1
        Here again, someone must assume something ... Well, tads and wars would not exist on Earth. because the soldiers can assume that they will be killed ... But no. Wars continue. And your weapon doesn't affect anything ...
    4. Free Island
      Free Island April 14 2014 01: 38
      0
      here, on the account of that - he helped, did not help ... I kind of went on a comrade to the other end of the city in a stormy youth, at night .. we were drunk in a zyuza))) celebrated the day of some kind of troops)))) so here we went into the store, took another vial .... I was delayed for some reason and my friend went out into the street .. I go out, I see four gopniks surround him and they kick him in his ears, scream, wave their hands, (we have a town Gopnik, everyone lives on the notions, fingers fan snot bubbles :))) Well, I see, my friend doesn’t take it out, he flew up and began to mutuate everyone who got his arm, but then I hear a ringing behind me, I turn around there is a gopnik, the vodka spills out from the head with vodka in the hand is a knife and next to my wife (she was accompanying a friend with us :)) with fragments from the bottle .... this is what I need - the gopnik’s knife was mine, fell out of his pocket and if it weren’t for his wife he would have me this knife in the back would put it ... after that I never carry knives with me. That's the gun - whether it will help you or shoot at you ...