M.Butina: "The number of supporters of the legalization of short-barreled weapons in Russia has tripled"

314
M.Butina: "The number of supporters of the legalization of short-barreled weapons in Russia has tripled"


Growing support in the ruling circles

The issue of legalizing the sale and carrying of pistols and revolvers as weapons Self-defense causes heated debate in our society.

There are quite a few opponents of this idea, but supporters, having united their efforts within the framework of the organization “Right to Arms”, have recently more often declared themselves as an influential force capable of changing public opinion in their favor.

In view of the importance of the issue, we decided to directly contact Maria Butina, Chairman of the Board of Rights of the Weapon, and ask her a few questions.

- What is the attitude of society in the idea of ​​allowing citizens to defend themselves with the help of short-barreled firearms?

- The dynamics of public opinion is visible in the sociological studies of VTsIOM and the Levada Center, which have been published several times. If three years ago the number of supporters of expanding the rights of citizens to weapons (short-barreled rifled firearms) was at the level of 14%, now it is already 44%.

Increased and the proportion of fluctuating. These people at some point will make a decision for themselves after listening to the arguments for and against. But the thing is that it is difficult to bring negative arguments here, because now citizens have a weapon with a capacity of more than 4 thousand joules. What then to say about a gun with a capacity of 350-500 joules?

Citizens of Russia on legal grounds with appropriate documents and no contraindications and convictions have the right to purchase weapons. People who know about this usually do not object to expanding the list of available weapons, since the citizen has proved his law-abiding. This dependence was also shown by the VTsIOM survey conducted in the summer of 2014 of the year.

- Does the ruling circles of our country change their attitude towards the idea of ​​liberalizing the law on weapons?

- Back in 2012, First Vice-Speaker of the Federation Council Alexander Torshin presented an expert report on the need to legalize short-barreled rifled firearms. This did not go unnoticed, and the reaction of the Presidential Administration followed. If earlier she considered the question to be irrelevant in principle, now it was said that this question, though not the most urgent, but it can be subsequently considered. This is a good move! At the same time, Alexander Torshin remains in solid positions.

In addition, in the LDPR earlier, individual deputies supported the liberalization of the law on weapons, and now there is support at the fractional level as a whole. By the way, the deputy from the Liberal Democratic Party Ivan Khudyakov introduced the appropriate amendments to the State Duma.

It must be said that the position of the elect of the people depends on the position of the public. And here it should be noted that the “Russian Public Initiative portal” collected 100 thousands of signatures in support of the initiative “my home is my fortress”. It provides for the possibility of the necessary defense of a citizen within his home in the event of an invasion. This initiative was supported by the Federal Working Group under the Government of the Russian Federation.

By the way, Sergey Makarchenko, coordinator of the movement “Right to Arms”, persuaded the Pskov parliament to introduce a legislative initiative “my home is my fortress” to the State Duma, and it is in the queue for consideration.

- It has been repeatedly noted that the concept of “necessary defense” allows for a free interpretation, which is why people who defend themselves may end up behind bars. What has been done to remedy the situation?

- Yes, our legislation is not perfect enough to justify every person who finds himself in a situation of necessary defense. Nevertheless, high-profile cases related to acquittals of the court change the attitude of the judges towards self-defense, although our right is not a precedent. We are moving from the particular to the general, and there are already precedents when, thanks to public response, media participation, demonstrations, we managed to achieve acquittals for Evgeny Kostrykin and Alexander Telesov.

Yes, the situation with self-defense is bad, but not to the extent that it is positioned. Every year, more than 600 cases of legal self-defense with traumatic weapons occur in Moscow and the Moscow Region. Notice that these are statistics only for traumatic weapons, and there have already been 600 cases. That is, people protect themselves, and the law justifies them, but much depends on the legal culture. A person should clearly realize how to behave in a situation of self-defense, how to testify, how not to harm himself.

If you are sure that you are trying to be imprisoned, and you are not to blame, then from the very first days contact us, we have a telephone toll-free hotline. We help with advice and lawyers, but we must contact us right away. If time is missed, then we already had examples when nothing could be done.
314 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. master 84
    -22
    16 September 2014 21: 56
    this was just not enough, first you need to establish control and they will shoot how much in vain the armor will be in price
    1. -3
      16 September 2014 22: 00
      I am definitely against ..! Again, the American experience is being imposed on us! already periodically hammered into the head .. Guess why and for what?
      1. -14
        16 September 2014 22: 16
        Also categorically against it, then it remains only to throw firewood on national soil and away we go, plus weapons will begin to fall into the hands of children.
        1. +3
          17 September 2014 13: 16
          a hunting shotgun can get to children (and it does) .....
          there are rules for storing weapons and ammunition. safes and weapons cabinets are quite affordable. Yes, and district police officers are required to regularly monitor.
        2. 0
          18 September 2014 12: 21
          There are no nationalities now! There are infidels and those that cut off their heads!
        3. macarque
          +2
          19 September 2014 12: 39
          I want to note that for 25 years now, it is not a problem to buy ANY "left" barrel. they do not cost prohibitive money, so it is better and safer to LEGALLY sell weapons (shot and "clean weapons" with a known history, I want to note) than to have a lot of criminal weapons of different origins, from army models, to kopanina of all types and conditions, and remade trauma and gas workers. This is a much lesser evil. By the way, in interethnic conflicts, they often take up knives and a hunting smoothbore that is not identified at all. By the way, the people do not get the rifle from the safes, they do not do it corny because there is nothing to identify it. then the brains are working if everyone understands it.
      2. +1
        16 September 2014 22: 25
        Quote: MIKHAN
        I am definitely against ..! Again, the American experience is being imposed on us! already periodically hammered into the head .. Guess why and for what?


        Are you hinting at Ferguson? wink
      3. Krasnoarmeec
        +3
        16 September 2014 22: 34
        Quote: MIKHAN
        I am definitely against ..! Again, the American experience is being imposed on us! already periodically hammered into the head .. Guess why and for what?


        American experience?!?!? Has anyone ever heard that some kind of righteous "mattress" prevented a mass execution, say, at school or somewhere else? Rhetorical question ...
        My opinion is trite- Do not shoot the weapon that is not!
        Although I would like to have, but chur, chur, chur No.
        And for shoots and saigas on banks is enough.
        1. BYV
          +63
          16 September 2014 23: 21
          Have you often heard about crimes committed with the help of legal, SHOTED weapons? As for me, I am for the legalization of the short-barrel, but categorically against traumatism. A person subconsciously does not perceive trauma as a weapon, so he uses it without hesitation. In addition, shooting injuries is problematic. And a man who decides to commit a crime will get a firearm without any problems. Thus, a law-abiding citizen finds himself in a deliberately losing situation.
          1. +18
            17 September 2014 01: 50
            I agree with you both on the first point and on the second - somewhere I saw statistics or a forecast about a firearm - it seems like it was written that by the first count the number of excesses of self-defense and unfortunate incidents, anyway this would not exceed the digits unambiguous with numbers in accidents, but I can and confused longoooo it was whatthat with kasaymo bandyuganov, yes this is our whole history, the government has deprived ordinary people of the means of self-defense, and gangs and darling police armed themselves to the maximum
          2. +18
            17 September 2014 05: 58
            I completely agree that anyone who needs a weapon for a crime will still find it or make a lot of options, but respectable citizens are defenseless in this regard, because at the moment, a criminal who takes out a weapon deals with almost 100% certainty of impunity. And knowing that the object of the attack may also have a chance to respond, believe me, it will cool many lovers to profit from someone else's good. Another question is the degree of control and training of weapons users, my opinion should be organized courses of about the same type as training on rights and even more strictly, and after that we will allow checking knowledge and skills once a year or something like that.
            1. +6
              17 September 2014 06: 53
              To begin with, a person who has bought a "firearm" for self-defense should be taught seriously to use a weapon! Not everyone served, not everyone remembers! A weapon in inept hands will only harm the owner of it! And yet - a serious measure of responsibility for storage, use, up to serious terms of imprisonment!
              1. +12
                17 September 2014 07: 35
                Did you get a hunter? Teach. And on the firearm course and possession and laws will be. And conscious citizens (now not protected !!!) we have a lot more gopoty (who already have weapons !!!). Nothing bad will happen with the permission of the weapon. And the gopot will calm down. Will be afraid. Check the weapons in bulk. Conclusion for those who do not have permission. And time will pass - the people will become more protected. It will become.
                1. +7
                  17 September 2014 16: 44
                  In Moscow, a group (gang) of Moldovans was once detained - on the streets, passers-by were wringing out mobile phones. To the question of the cops - "What, you couldn't do the same at your place, they came to Moscow," they answered, "We can grab a bullet for that, but here - calmly." Something like this...
                  1. 0
                    19 September 2014 00: 12
                    and here you can get a knife under the ribs, you are my mother ....
                2. +2
                  19 September 2014 17: 51
                  The correct formulation of the question. And then they all argue about property, theft. Here the main question is the question of protecting honor and dignity. From ancient times there was a rule - if you are a free person, then you have a weapon and no one has the right to insult you. If you are a slave, you are nobody.
              2. 0
                19 September 2014 15: 13
                absolutely agree! and you don’t need to look for examples - the case at a school in Moscow is indicative, and even very! crying
            2. 0
              19 September 2014 00: 10
              I agree, and even the gangsters will show off their gangs when they realize that they are now on equal terms with everyone.
            3. 0
              19 September 2014 15: 11
              in - in! and in the head of such a check put Vasya Pupkin (or anyone else), but only having such a level of knowledge, and we will get the maximum problems. In my opinion, such things must be resolved in the same way as in the whole world: shit-answer, regardless of persons and positions. it’s still not clear to me: why are boys 18 years old trusted in weapons, and not only small arms, but they who don’t trust us who have served in the army and have more than a dozen years? our elects in the State Duma refer to the mentality, and how does the mentality in Molodovo differ from ours? so there after allowing permission to wear a short barrel and casts legislation in accordance with the vital necessity, the level of street serious crimes fell three times ... request and what arguments still need? look at the statistics: about 70% of murders on household grounds with kitchen knives take place in Russia, so what? let's forbid knives, as in medieval Japan, one knife with a blunt end and a chain in the middle of the village? !!! and why do the same deputies HAVE the same short barrel, but I can’t? What, I did not go out with a snout? fool
          3. +5
            17 September 2014 06: 35
            Absolutely right. I support 100%. Only the circle of legally possessing weapons should have serious limitations.
          4. +2
            17 September 2014 12: 23
            I completely agree, and the example of the United States shows that weapons are used only in those states where the carrying of weapons is prohibited.
          5. +4
            17 September 2014 15: 48
            Quote: BYV
            Have you often heard about crimes committed with the help of legal, SHOTED weapons? As for me, I am for the legalization of the short-barrel, but categorically against traumatism. A person subconsciously does not perceive trauma as a weapon, so he uses it without hesitation. In addition, shooting injuries is problematic. And a man who decides to commit a crime will get a firearm without any problems. Thus, a law-abiding citizen finds himself in a deliberately losing situation.
        2. +29
          16 September 2014 23: 21
          Quote: Krasnoarmeec

          American experience?!?!? Has anyone ever heard that some kind of righteous "mattress" prevented a mass execution, say, at school or somewhere else? Rhetorical question ...
          My opinion is trite- Do not shoot the weapon that is not!
          Although I would like to have, but chur, chur, chur No.
          And for shoots and saigas on banks is enough.


          So one manager in Moscow from "Saiga" people shot.
          Ban is not an option. In most cases, kill with table knives and axes.
          permission for hunting weapons can be obtained, even for smooth, even for rifled. You can get permission for injury.
          And with the traumatic pistols they shot the people - do not worry about mom. At the same time, when there was a discussion about permission to sell such weapons to private individuals, some experts suggested instead of traumatic permission to sell civilian rifled weapons.
          This opinion was motivated by the fact that a traumatic pistol is almost an ideal weapon for killing. Judge for yourself, there are no bulletproof magazines, because of the inability to identify a rubber bullet. Identification is more difficult with a sleeve. but quite possible.
          In addition, a person who has an injury uses the barrel without hesitation, like "What will I do to him, well, I'll leave a bruise", although the ballistics of a shot from this type of self-defense weapon is not predictable.

          Now consider a rifled short barrel.
          Tell me which one will shoot from a registered weapon if it is shot and the arrow is immediately found?
          Now about the permission for this type of weapon.
          In my understanding, such permission can only be obtained by a competent person who has served in the Armed Forces of Russia after receiving all documents confirming his mental health. Permission is given only for storage without the right to carry it (with the exception of cases when the weapon is transported in a sky-ready condition, for example, in a shooting gallery). A separate license must be issued for the right to bear arms, and a request for the issuance of such a license must be motivated.
          Now about the inquiries. A person who issued a certificate to an unhealthy or previously convicted (with an unexpunged criminal record, with the exception of particularly serious crimes), a citizen should be sentenced to a term that is provided for the intentional murder of two or more persons.
          1. +4
            17 September 2014 06: 41
            Quote: DV69

            Now about the inquiries. A person who issued a certificate to an unhealthy or previously convicted (with an unexpunged criminal record, with the exception of particularly serious crimes), a citizen should be sentenced to a term that is provided for the intentional murder of two or more persons.

            You will find a lot of convicted doctors issuing various certificates for bribes. Any bribe doctor who issued a fake certificate will say that when he issued it, the client was sane, and the medical community will confirm this. So do not be offended if you arrive 9 grams from a citizen with a certificate, just because he did not like you.
            1. +2
              17 September 2014 11: 07
              Quote: Polar

              You will find a lot of convicted doctors issuing various certificates for bribes. Any bribe doctor who issued a fake certificate will say that when he issued it, the client was sane, and the medical community will confirm this. So do not be offended if you arrive 9 grams from a citizen with a certificate, just because he did not like you.


              It is necessary that the punishment be such that the bribe for the certificate does not compensate him, then they will not take it.
          2. 0
            19 September 2014 00: 14
            Well, yes, the manager shot the obviously unarmed people, but they would have been armed, the stop crane would have worked in his brain right away.
          3. macarque
            0
            19 September 2014 12: 45
            Neither add nor subtract the full and specific alignment "+" you
          4. 0
            20 September 2014 21: 49
            Quote: DV69
            In my understanding, such permission can only be obtained by a competent person who has served in the Armed Forces of Russia after receiving all documents confirming his mental health.

            among other things, he (the person) must pass five years with a smooth-bore and the same amount with a groove, and only then get permission for a pistol or revolver ... IMHO
        3. +8
          17 September 2014 07: 30
          In the United States, they shoot at school for the reason that carrying weapons is prohibited there. And they don’t shoot on the streets - because anyone can pull out the barrel in return and shoot you back. Criminals already have weapons. But there are no citizens. And they cannot defend themselves. I am definitely for it. If a minor is .... he is quietly taking a bag, a phone, a hat from a mother with a child, then with the adoption of the law she will simply shoot him in the leg and she will be right. I have a weapon. Never applied. But I feel at least a little protected.
        4. 0
          17 September 2014 23: 39
          Quote: Krasnoarmeec
          And for shoots and saigas on banks is enough.

          For shoots on banks and pneumatics for the eyes is enough.
        5. 0
          17 September 2014 23: 39
          Quote: Krasnoarmeec
          And for shoots and saigas on banks is enough.

          For shoots on banks and pneumatics for the eyes is enough.
      4. +24
        17 September 2014 03: 24
        Again, the American experience is being imposed on us!
        In my opinion, this is rather a good old pre-revolutionary experience, when any citizen of the Russian Empire could buy firearms for himself in any shop and even carry them with him. And somehow nothing - the problem of the shootings was not there. The only thing is that young idiots quite often fired from unhappy love. The present, by all indications, is no longer threatened, and an errant official has hardly shot himself from shame.
      5. Strezhevsky
        -1
        17 September 2014 04: 35
        Quote: MIKHAN
        I am definitely against ..! Again, the American experience is being imposed on us! already periodically hammered into the head .. Guess why and for what?

        Do we really need to resell our Kalash at a triple price?
        Weapon lobbies from behind the hill, already askomin stuffed!
      6. +4
        17 September 2014 07: 08
        In vain you think so) when you have weapons in your hands, those around you become an order of politeness and friendliness)))))))
      7. +1
        18 September 2014 12: 19
        I'm for it! Because the next Muslim brothers will come and begin to cut again and you will wallow with the cut off head! Although I have trunks, there are enough knives with a safe, but the trunk on my pocket gives me a chance!
      8. vvdmitriyvv
        0
        18 September 2014 15: 06
        Do not whistle! where does the United States ??? weapons are allowed in the US because of the "mobilized society" - read their constitution! we have a different picture! in our country, bandits and oligarchs and so calmly acquire weapons, and not registered! but ordinary people have no access to it at all! if this law is released, any bandit will think before running into someone, because this someone can easily be armed! Several years ago I witnessed a case when a jeep blocked the road from there a crowd of youngsters spilled out, one of them had a pistol in his hand. They pulled the girl out of the stopped car and started beating her, not paying any attention to the police "pill" standing next to them, let alone passers-by ... The cops were not timid - they worked professionally, it was dear to see! what do you think - if there was a chance that the girl was armed, would they do that? in Russia, as it was preserved in the Caucasus, there was always a weapon in the house! - this is the norm! now, of course, they are afraid to give people weapons - suddenly the oligarchs will be shot! as was the case with us - a plumber shot his employer after he did not pay him money for several months ... unlike the pro-oligarchic authorities, I personally am on the side of that locksmith!
      9. lankrus
        0
        18 September 2014 19: 33
        Quote: MIKHAN
        I am definitely against ..! Again, the American experience is being imposed on us! already periodically hammered into the head .. Guess why and for what?


        It's funny Everyone nods at the American experience, no one even bothers to just look at the statistics.
        In 2012, there were 10000 murders per 4,2 inhabitants in America, and 9,3 in Russia.
        Compare the numbers and understand the benefits of legalizing weapons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D1%81%D1%82%
        D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD_%D0%BF%D0%BE_%D1%83%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BD%D1%8E_%D1%83%D0%BC
        %D1%8B%D1%88%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85_%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%
        D1% 82% D0% B2

        Why is that. Because they no longer get into your house, they’re afraid of running into a bullet.
        You will not be robbed in a dark alley, etc. And if this happens, then you have a guarantee that you will protect your family, yourself, and even your country from all kinds of radishes.
        The number of police does not affect statistics, because they only protect themselves, and for a change, they record crimes.
    2. 0
      16 September 2014 22: 13
      In general, the head is needed in order to think and think comprehensively!

      Our society in its mentality, consciousness, upbringing has not matured to any weapon! We are essentially a society of kindness, but with a sudden manifestation of aggression! So if you conduct a survey in all the colonies and prisons in Russia, it is quite possible that you will get a result of 60 percent, no more! And this is because, as the majority answers, until it begins to think, and literally after some time, this percentage begins to fall!
      America is a good example of the full legalization of weapons - constant massacres!

      No need to lobby manufacturers and sellers of death; lobby better for teachers and sports trainers for youth, create art, literary, craft schools ...
      I understand that to love goodness is much harder and less profitable!
      But try it, you might like it and you will be remembered by people who did not die at the hands of the Durobes, whom you put into your hands a gun!
      1. +24
        16 September 2014 22: 24
        And here I am against wearing, but definitely for storage. A person must have a legal opportunity to defend his house with weapons in his hands. By the way, do you know how much a machine gun costs in St. Petersburg? Recently, for just 1500 euros, I was offered a new PC in oil. So, whoever needs it and without permission will buy it, and even cheaper than in the store, and a law-abiding person with a banal smooth-bore has inhuman hemorrhage.
        A very competent option in Switzerland: he served in the army, get a barrel for home storage, on a green whistle to mobilize, come in an ekip and with weapons to the collection point.
        1. +4
          16 September 2014 22: 31
          Man is different for a man, and the presence of a weapon significantly changes the consciousness of an adult, not even a mature person in a certain situation ... Not that mankind has not grown to arms, no! Let’s think how to save mankind from the desire to have a weapon — that’s exactly what will be the evolution of mankind! And not what we see now, as if more sophisticated and effective to kill your own kind!
          1. 0
            16 September 2014 22: 40
            In general, I am against the legalization of weapons. It was still not enough that any scum would indulge in trunks, especially pistols - originally created for hidden wear. But on the other hand, I do not see anything reprehensible in the defense of my home with a firearm. After all, when your life and the lives of your loved ones are in danger - then you simply must destroy the aggressors. Because in the opposite situation, they will kill you and your relatives, easily and freely.
            1. +14
              16 September 2014 23: 03
              Quote: Basarev
              After all, when your life and the lives of your loved ones are in danger - then you simply must destroy the aggressors. Because in the opposite situation, they will kill you and your relatives, easily and freely.
            2. -5
              17 September 2014 02: 13
              A hunting rifle is enough to protect your home. The current legislation allows this to be done. And no gun is needed. Permission is needed only to traders because it is a lot of money and they do not care that mortality from weapons will increase many times. When it smells of money, conscience falls asleep.
              1. +11
                17 September 2014 03: 05
                enough hunting rifle? when bandits burst into your apartment I would like to see how you manage to run into the bedroom, open the safe, get this meter-long dudorg, charge the cartridge, cock the trigger!
                1. +1
                  17 September 2014 06: 36
                  Quote: bashmak
                  when bandits burst into your apartment I would like to see
                  Yes, fullness! I suppose you would go to the toilet at home with a pistol? If they cannot put things in order with injuries, they did not protect anyone, on the contrary, it was not the bandits that became more dangerous, but these most ordinary citizens with a pistol. They can't put things in order with an accident, but give the car also a combat barrel in the glove compartment ... Maybe this demagogy about kitchen knives, pre-revolutionary Russia, "slaves" and "equality" according to Sam Colt will be enough? Madame Butina is itching to do everything, she was already accused of smuggling the interests of the arms lobby, first of all, foreign, again old songs about the "main thing" began. It is not the population's weapons that are dangerous, it is already the sea, the legalization of lynching is dangerous, without trial and investigation. You even have a count on your head, give me a gun to play superman, and "supermen" in real life, do it when they wet them and take away their own weapons.
                2. 0
                  19 September 2014 15: 35
                  and by the way: according to the Law on the possession of hunting weapons: ... weapons must be stored in a SAFE CLOSED to the KEY, in the DISASSEMBLED CONDITION, SEPARATELY from the AMMUNITION, WHICH SHOULD BE CLOSED IN THE HOTEL BOX ... interesting, and this is all the time open, assemble the barrel and charge? not so long ago one aunt in the Sverdlovsk region was not planted just because the media intervened and made a fuss, and how much nerves and money are needed to prove that you are not a camel?
          2. +9
            16 September 2014 22: 52
            Quote: Finches
            Man is different for a man, and the presence of a weapon significantly changes the consciousness of an adult, not even a mature person in a certain situation ... Not that mankind has not grown to arms, no! Let’s think how to save mankind from the desire to have a weapon — that’s exactly what will be the evolution of mankind! And not what we see now, as if more sophisticated and effective to kill your own kind!

            This is already pure Marxism - the Leninism of the Brezhnev era. A person needs to be saved not from craving for weapons, but from causing trouble to another person. And the only way is to realize this person’s inevitability of punishment. Everything else is an ideology that gives, at best, a temporary result. It is impossible to re-educate the beast, it can only be trained.
            1. 0
              16 September 2014 23: 28
              When, God forbid, shoot your child at school, some kind of crazy guy who declared exactly the same goals at the beginning as you did! I think that you will change your attitude!
              And yet, I would not have attacked Marxism-Leninism so much - look at the statistics of murders in the USSR for any year and compare with the statistics of murders in Russia - it is clear that even without the legalization of weapons, Russia has stepped far in increasing corpses and is boldly moving along the path of "democratic "society only forward!
              1. +3
                17 September 2014 06: 52
                Quote: Finches
                look at the statistics of murders in the USSR for any year and compare with the statistics of murders in Russia

                Where do you remember the true statistics in our good USSR? Yes, and about today's Russia, I have big doubts! Although the order, or maybe self-awareness was more! Only here are hunting rifles, in the USSR they were stored more on the wall, well, on the last man in the sofa! Now, try without a safe! And the post-war years of the Second World War, the smooth-bore sold freely, the children behind them (even minors), walked through the city into the woods, traveled by public transport! The award was in bulk! And then it happened that they shot and dashing 90 fire, and now they are scorching! But who is shooting? My father, at the age of 14, personally accustomed me to arms and was not afraid to give, he taught to automatism! how to behave when hunting. And I teach mine, so they don’t have any fashion with weapons to play, or grab when not long after! I think the point is how to present this weapon to a person and teach him how to deal with it! And not 2 weeks to learn, at some courses, but since childhood!
              2. 0
                17 September 2014 12: 13
                Quote: Finches
                When, God forbid, shoot your child at school, some kind of crazy guy who declared exactly the same goals at the beginning as you did! I think that you will change your attitude!
                And yet, I would not have attacked Marxism-Leninism so much - look at the statistics of murders in the USSR for any year and compare with the statistics of murders in Russia - it is clear that even without the legalization of weapons, Russia has stepped far in increasing corpses and is boldly moving along the path of "democratic "society only forward!

                You obviously did not understand me wink I am against the public carrying of any weapon, including knives, axes and baseball bats. And I did not attack Marxism-Leninism, but attempts to re-educate a person through ideology. In the USSR, low crime was not because everyone was kind, but because the police worked less normally. And now it’s not necessary to develop self-defense (the Colt law is good in underdeveloped territories, it is simply dangerous in the city), and law enforcement agencies should be brought to a normal state.
                At the same time, having a house trunk in a safe and under a license is very useful for a number of reasons.
          3. 0
            19 September 2014 15: 29
            yes you rotten liberalist, my friend! what this platform leads to is seen in the example of the southeast of Ukraine !!! there men DO NOT WANT TO PROTECT THEIR LAND !!! are you calling us to this?
        2. +1
          16 September 2014 22: 38
          Well, such an alternative has a right to life, but again in the future. The same Swiss, sorry, were trained in the most severe laws and fines for any fault for a couple of centuries, that's for sure. We have everything ahead .....
        3. +7
          16 September 2014 22: 58
          Quote: MooH
          A person must have a legal opportunity to defend his house with weapons in his hands.
        4. +3
          17 September 2014 00: 13
          Quote: MooH
          By the way, do you know how much a machine gun costs in St. Petersburg? Recently, for just 1500 euros, I was offered a new PC in oil.


          throw off the address who should, one hundred pounds of illegal sale.
        5. macarque
          0
          19 September 2014 12: 59
          Your gentlemen are cheaper. In Yekaterinburg "Stechkin" which is APS-65t.r which is APB-72t.r. Makarov from 20 to 45 with a silencer included.
      2. +3
        16 September 2014 23: 21
        Quote: Finches
        lobby better for teachers and sports trainers for youth, create art, literary, craft schools ...
        I understand that to love goodness is much harder and less profitable!


        Robert Burns
        LINES ABOUT WAR AND LOVE
        Covered with laurels, robbery,
        Both land and sea
        Not worth the praise.
        I'm ready to give my blood
        In that life-giving battle
        What we call love.

        I praise the world for triumph
        Satisfaction and prosperity.
        Create a nicer one
        How to destroy a dozen!

      3. Kirasar
        +4
        16 September 2014 23: 30
        I completely disagree with you. Let's take a look. So you write that our mentality is not ripe for such a weapon. But the American is ripe. The American citizen, in your opinion, is more conscious ... Well, okay. (And please do not write about the fact that the police should work, you can’t put a policeman on every corner) Write about the massacres. But neither are committed in most of the long trunk! A carbine can be bought from us. The story, say, with Breivik, could end very quickly if one of the students had a gun. They go with a long barrel to kill, it is more convenient with it. And the mercenary still has a gun. Well and in conclusion about the lobby. There are undoubtedly parties interested in opening short-barrel sales.
        1. +1
          16 September 2014 23: 39
          If you mean me, on the contrary, I wrote that for the most part humanity has not matured to the presence of free weapons, including the American one!
          Take the story - as soon as humanity at the legislative level began to pursue the proliferation of weapons and unsubstantiated murder (duel), then humanity began to live a little longer and more of it began to appear on Earth!
          I agree that my wording is quite simple, but nevertheless, we now live a little longer than a couple of centuries ago and not only thanks to the development of medicine, but also to the improvement of human consciousness and morality!
      4. Kirasar
        +3
        16 September 2014 23: 46
        I completely disagree. Let us, as you call, think comprehensively. So you write that our society has not grown to a short-barrel. And the American, of course, has grown! America does not drink, does not smoke, and they do not have slums. And their citizens are conscious ... not like us :( And just don’t write that the police should do their job better. I myself would not mind, but you won’t put a guard on every corner. Next, about the massacres. You didn’t notice that MASS kill from a long barrel? And we have rifles allowed. Let's recall something loud ... let's say Breivik. How long would he be able to walk around the island if students, even two or three, had pistols? The answer is obvious. And in conclusion about the lobby. Of course, there are parties interested in opening sales of pistols. But remember that these sales will incur considerable taxes to the budget, which is now difficult. To summarize, I will write everything - I am for the culture of arms, I am for changing the legislation in the field of self-defense, I am for tight control, I’m so that I can protect myself EVERYWHERE,
      5. +2
        17 September 2014 17: 08
        Please answer, please, how does the mentality of the inhabitants of the Republic of Moldova differ from the mentality of the inhabitants of Russia. In Moldova, the short barrels are allowed, and no one has shot anyone. It turns out that the minds of Moldovans have matured to possess a short-barrel, but the Russians haven’t? I repeat - a weapon is first of all responsibility, everyone should be responsible for himself, and if someone believes that he is not ripe for a gun - a free will, but do not need to cut everyone to his comb - if a person has not grown to possess a weapon - there is no need to acquire it, that's all. My wife does not drive a car and does not want to study, because she believes that there is nothing to do with her character behind the wheel. So what - this is her free choice, and no one limits her in him. With the barrel somehow as well.
      6. vvdmitriyvv
        +1
        18 September 2014 15: 19
        where does the readiness of society ??? it’s not about the general armament of all citizens! and the readiness of each individual individual to carry weapons should be discussed by psychologists and a track record, if any! For two years I served in the arms with an assault rifle in the army - not a single jamb, not self-arrows, nor attempts to use it against any of my colleagues! who can tell me that I am not ready to carry weapons after I guarded the sleep of citizens of the Russian Federation for 2 years, and then another one and a half (having quit) ???
      7. 0
        19 September 2014 15: 25
        judging by your statements, the saying is 100% right: in the rain and cold, in the snow and mud there is a valiant connection! Well, now think with your head, read the comments and sayings of KNOWLEDGE people and understand: UNTIL YOU YOURSELF can repel the gopot, NO police-schmilitia will personally help YOU! I'd rather sit two (or three) years in excess of self-defense than my relatives will grieve at the funeral! and yet: not so long ago, the use of sambo techniques or other types of martial arts was equivalent to the use of weapons, thank God now this insanity has gone into oblivion.
    3. 0
      16 September 2014 22: 43
      Yes bullshit all this. Where does the statistics come from? The arms lobby in our Deme ?. Why not. Here, for example, we are ordinary citizens. And what short-defense to defend themselves from the police, or from those whom they cover? So it turns out that we are bred into a civil war inside Russia. Or is Ukraine no longer an example of this?
      1. +9
        16 September 2014 22: 47
        Ukraine did a good job without legalization. This is not an argument.
        1. +3
          17 September 2014 00: 05
          An argument in legalizing what is not an argument? There is a Maidan, because the paid "police" cannot protect us. You, there, arm yourself, and we will always make money on the ATO. So what do you think? Russians take up arms when the enemy is external, and not among themselves. Hack it on your nose, "gentlemen" Russia do not know! Our time will come.
          1. 0
            17 September 2014 01: 47
            Quote: siberalt
            Russians take up arms when the enemy is external, and not among themselves.


            This is an argument. Supporters of weapons should understand that they vote so that we can kill each other by shooting in the streets, legally.

            Short weapons - by definition, weapons of attack, not defense. This is mainly due to the possibility of its hidden wearing, which ensures the suddenness of the attack.

            A professional criminal will not refuse an attack on the grounds that a potential victim may be armed. He simply plans the attack differently - more aggressively. Roughly speaking, it does not fit with the demand, but will strike from behind with something heavy without talking.

            As for the drunken showdowns, you can really dream up yourself. Instead of a banal massacre in a tavern, at a disco, at a wedding, anniversary, etc. there will be a shootout. With bullets whistling back and forth, a powder burn and blood on the floors, tablecloths and curtains.

            I understand that sometimes I want to knock on the head a boor or a byd.lan for some rudeness or bydlanism. Can not? Go to the gym - train. Do not want to train - be patient.

            In short - minus to all who are "for" and plus to all who are "against". smile
            1. +2
              17 September 2014 05: 52
              Quote: Luga
              Quote: siberalt
              Russians take up arms when the enemy is external, and not among themselves.


              This is an argument. Supporters of weapons should understand that they vote so that we can kill each other by shooting in the streets, legally.

              Short weapons - by definition, weapons of attack, not defense. This is mainly due to the possibility of its hidden wearing, which ensures the suddenness of the attack.

              A professional criminal will not refuse an attack on the grounds that a potential victim may be armed. He simply plans the attack differently - more aggressively. Roughly speaking, it does not fit with the demand, but will strike from behind with something heavy without talking.

              As for the drunken showdowns, you can really dream up yourself. Instead of a banal massacre in a tavern, at a disco, at a wedding, anniversary, etc. there will be a shootout. With bullets whistling back and forth, a powder burn and blood on the floors, tablecloths and curtains.

              I understand that sometimes I want to knock on the head a boor or a byd.lan for some rudeness or bydlanism. Can not? Go to the gym - train. Do not want to train - be patient.

              In short - minus to all who are "for" and plus to all who are "against". smile

              - Publicly available crime statistics. Who prevents you from making a purely "for sebe" sample by countries where short-barrels are allowed (even to take the Balts or Moldovans) and countries where it is not allowed. With regards to the US, there are also statistics on the states where it is allowed and where it is not allowed. You will be unpleasantly surprised: there are more serious crimes where weapons are prohibited.
            2. vvdmitriyvv
              0
              18 September 2014 15: 30
              1. I would like to see how you walked along the street with a 2-barrel under your arm ...
              2. In order for this to be short-haired so that the enemy does not know whether the object of the attack is armed or not!
              3. Nobody said that weapons should be given to drunkards and mentally unstable individuals!
              4. This does not interfere with gym classes!
              in short, for your arguments, minus, for the attempt and desire to defend your opinion plus - in total - I will manage without ratings ...
        2. +1
          17 September 2014 00: 55
          Ukraine has failed to cope with this. And it was not necessary, "lord" ignorant. On your cons - from the high bell tower ... laughing Comrades, I apologize for the intemperance. In institutes of noble maidens did not study.
    4. 0
      17 September 2014 06: 24
      What, in fact, is discussed in the article ... about arms control, permission and about the owners themselves. But I am for legalization.
    5. 0
      17 September 2014 06: 35
      The duty and duty of the state to fight crime, therefore, the government should tighten the law, up to execution, for banditry, for the use of weapons against unarmed citizens, and not arm "law-abiding".
      Three million officials stuck to the budget, three times more than in the USSR, and crime increased by more than thirty times. If you give weapons to the population, then only to shoot the official rabble and replace it with a more responsible one - those who are afraid of the law and the People’s Power.
      Let's hope that the author of the article and the deputies pushing for the law on the legalization of the short-barreled shot will be one of the first to fly in the forehead - as payment for dirty work
    6. 0
      17 September 2014 13: 18
      not an argument ....
      it’s not a weapon that shoots, but a man holding it ..... and we have people to look after, every hundredth citizen of the Russian Federation is an employee of law enforcement agencies.
    7. +2
      17 September 2014 18: 54
      With control, and now everything is in order - monitor the topic, chat with people who own not even rifled, but smooth weapons. Before getting on sale, a weapon is fired back, samples of bullets and cartridges are stored in a bulletproof magazine, regular checks of gun owners, permits must be periodically renewed - and this is a physical examination, etc. - so everything is in order with the control.
    8. +1
      17 September 2014 18: 54
      With control, and now everything is in order - monitor the topic, chat with people who own not even rifled, but smooth weapons. Before getting on sale, a weapon is fired back, samples of bullets and cartridges are stored in a bulletproof magazine, regular checks of gun owners, permits must be periodically renewed - and this is a physical examination, etc. - so everything is in order with the control.
    9. 0
      19 September 2014 18: 52
      Can you imagine the LCN rushing behind the trunks then, moreover, legally already. They are right now with injuries, but they will be with combat.
      1. 0
        19 September 2014 18: 59
        And yet, the point is in a short barrel, if with the current legislation, even without a barrel, for "too strong" self-defense, almost 100% are imprisoned?
  2. 0
    16 September 2014 21: 57
    Do not do this!
    1. +33
      16 September 2014 22: 59
      I read and just get lost))))))))))))))))))
      What are you talking about? about the ban ??? for whom???
      Оopen your eyes and see - even now, when "short-barreled" is "forbidden" - there is a lot of leftist and far from being "short-barreled", IT IS NOT SPECIALLY HIDDEN. The same outrageous bandits (cops), hot Caucasian dzhigits, contingent ZK, sons of all kinds of bureaucrats, etc. etc.
      As for the ban, HE IS FORBIDDING only the most ordinary citizens(they even did insanity with hunting to make it harder to acquire, and to get as much money out of a person as possible) who are allowed to rob, rape, kill ... and so that ordinary citizens do not inadvertently cause serious mental trauma by resisting their criminal! not to cripple in any way, let alone deprive of life !!!

      One sensible wrote - about the vertical of power, wrote correctly, this has already passed ...

      ANY OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSEDS HAS A STRONG, VERY STRONG SELF-PRESERVATION INSTINCT, AND REMEMBER - EVEN THOUGHTS IT EVEN IF IT IS STOPPED, EVEN IT IS STILL STARTED. IF IN RESPONSE IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE LEAD, AFTER TO Lethal concentration in the body as a result of POISONING WITH HEAVY METALS))))

      SPECIALLY FOR HUMAN RESPONSIBILITIES - DO NOT TELL ABOUT THE CELEBRATION OF THE LAW AND THE IMMISSIBILITY OF PUNISHMENTS ... and at least until greening I’m poking around ... I put the bolt into cons)))

      FOR UNDERSTANDING - SEE NEWS ... READ BETWEEN LINES ... ARM YOUR OPPORTUNITY ...
      1. +8
        16 September 2014 23: 16
        I agree! the criminal is always armed.
        1. -7
          17 September 2014 06: 55
          Quote: Nikskiff
          I agree! the criminal is always armed.

          The criminal is always armed because power is corrupt.
          Then, first, this power must be removed from contentment and replaced with power responsible to the Law. But for this people are possible and can massively arm themselves.
          1. +7
            17 September 2014 10: 31
            A criminal is always armed not because the government is corrupt, but because he is a CRIMINAL! And if we take the statistics of murders, then the most common murder weapon is an ordinary kitchen knife, so let's ban it! I am for legalization, but on the condition that there is a clear and precise law on self-defense, toughening the rules for the acquisition and possession of short-barreled weapons so that they do not fall into the hands of idiots, as well as the obligatory annual free training courses and exams on short-barrel ownership for its owners, have not passed / did not pass, the trunk is selected and the license is canceled. We need to instill a culture of handling weapons and exercise real and strict control over them, then there will be no problems with their owners.
      2. +3
        17 September 2014 00: 18
        Quote: maroder555
        One sensible wrote - about the vertical of power, wrote correctly, this has already passed ..

        Absolutely in the top ten!
        The issue of legalizing weapons is a matter of trusting the people in power and nothing more. hi
      3. equity
        -9
        17 September 2014 01: 26
        maroder555 (2) quote: "I read and just go crazy))))))))))))))))
        What are you talking about people ??? about the ban ??? for whom??? Open your eyes and see - even now, when "short-barreled" is "forbidden" - there is a lot of leftist and far from being "short-barreled", IT IS NOT SPECIALLY HIDDEN. The same outrageous bandyuk (cops), hot Caucasian dzhYgits, the ZK contingent, the sons of any bureaucrats, etc. etc. "

        It is interesting where you are and what news you are looking at, I look at the news every day on different Russian TV channels and on the Internet I follow the news, for example, based on this news, 49 out of 50 crimes using firearms do exactly that ( persons of Slavic nationality) bully , about violence, especially against children in general I am silent, it's just a classic fashion if you want, u (persons of Slavic nationality)! I have never heard in my life that a Dagestani Chechen or Ingush raped children !!!
        1. +4
          17 September 2014 10: 35
          Do not stir up, and people of Caucasian nationality in the ranks of rapists and murderers are enough! If you have not heard about this, it does not mean that this is not. In general, the criminal does not have a nation, he is a criminal and that’s it!
      4. Vel
        Vel
        +3
        17 September 2014 01: 44
        Than judo and karate better old TT lol
      5. 0
        17 September 2014 05: 55
        That's it! Therefore, it is necessary to give the opportunity to protect themselves a law-abiding citizen.
      6. vvdmitriyvv
        0
        18 September 2014 15: 38
        what are the disadvantages?)))) see the bolt from thee heavy from uranium - crushed all the minuses! )))))))))))))))))))))))))
  3. -3
    16 September 2014 21: 58
    to forbid, and then they’ll think of something good to rebel against the vertical of power :-)
    1. +3
      16 September 2014 22: 09
      Ukrainians over against the vertical of the rebellion, having previously robbed Western arsenals, some elements of the rebellion even fly into our territory, and the whole country loses horizontal blood in blood: (((((And without us, hoe in the world of Sudan, Angola and other bananas -Latian replicas: (((nafih-nafih
      1. Tyumen
        0
        16 September 2014 22: 31
        That you just noticed.
        1. +1
          17 September 2014 10: 37
          Yeah, and if law-abiding citizens had shot a dozen or two law-abiding people at the very beginning, it might have turned out differently. Don't you think?
    2. +4
      17 September 2014 01: 12
      Quote: saag
      and then what good they think will revolt against the vertical of power :-)

      - the most naive thought! Rifled hunting (even for a buffalo, even for an elephant) and with optics is allowed, the authorities do not see any danger in this, and a pocket bundle with 500 joules scares. But you will not be with this bundle everywhere, in crowded places and in any weather. You won’t drag yourself. Only the most puzzled and those of the year do not drag this crap in your pocket.
  4. +31
    16 September 2014 22: 00
    - What is the attitude of society in the idea of ​​allowing citizens to defend themselves with the help of short-barreled firearms?

    The battles on this topic on our site were not comic.
    But I am more and more inclined to the idea that talking about it should be transferred to the plane of the right to protect a citizen of RUSSIA his life and health (as well as his relatives) with a clear threat by ANY WAYS without the consequences of persecution by our state.
  5. -9
    16 September 2014 22: 00
    This same "Butina" is pushing the idea of ​​the legalization of firearms into an unhealthy society.

    We Caucasians with injuries go around Moscow, they arrange weddings with shooting, but then they will be given a battle.

    We’ll be like in the USA, where schoolchildren walk with trunks? And they can shoot. There were precedents.


    lo supporters of the legalization of short-arms in Russia tripled "


    Yeah. Yes, right now.

    Butina, I think it's time for you to be a fool.
    1. +24
      16 September 2014 22: 07
      We Caucasians with injuries go around Moscow, they arrange weddings with shooting, but then they will be given a battle.


      Yeah, and more bandits with bats go, do not forget to carry knives with you ...
      only our respectable citizens go with flowers Schaub from the bandits was something to fight back.
      I have repeatedly encountered criminal guys and I can say that it is very difficult to counter them with their bare hands without damaging their health .... and the law enforcement agencies honestly disappointed me in terms of the inevitability of punishment for a criminal.
      1. -12
        16 September 2014 22: 14
        law enforcement agencies honestly disappointed me in terms of the inevitability of punishment for a criminal.


        To give out weapons to Russians is akin to the fact that you slippery slippery tiles rub on oil with shine to make it shine.

        The problem needs to be solved, and not accompanied by its aggravation, transferring the conflict to a more fierce stage of confrontation, distributing machine guns and grinders to the population.
        1. +6
          17 September 2014 08: 48
          Quote: Interface
          law enforcement agencies honestly disappointed me in terms of the inevitability of punishment for a criminal.


          To give out weapons to Russians is akin to the fact that you slippery slippery tiles rub on oil with shine to make it shine.

          The problem needs to be solved, and not accompanied by its aggravation, transferring the conflict to a more fierce stage of confrontation, distributing machine guns and grinders to the population.

          - That is, a priori, the Russians are brainless hackers who only dream of bleeding their neighbor? And you yourself, dear, are you yourself? I now have a long barrel, and nothing, I’ve owned it for 26 years, and the neighbors are still alive.
        2. 0
          19 September 2014 16: 32
          What exactly do you suggest? not empty-empty chatter, but concrete proposals to solve the problem? to recruit another 1000 policemen? In my opinion, we have already passed this, sense = big 000! fool and why exactly "give out weapons to ALL Russians?" after all, initially it is proposed to issue ONLY to mentally healthy, served well, etc. by the way, but what about female persons? After all, they for the most part do not serve in the army, because we do not have Israel with its UNIVERSAL military duty? hi in general, there are a lot of questions, but my opinion is to rezinoplyuy OUTSIDE THE LAW !!! negative
      2. +6
        16 September 2014 22: 20
        law enforcement agencies - which are policemen? and kada it was so that the policemen would protect the people?
        1. -4
          16 September 2014 22: 31
          law enforcement agencies - which are policemen?


          I do not argue. But this is a completely different topic of conversation.
          1. Alf
            +1
            17 September 2014 09: 36
            Quote: Interface
            law enforcement agencies - which are policemen?

            I do not argue. But this is a completely different topic of conversation.

            This is not another topic. Not at all different. This topic is the basis of the basics, which is why the whole fuss. It is from this topic that people want to arm themselves, because people do not believe that law enforcement agencies are able to protect them.
          2. 0
            19 September 2014 16: 33
            JUST THE SAME !!!
        2. -1
          16 September 2014 22: 37
          Quote: isker
          law enforcement agencies - which are policemen? and kada it was so that the policemen would protect the people?

          Of course, our wallets are protected from our money’s extra and not extra, they’re not bad on the track, and I’m not averse to robbing a simple hard worker, but if they aren’t there or will arrive already when the corpse has cooled down long ago to register a crime
          1. 0
            16 September 2014 23: 13
            Quote: kerguda straight
            Quote: isker
            law enforcement agencies - which are policemen? and kada it was so that the policemen would protect the people?

            Of course, our wallets are protected from our money’s extra and not extra, they’re not bad on the track, and I’m not averse to robbing a simple hard worker, but if they aren’t there or will arrive already when the corpse has cooled down long ago to register a crime
        3. The comment was deleted.
      3. Tyumen
        +15
        16 September 2014 22: 38
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        ha and even bandits with bats go, do not forget to carry knives with you ...

        I am not a bandit, but a simple hard worker, but I always have a Finnish with me. And several times already helped (20 years). Once, Stafford just grabbed his leg, almost broke a bone, so he could barely do that ... Then he took care of the owner longer.
        1. +7
          17 September 2014 00: 00
          Is Hozyan alive? Or crying
          1. Tyumen
            0
            19 September 2014 06: 24
            Yes, they just talked with the owner, he almost fainted from the sight of blood, I had been trying to find out for a long time why he was carrying such weapons on a leash, with his sensitivity.
      4. +1
        17 September 2014 07: 03
        Quote: The same Lech
        We Caucasians with injuries go around Moscow, they arrange weddings with shooting, but then they will be given a battle.


        Yeah, and more bandits with bats go, do not forget to carry knives with you ...
        only our respectable citizens go with flowers Schaub from the bandits was something to fight back.
        I have repeatedly encountered criminal guys and I can say that it is very difficult to counter them with their bare hands without damaging their health .... and the law enforcement agencies honestly disappointed me in terms of the inevitability of punishment for a criminal.

        So maybe law enforcement agencies need to hard clean and tighten the punishment for grievous bodily harm and murder until the execution. And at the same time for corruption to introduce the execution and confiscation.
        1. Alf
          +2
          17 September 2014 09: 43
          Quote: Polar
          So maybe law enforcement agencies need to hard clean and tighten the punishment for grievous bodily harm and murder until the execution. And at the same time for corruption to introduce the execution and confiscation.

          Cleaned a couple of years ago. So what ? How does this procedure go?
          They take personal files of Ivanov and Petrov. They look at reprimands and thanks. As a rule, an honest servant Ivanov has a lot of reprimands from his superiors for unnecessary anxiety and no thanks. But Petrov has no reprimands and sheer thanks. But Petrov’s everything is purely only in terms of reporting, but in fact, statements are not accepted, cases fall apart, witnesses refuse to testify.
          Who do you think will be left in the frames? This happened a few years ago.
    2. +15
      16 September 2014 22: 30
      Quote: Interface
      We’ll be like in the USA, where schoolchildren walk with trunks? And they can shoot. There were precedents.

      Schoolchildren with a trunk, at least with a legally acquired and licensed, do not walk on the streets here. And adults, too (alas, my staff practically does not issue licenses for hidden wearing, only to retired police officers, prosecutors, etc., and to everyone else, even retired military and prison guards - to hell). And even where they give out, they check for the absence of a criminal record, drug addiction, and mental illness. For storage in the house - this is welcome, but it’s also a check, and not younger than 18 (well, where is shkolota here?)
      And the fact that some boys in disadvantaged areas bring a pistol to school is so illegal, I think, and in Russia you can buy. But when buying "from the left", you never know how many corpses are already hanging on this trunk, and if they do, you will have to answer very unpleasant questions.
      1. +2
        16 September 2014 22: 33
        And the fact that some boys in disadvantaged areas bring a gun to school is illegal, I think, and you can buy in Russia.


        This is what I had in mind.
      2. +5
        17 September 2014 00: 00
        "Some boys" in Russia carry guns to school too. The boys are really more likely from prosperous areas .. In general, I think that the initiative "My home is my castle" is the best of all the bills in recent years. Wearing a short barrel is not so straightforward. I want to live in a country where you just don’t need to wear it ... The rules for applying trauma are simply put into a stupor. It is either necessary to prohibit it, or to regulate its use in more detail. Without delirium about a warning shot (just with a threat to health and life and with the right to shoot even in the head), but with a tough INSURANCE punishment for misuse (like for a combat one). In principle, it is better to prohibit - it is psychologically easier to apply trauma than combat, and the consequences are often more serious. On the battlefield - if, in parallel with the permission, you enter a VERY HARD and REALLY INSISTANT PUNISHMENT for illegal possession, use (for example, at a wedding or in a drunken stupor), then public safety will only increase. Taking into account the fact that a registered rifled barrel imposes responsibility and the possibility of control - those who like to shoot in traffic jams will quickly pass out.
    3. -2
      16 September 2014 23: 09
      CAUCASUS WITH TRVMATS))))



      And who bothers you, AS THE RIGHT PERSON, WOULD LIKE TO CARRY A KNIFE WITH YOURSELF ???
      WHAT??? HUMANITY? HUMANITY ?? Well Toda
    4. 0
      16 September 2014 23: 09
      Quote: Interface
      We Caucasians with injuries go around Moscow, they arrange weddings with shooting, but then they will be given a battle.
  6. +1
    16 September 2014 22: 00
    So you look and a personal tank will be allowed. Let's wait.
  7. 0
    16 September 2014 22: 03
    Then it’s necessary to resolve duels too!
    1. 0
      18 September 2014 14: 57
      - And nobody forbade them! smile We got acquainted with article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and - "through a scarf, three steps ..."
  8. +11
    16 September 2014 22: 07
    I will express myself on this subject. On the one hand, of course, there are risks that they will start to shoot as they please. It is hardly possible to tighten control over the legalization of weapons in a country where a mentally unhealthy person can easily acquire a barrel (having bought a certificate) !!! But in the current state of affairs in the police, which probably only protects itself, but not our citizens ... it’s probably worth it to resolve. Then we can at least protect ourselves !!!
    1. +8
      16 September 2014 22: 44
      Something is not visible to the saigonosians, felling everyone right and left ...
      1. -2
        16 September 2014 23: 05
        Quote: Basarev
        Something is not visible to the saigonos, felling everyone right and left ..

        Have you forgotten how children were shot in Belgorod?
        1. +3
          17 September 2014 00: 12
          Quote: tomket
          Have you forgotten how children were shot in Belgorod?

          and he also shot from legal children. I could shoot what to take, steal and capture. When he was detained, he killed a policeman with a knife. This is how it relates to the legalization of a short barrel ???
          1. Tyumen
            0
            19 September 2014 06: 14
            Quote: avdkrd
            When he was detained, he killed a policeman with a knife.

            Yes, he didn’t kill, but wounded a bit.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. -9
      16 September 2014 23: 03
      Oh well! In our city, a group of sophomores went to a bar to drink beer in honor of a meeting after the holidays. We drank, and the toilet is somewhere on the street. And one young kid didn’t run, leaned against the wall behind the car ... and instantly died from a bullet. The guard who lived on the second floor of this house, and who thought that his car was in danger of storing weapons ... It was a shock to the whole city. And if they pass a lobbying law, such stories will become commonplace.
      1. -1
        16 September 2014 23: 34
        Quote: constanta
        The guard who lived on the second floor of this house

        To anybody, this guard was "thinking, with his head on his shoulders, received permission, having handed over a bunch of certificates, and after passing a bunch of medical examinations, not punks, with experience, after service, they gave him for storage, and not" threw them into the hands of just anyone "" and other, and so on. In general, very few people can wobble in their heads. Chikatilo was intelligent-looking, how can such a trunk not be given out for self-defense?
      2. Alf
        +4
        17 September 2014 09: 50
        Quote: constanta
        Oh well! In our city, a group of sophomores went to a bar to drink beer in honor of a meeting after the holidays. We drank, and the toilet is somewhere on the street. And one young kid didn’t run, leaned against the wall behind the car ... and instantly died from a bullet.

        Should drink less ! Even if you suck a bucket of beer, you can always, at least slowly, at least crawl, but go to the toilet. Well, if the poor unfortunate kid Habit to relieve need at the nearest corner, then this is only his problem. Or is he also pouring water at home on all corners of the apartment?
        And if they pass a lobbying law,
        ,
        then the culture of people will inevitably increase. Have you ever wondered where in the States the habit of smiling at 33 teeth is for everyone? From the Wild West, when for a sidelong glance it was possible to get a bullet.
    3. +1
      17 September 2014 00: 08
      Quote: jaguar
      the police that probably protect themselves only but not us citizens ...

      I am ambiguous towards the police, but I know for sure that at least in the Kuban (in Krasnodar specifically) people began to forget about street crime. Of course, corruption and idiocy are also enough, but this is in other areas, and the police perform their main function at 5+. I remember how it was in the nineties and as now, I see the same thing.
    4. -1
      17 September 2014 07: 10
      Quote: jaguar
      But in the current state of affairs in the police, which probably only protects itself, but not our citizens ... it’s probably worth it to resolve. Then we can at least protect ourselves !!!

      And why then do the people feed such a lot of parasites that cannot protect them?
      Maybe it’s better for the PEOPLE to restore order and cleanse their space of such parasites than to hang around with weapons around the clock, constantly waiting for a bullet in the forehead from the same oncoming
      1. +1
        18 September 2014 15: 03
        - Yes, that's right, only where to get people to replace the transferred parasites - we live on the same streets ... If only we bring up in hermetically sealed boxes, in strict accordance with the requirements of the laws, well, the wishes of the positive part of the population, of course ... laughing
  9. -5
    16 September 2014 22: 11
    Weapons are good, only I'm afraid our society is not ready for these weapons.
    1. +7
      16 September 2014 22: 28
      Quote: Barboskin
      Weapons are good, only I'm afraid our society is not ready for these weapons.

      Only criminals have long been ready, our laws are not ready, a fresh example, robbers burst into a neighbor, he fights back, another neighbor flies into the noise, they take away a gun from the robbers in a landfill and shoot them, the gun turned out to be a military one, three blind men and easy the neighbor was shot down, the investigators started a business on the neighbors and how it will end is not yet known, but of the robbers make the injured party
    2. Tyumen
      -5
      16 September 2014 22: 40
      I think too early, let the 90s generation die out.
      1. +4
        16 September 2014 23: 08
        Quote: Tyumen
        I think too early, let the 90s generation die out.

        It is this generation that knows what weapons are, for nothing they will not shoot and carry them with them
        1. Tyumen
          -1
          16 September 2014 23: 53
          Yes, I didn’t mean us, but the youth for whom the 90s is a gangster romance, those who are from the * Brigade * are delighted. Wrong expressed.
          1. Alf
            0
            17 September 2014 10: 01
            Quote: Tyumen
            Yes, I didn’t mean us, but the youth for whom the 90s is a gangster romance, those who are from the * Brigade * are delighted. Wrong expressed.

            Yes, that's just the problem — this youth also had children and they were brought up in the same way.
      2. +4
        17 September 2014 00: 24
        Quote: Tyumen
        I think too early, let the 90s generation die out.

        Excuse me, what generation?
        I can relate myself to the 90th - in the 90th I went to the army (served in the Western Group of Forces), in the 92nd I returned to another country. It is natural for a person to adapt to the environment, and only then change it in his favor. I'm not going to die out, but I don't even run with a barrel - I don't even have it (I don't even need it). Those who have gone through the nineties not in film series are either adequate or no longer with us, and for sure the "generation of the nineties" will not add problems.
        1. Tyumen
          0
          19 September 2014 06: 19
          Quote: avdkrd
          Excuse me, what generation?

          I’m from 75 years old, so in the 90s I was just a boob who ran around with the barrel and wrapped knife scars with a rag. Today, of course, I settled down).
    3. Alf
      +4
      17 September 2014 09: 59
      Quote: Barboskin
      Weapons are good, only I'm afraid our society is not ready for these weapons.

      Not ready. And it will be ready somewhere in 1000 years. This tale has been feeding us for 25 years. And when will it be ready, can you say?
  10. RyazanVDV
    -10
    16 September 2014 22: 13
    Personally, I am against the legalization of the short-barrel in our country, as this will INevitably lead to an increase in crime. For the first 2-3 years the situation will be just awful, subsequently the crime rate will certainly decrease, due to the fact that law enforcement officers, and society as a whole, will develop a system of counteraction in the new circumstances. But is such a game worth the candle?
    1. +11
      16 September 2014 23: 15
      FOR THOSE WHO HAVE A SHORT MEMORY - IN RUSSIA BEFORE THE REVOLUTION, THERE WAS A FREE CARRYING OF A "SHORT BARREL"

      AND WHEN THE GREAT LEADER OF THE PEOPLES IV STALIN, AFTER THE WAR, AFTER THE WAR, THERE WAS ALSO A FREE MOVEMENT OF WEAPONS.

      ON THE US - IN THE SOUTH STATES, WHERE JUST THE LARGE PART OF WEAPON OWNERS AND SUPPORTERS LIVES CRIME AT A TIME LESS THAN ... MAKE CONCLUSIONS ...
    2. Alf
      +3
      17 September 2014 10: 09
      Tell me, how then to change the situation? So it will be that the bandit with the left weapon does what he wants, and an honest citizen is taken to the morgue.
      If the short-barrels are allowed, then crime will decrease (it’s not going anywhere), but then they will ask the police, the citizens armed themselves, fight back, crime has decreased, then you, gentlemen, what’s the point here? Maybe you can be driven out as those who could not cope without pensions, but long service, but take others in your place? Those who will drag the service, as expected? Our top officials of the Ministry of Internal Affairs are afraid of this. The law on legalization will be a whip for improving the work of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
    3. +1
      17 September 2014 10: 48
      That's right, in the end they will adopt an adequate law on self-defense and simply shoot the increased crime.
    4. 0
      17 September 2014 17: 38
      Don’t worry, I’m also cons of cons with the same position. But such cons to me as an order.
      Meanwhile,
      It will be possible to trade sports and hunting knives without a license.

      Original article: http://russian.rt.com/article/50285#ixzz3DZzo1DFa
  11. -5
    16 September 2014 22: 14
    Strongly against. Himself from Krasnoyarsk, we had cases when some people go ... we shoot buses from injuries, how many showdowns with injuries are on the road, and if I don’t know what to give the gunshot to the population. I’m already scared when you watch or read such news, you understand that you and your child could be there, and if the population will have a firearm freely, I’m not sure that it will be used only in case of defense, and not some hot head. I think there are quite enough means for self-defense at the moment, except for firearms. I believe that firearms should only be in the hands of professionals in the people who are involved in this work.
    1. +8
      16 September 2014 22: 20
      .
      I think there are quite enough means for self-defense at the moment, except for firearms.


      For example, what ????

      Just name real means that can stop a hefty man in a drunken state ... who does not give a damn about your pepper spray or BLOW with an aerosol.
      1. -9
        16 September 2014 22: 25
        For example, an electric shocker or the same injury. And also, as an option, not to be nauseous and it is desirable to engage in sports with some kind of combat boxing, SAMBO, ARB.
        1. +6
          16 September 2014 22: 32
          electric shocker or the same injury.


          Do not tell .... in wet weather you won’t use a shocker, you risk injuring yourself in an article by harming the attacker or others.

          As for SAMBO (I have a discharge since Soviet times), it’s good for a trained person it’s true (it helped me) .... but I'm talking about ordinary people not supermen.
          1. -6
            16 September 2014 22: 41
            So, with a trauma, you run the risk of harm, but no firearm !? Where is the logic? In my opinion, it’s just the same with a firearm to do harm to people around us many times more. And about SAMBO, etc., almost all self-defense experts say that it is best to run away and not engage in a showdown at all.
            1. +2
              16 September 2014 22: 50
              And I, as a non-expert, tell you that the chances of running into criminals sitting at home behind seven locks are zero smile

              Understand at last that what worries me is not the availability of weapons by someone, but the inability of our society to ensure the safety of an individual citizen of RUSSIA on the street, in the gateway, in vehicles and then on.

              And until there is a system in RUSSIA that automatically puts the offender in a cage
              talk about weapons will rise regularly.
              1. -4
                16 September 2014 22: 59
                What is this system that automatically puts the offender in a cage !? And in which countries does it operate? Is it like in the Tom Cruise science fiction film Minority Report? Where were the people who knew in advance who, when and where would commit a crime !?
                1. +6
                  16 September 2014 23: 14
                  What a system, one that automatically puts an offender in a cage!


                  And you remember the Soviet precinct .... they knew every pig in the district, they knew who was doing what, who they were going to, what they were eating, when they were sorry ... they farted.

                  And it was not difficult for them to determine by time which thief had stolen his hat from Aunt FAITH .... THERE WAS SUCH TIME and I still remember him .... unfortunately all this is in the past.
                  1. -1
                    17 September 2014 10: 51
                    And also remember "Shchelokovshchina": fake cases, plan, concealment of crimes, etc.
                    1. +1
                      18 September 2014 20: 36
                      Ugrumiy - General of the army Shchelokov compared to the current ones - generally a saint! Which, by the way, really did at least something to improve the work of the police and increase salaries. You'd better remember Fedorchuk, who, with his hangers-on from the "party" bodies, dispersed the professionals. After these ... and there was a surge of all this negativity that you are talking about. We served, we know ...
                      1. 0
                        19 September 2014 05: 16
                        I agree with you, but still his good deeds do not rehabilitate his negative actions. And about the weapons, that then, that now the criminals found a way to arm themselves and commit crimes, the state has always limited the possibilities of self-defense to law-abiding citizens, remember how many people were prosecuted for exceeding the limits of self-defense, which is what the USSR has now. Therefore, in my opinion, in our country the issue of legalizing weapons is more likely to lie on the political plane than on the law-enforcement plane. Officials are afraid of giving people the opportunity to acquire weapons, otherwise suddenly ...
              2. +7
                16 September 2014 23: 23
                Quote: The same LYOKHA
                And until there is a system in RUSSIA that automatically puts the offender in a cage, arms conversations will rise regularly.
            2. 0
              17 September 2014 09: 25
              That's when you and your wife are caught somewhere, run away, leaving her behind.
          2. +2
            17 September 2014 07: 17
            If you are often beaten then this is not a reason to arm everyone to the teeth. You just need to pay attention to yourself, do self-education.
            1. +1
              18 September 2014 11: 13
              If you told me, you didn’t try to beat me. They are stupidly scared, I guess. Yes, and probably do not want to die.
        2. +12
          16 September 2014 22: 38
          Against the armed and the more drunk, you can try to stand, most likely the standing will not be long. Boxing, wrestling is not bad, but it doesn't always help. Someone can stop it with a word, everything is individual. But when you know that that "drisch" has a barrel, even a drunk will think. In general, "a word and a pistol can achieve much more than just a word" (c)
          1. 0
            16 September 2014 23: 07
            Come on! A drunk will think !? Yes drunk on the drum. And in general this is a vicious circle drunk armed and you and what next? Have a shootout?
        3. +2
          16 September 2014 22: 47
          You can still legally acquire Vepr-12. A 12-gauge salvo will deliberate anyone. There was also a gun named Drake-4 artillery caliber 23 mm. Only no one remembers what happened to him later. There is also a TOZ-123 monster shotgun, also 4 calibers, so it is still being produced.
          1. +2
            16 September 2014 23: 02
            Quote: Basarev
            You can still legally acquire Vepr-12. A 12-gauge salvo will deliberate anyone. There was also a gun named Drake-4 artillery caliber 23 mm. Only no one remembers what happened to him later. There is also a TOZ-123 monster shotgun, also 4 calibers, so it is still being produced.

            It’s not an option, you won’t take such a fool with you to withdraw money at a bank ATM
        4. +4
          16 September 2014 23: 19
          Quote: AlexSK
          For example, an electric shocker or the same injury. And also, as an option, not to be nauseous and it is desirable to engage in sports with some kind of combat boxing, SAMBO, ARB.
        5. +3
          17 September 2014 01: 48
          Quote: AlexSK
          combat boxing, SAMBO, ARB.

          How much will fit! And very healthy! Just do not forget: the attacker, most likely, can also possess hand-to-hand techniques.
          Quote: AlexSK
          some go ... we shoot on buses from the injury, how many showdowns on the road with injuries
          Traumatism is an affordable weapon, and here we are talking about verification, as for hunters. Here, the weapon control is different, and the requirements for the ins and outs of a potential user! Remember, how often on the roads scorching from hunting rifles? ..
          On the other hand, it has always been like this: if a person needs a firearm to commit a crime, he will always find an opportunity to acquire this weapon! A law-abiding person cannot, for the purpose of self-defense against such "shooters", acquire a pistol without breaking the law .. Where is the logic?
          1. -1
            17 September 2014 11: 54
            Quote: avia1991
            Remember, how often on the roads scorching from hunting rifles? ..

            Well, no need to compare a hunting rifle and a gun. In general, the shores are different. The gun can be put in a pocket and carried freely and covertly, unlike a gun.
            Quote: avia1991
            And a law-abiding person cannot, for the purpose of self-defense against such "shooters", acquire a pistol without breaking the law .. Where is the logic?

            I don’t know how long I live, I have heard twice in my city that all times someone attacked with a firearm, mainly with knives and injuries, robberies, raids and showdowns take place. And you give me guarantees that these guns will not legally acquire inadequate? And just do not tell me about strict control. Given our realities, or rather the level of corruption and nepotism, it is very easy to arrange. And then a person may be able to show himself normal while passing the tests, and he will drink and demolish the tower.
            1. 0
              19 September 2014 00: 57
              Quote: AlexSK
              Given our realities, or rather the level of corruption and nepotism
              just inadequate comrades easily acquire weapons.
              Quote: AlexSK
              And you give me guarantees
              I am not the President to give guarantees of this kind. I can guarantee, however, that for my part I will strictly abide by the rules for the use of such weapons, and I will not allow them to be violated by those who try with me.
              Quote: AlexSK
              And just do not tell me about strict control.
              Well, why, actually? Control, and accounting, and education of the masses - but how else ?! It is necessary to educate the culture of using personal weapons - but this must be done in any case!
              Quote: AlexSK
              as long as I live, in my city for all the time I heard two times that someone is on someone attacked with a firearm
              I am very glad for you! You probably have a small town, and the very notion "HEARD" is the level of gossip. Make Aim: Look For Real Police Stats - You will be unpleasantly surprised! hi
        6. Alf
          +3
          17 September 2014 10: 11
          Quote: AlexSK
          For example, an electric shocker or the same injury. And also, as an option, not to be nauseous and it is desirable to engage in sports with some kind of combat boxing, SAMBO, ARB.

          Tell this 40-year-old woman or senior citizen.
          1. -3
            17 September 2014 11: 57
            For a 40-year-old woman, there are a lot of means spray cans, shockers, injuries. And something I'm not sure that pensioners, having received a gun, will really secure themselves. You must also be able to handle him skillfully, quickly and competently.
            1. +1
              19 September 2014 16: 51
              I am a pensioner, I am 63 and I will also teach you how to handle the barrel. and cleverly, and quickly, and competently. I’m still teaching boys how to play paintball competently.
        7. +2
          18 September 2014 15: 10
          - Aha! And in court you will be asked, "Why did the defendant, being a master of sports in Belarus, not measure the degree of threat with the use of techniques and hitting the attacker?" We have a sporting category - an aggravating circumstance! smile
      2. Tyumen
        -6
        16 September 2014 22: 41
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        Just name real means that can stop a hefty man in a drunken state ... who does not give a damn about your pepper spray or BLOW with an aerosol.

        KNIFE
        1. +1
          16 September 2014 22: 53
          KNIFE


          A blade over 15 cm also runs the risk of getting an article for knives ....
          although people manage to take their own lives by the most exotic things ... like a car tire.
          1. 0
            18 September 2014 18: 21
            Edged weapons - this is not a blade length of more than 15 cm.
            http://spiculo.ru/lessons/chto-xolodnoe-oruzhie-a-chto-net.html
          2. Tyumen
            +1
            19 September 2014 06: 01
            Quote: The same LYOKHA
            A blade over 15 cm also runs the risk of getting an article

            Not a blade, but a blade. And 15 cm to do with it, the law has a lot of points. For example, a machete is not XO, wear it to your health.
      3. -6
        16 September 2014 22: 43
        Loshara and with a tank in the face will receive, train your will.
        1. BYV
          +5
          16 September 2014 23: 12
          Nobody knew, and you are Batman? Against scrap on the back of the head, or a group of strong ill-wishers, the will will not help much.
      4. -1
        16 September 2014 23: 16
        You might think we have hefty drunken men rushing at passers-by, on every corner ... This man in that situation of yours will shoot the first from around the corner, and your gun will not help you anymore. God give you health and long years stop
      5. 0
        16 September 2014 23: 24
        Quote: The same Lech
        .
        I think there are quite enough means for self-defense at the moment, except for firearms.


        For example, what ????

        Just name real means that can stop a hefty man in a drunken state ... who does not give a damn about your pepper spray or BLOW with an aerosol.
    2. +9
      17 September 2014 00: 32
      Why compare shooting from injury and shooting that has not yet taken place from the RED Cut Short Barrel? Impunity and the impossibility of examining an injury just give rise to its careless use. With a legal short-barrel, these scumbags would never have thought of firing on buses. The first is an understanding of the possibility of finding the owner of the barrel, the second is an understanding of the lethality of weapons.
      1. PPL
        -1
        17 September 2014 09: 09
        Quote: avdkrd
        Why compare shooting from an injury and an unrealized shooting from an REDUCED short-bore? ...
        The first is an understanding of the possibility of finding the owner of the barrel, the second is an understanding of the lethality of weapons.

        The trouble is that most shoots without thinking ... fool
  12. +15
    16 September 2014 22: 19
    Whoever is against a weapon does not buy it. And by the way - legal weapons in the showdown is not involved. How many long-barreled weapons on hand - but there are no showdowns in the style of pile on pile. Yes, and duels something is not visible. So are pistols with revolvers. They’ll even be worn, but no one needs to fight, as someone wrote an essay here.
    Only here the government is always afraid of protected courageous citizens. Why's that?..
  13. +4
    16 September 2014 22: 21
    While the society is not ready ... the police must work like the police in the USSR ... remember, the cops did not carry any weapons at all. And it is necessary to refine the laws on self-defense ... then traumatism and smooth-bore hunting will be enough ...
  14. natasha_kuzneczova
    -3
    16 September 2014 22: 24
    Is this custom longing to turn Russia into America? The lobby of the corrupt oligarchs in the State Duma has repeatedly pushed this filthy proposal.
  15. +12
    16 September 2014 22: 24
    Do not confuse trauma and short-barrel, the responsibility is different! Why they shmish from trauma, because they internally understand - this is not serious crap. How many hunting rifles do we have in our country? And where are your "rivers of blood"? If personal short-barreled weapons are allowed under the same conditions, nothing will change.
  16. Punkt
    -10
    16 September 2014 22: 25
    it's like giving a grenade to a monkey) vamerike, a weapon is a culture that goes on side with them for centuries, so to speak !!! - they constantly shoot !!!! but what we have !!! - and just don’t have to say what no one will start to shoot — if they beat people for injuries for a place on the roadway !!!! — traumatic trunks are enough — how many are crippled and killed !!! the law
    1. +16
      16 September 2014 22: 37
      Yeah, everyone in AI is so smart, they know how to handle weapons from diapers, but in Russia it’s not clear who will give weapons to anyone, he will scamper about the streets and shoot in all directions. Personally, I am offended by your comparison of Russian citizens with monkeys.
    2. +14
      16 September 2014 22: 54
      Quote: Punkt
      it's like giving a grenade to a monkey) vamerike, a weapon is a culture that goes on side with them for centuries, so to speak !!! - they constantly shoot !!!! but what we have !!! - and just don’t have to say what no one will start to shoot — if they beat people for injuries for a place on the roadway !!!! — traumatic trunks are enough — how many are crippled and killed !!! the law


      Are you comparing our people with monkeys? Interesting, but who are you yourself?
      And with something suddenly you saw a massive shootout? Do you personally start shooting for a place on the roadway? No? And why do you consider other freaks, but not yourself? And they trample from injuries because they know that shit is not serious and the real term, if not killed, of course, is not soldered.
    3. 0
      21 September 2014 21: 16
      Quote: Punkt
      Vamerike- a weapon is a culture which goes side by side with them so to speak

      OH YEAH! "Highly cultured" descendants of bandits, outcasts, "soldiers of Fortune", seekers of easy money - sooo worthy example to follow! Of course, who else to learn from? After all, they so "politely" destroyed the indigenous population, "culturally" shot, in the struggle for a place in the gold mines, most of their own relatives! .. IS THEM FROM THEM YOU SUGGEST TO TAKE AN EXAMPLE ?! !! Sorry - the other way hi
  17. -12
    16 September 2014 22: 26
    Firebolt? In the city during the day if such self-defense begins. How many corpses can there be? Think. Innocent people can suffer
    1. Alf
      +2
      17 September 2014 10: 17
      Quote: Million
      Firebolt? In the city during the day if such self-defense begins. How many corpses can there be? Think. Innocent people can suffer

      Then in which case you also raise your hands, immediately give all the values ​​or become in the 5th position.
  18. shitovmg
    +7
    16 September 2014 22: 28
    And I’ve been living with legal weapons all my life, for me this question is not worth it! It’s time to refuse soon by age. I have never used it.
  19. +16
    16 September 2014 22: 28
    I wonder why, as soon as the conversation about the legalization of short-barreled weapons comes, everyone begins to shout in chorus: "We are against the fact that the weapon would be SHARED." No one ever says that weapons would be handed out, supporters of legalization are talking about permission to store and carry short-barreled weapons. And obtaining such a permit must be carried out in accordance with applicable law. Moreover, many are of the opinion that the legislation regarding the issuance of weapons permits is being tightened. Well, for those who say that the country will drown in blood and children will shoot in all directions and at themselves from their parents' weapons, I advise you to familiarize yourself with the data on hunting weapons. Currently, the population has hundreds of thousands of legal barrels in its hands. And do they often shoot? And yes, in tsarist Russia almost any citizen could buy a revolver.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  20. -2
    16 September 2014 22: 29
    The lobbyists, who can do it (on the pocket), want to turn Russia into brainless America, so that here, just a little - BULL in the forehead - a neighbor, relative, employee, classmate, etc.
    1. +6
      16 September 2014 23: 21
      a bullet in the forehead of a robber and a lawless man ... it’s easier, less expenses for his maintenance in prison ... it’s one good for the state
      1. 0
        17 September 2014 06: 05
        This is in IDEAL, and the facts show that weapons are used without an obvious threat to life.
        In the 80s, the son of employees, a neighbor boy (12 years old), shot his wrist with a hunting rifle. Only the heroic work of the young surgeon saved the wrist. The boy underwent 5 operations in 1,5 years.
        When the neighbor was aiming, the victim said that at the last moment he darted to the side, this saved his life.
        Already in Moscow, a year ago, a schoolboy killed a teacher and a police officer.
        1. +1
          18 September 2014 18: 28
          And do you know many such cases? Compare with the amount of weapons in the hands of hunters. Knives, axes, forks must be removed, since most crimes occur precisely with the use of kitchen and household utensils. And most importantly - a complete ban on car ownership! This is a weapon of mass destruction!
          It doesn’t shoot weapons. Shoots a man.
        2. 0
          19 September 2014 16: 58
          for sure! and more recently, the court recognized this boy as schizophrenic! yes for this (shooting at school) his dad must be hanged for his genitals! again not a tactful example on your part, from the tricks of crazy NOBODY and nowhere uninsured! hi
      2. -4
        17 September 2014 07: 32
        Something a lot of the topic came running, lobbying for the short barrel. Or maybe it's one under many nicknames?
  21. -4
    16 September 2014 22: 29
    Well, if they legalize, then in some regions (where everything was relatively calm before), a sort of Ferguson 2.0 may well arise. People think with your head - you do not have enough trauma with rubber chestnuts - give you lead ones?
  22. +11
    16 September 2014 22: 30
    A certain category of citizens have weapons to hell. One gentleman constantly carries a saiga in a big black car, and solves all problems with police officers on the spot with small bribes or connections. I have no money for bribes and no connections. That’s all equal rights before the law.
    1. +2
      17 September 2014 06: 13
      But if you shoot in an extreme situation in this "master", then YOU you will be to blame, since YOU no money for bribes.
      Just the other day, there was a note stating that a man killed his wife'S VIOLENT, and at the time of the abuse of his wife, he was sentenced to 11,5 years ...
      Conclude: - the man, most likely, did not have money for bribes, so he received "justice" in full ...
  23. +16
    16 September 2014 22: 30
    Quote: Barboskin
    Weapons are good, only I'm afraid our society is not ready for these weapons.

    What have you done to prepare society for the RIGHT to weapons? My daughter, from the age of 8, is with me at the shooting range, knows how to handle, and cannot cut her finger with a gun and knife when she peels potatoes or fish on a camping trip.
    It is necessary to cultivate the culture of weapons in the family, and not to raise them (weapons) into the category of an almost unattainable "dream for a maniac-murderer".
    Weapons can and should be able to use, and clearly know what it is intended for. Such concepts are laid at the stage of personality development, rabid prohibitions will not teach anything good.
  24. +1
    16 September 2014 22: 31
    If the police will fulfill its direct duties, then the population does not need any weapons, except for hunting, of course.
    1. 0
      18 September 2014 18: 30
      Then the number of police officers must exceed the number of ordinary citizens, in order to put a police officer on each criminal. After all, the police also go on vacation.
  25. Oleg1968
    +14
    16 September 2014 22: 31
    Good to everyone ......
    Do you think that the authors who consider the permission of "short-barreled" impermissible (and probably yourself) are stupider than Moldovans and Estonians? (they have pistols)
    During the possession of smooth trunks (16 years), I realized that the brain in relation to its weapons and unconditional full control over it and its safety (in all respects) only grows.
    Under the existing control system, there will be no problems with the "barrel" (99,9%) during its possession, and the weapon has been criminalized for a long time.
    PS And the level of robbery and property crimes will decrease (statistics for the same Moldova)
    PS2 ... Interface (2) RU Today, 22:14 PM ↑

    law enforcement agencies honestly disappointed me in terms of the inevitability of punishment for a criminal.


    To give out weapons to Russians is akin to the fact that you slippery slippery tiles rub on oil with shine to make it shine.

    The problem needs to be solved, and not accompanied by its aggravation, transferring the conflict to a more fierce stage of confrontation, distributing machine guns and grinders to the population.

    And the population has a lot of "shotguns", as you say, and it greatly oppresses you? You don't even know and don't see it :-)
  26. +23
    16 September 2014 22: 32
    As long as you don’t respect yourself, no one will respect you either. You don’t listen to you and you can’t give kitchen knives, you’ll cut each other drunk. once again not to drink. So to say a healthy lifestyle. And in general, Moldovans can, Lithuanians can, Latvians, Estonians can also, but Russians can’t? I apologize for the emotional commentary, it just kills the understatement of Russian Russians.
    1. +10
      16 September 2014 22: 39
      the justice system through the opa, who exceeded the protective measures are judged more strictly than those who attacked. You’ll kill a maniac with a knife, they’ll be quietly imprisoned for 5 years. In our country, a criminal often has more rights than an ordinary person.
  27. -6
    16 September 2014 22: 32
    it’s impossible, period. our people are hot.
    someone's hands itch from a new market.
  28. Gates
    +11
    16 September 2014 22: 35
    The people of our country are creating nuclear weapons, and having a simple pistol is impossible just nonsense, only for !!!
  29. The comment was deleted.
    1. +14
      16 September 2014 22: 55
      absolutely right! very often people do not perceive trauma as a weapon, as a result, a corpse and snot "I didn't know, I didn't want to"
  30. RyazanVDV
    0
    16 September 2014 22: 35
    Quote: The same Lech
    .
    I think there are quite enough means for self-defense at the moment, except for firearms.


    For example, what ????

    Just name real means that can stop a hefty man in a drunken state ... who does not give a damn about your pepper spray or BLOW with an aerosol.

    In vain you are so pepper spray is quite an effective means of self-defense against tipsy fellow citizens, not to mention shockers. There is one very important BUT, citizens who purchase personal self-defense tools often put them in their purse or pocket, without even bothering to read the instructions for use, not to mention how to correctly use them in case of urgent need.
    Absolutely the same thing in the field of use of firearms, there is no culture of its storage / use. Why and why, and what needs to be changed in order to correct this situation is the tenth thing. It is important that unfortunately this is the case. Therefore, the legalization of the short-barrel is chaos, it is not regrettable to realize this. Well, our society is not ready for such reversals, alas!
  31. +3
    16 September 2014 22: 35
    The main reason for lobbying short-barrels is that this is a huge business, count if every Russian buys a pistol, someone will not buy, and someone will buy two or three. An unpaved field for "Western partners".
    1. Alf
      +2
      17 September 2014 12: 35
      Quote: roman72-452
      The main reason for lobbying short-barrels is that this is a huge business, count if every Russian buys a pistol, someone will not buy, and someone will buy two or three. An unpaved field for "Western partners".

      And who said that for Western partners? Is it possible that Izhmash or Kalashnikov will get a new sales market?
  32. +8
    16 September 2014 22: 36
    Quote: Ossetian
    At the same time in dogon: I am a staunch opponent of the so-called rubber shooters (gandonoplyuyev), as this under-equipment with a "non-lethal effect" often relaxes the owners who think about themselves (well, I won't kill them), which leads to rather sad consequences.
    IMHO: the weapon should be a weapon, whether it be a cop or a hunting smoothbore.
  33. unit
    +10
    16 September 2014 22: 38
    it's time to ban injuries
  34. +1
    16 September 2014 22: 38
    First, you need to stop eating vodka every day with beer, rely on the father of the "tsar" and at the same time blame him for all your troubles, bring your cigarette butt to the trash can, and it is better not to smoke at all, and then weapons can be legalized, even a grenade launcher. And if drunkards uncultured weapons to distribute with our corruption, then there will be chaos! Yes, in five to ten years, people will learn and begin to understand that there is another force against the force, but these 5-10 years will be marked by tens of thousands of innocent victims at the hands of idiots. Anyone who supports legalization is very sure that his makarych will protect his own daughter from the bullet of a drunken idiot? If you are sure that he is a cretin or a dull youngster. These 5-10 years of adaptation YOU will have to live, and not read the statistics from Europe. Here, for the revolution, as well as for legalization, many tore their T-shirts, but go to Donetsk, there is a revolution and legalization, everything is for you. Weapons are needed by weak-willed suckers to avenge school pendolas, they fiercely long for a pistol, only if the eggs are crumpled since childhood, then the gun will not help.
    1. +9
      16 September 2014 22: 43
      Again a silly conversation about "handing out weapons." You first think about what they are talking about, and then comment. Nobody wants to give out anything. Officially issue permits after appropriate checks, training, etc. Many people from the officially registered hunting party were killed? Let's ban cars - every day hundreds die due to the fault of idiots who were given their rights and they rushed to put pressure on everyone on the roads
      1. -4
        16 September 2014 22: 45
        Quote: zcrb
        Formally issue permits after appropriate checks, training, etc.
        - Do you have a right to drive?))) Now think! If not a youngster, but if stupid, then you won’t understand the leading question))
      2. -3
        16 September 2014 22: 53
        Quote: zcrb
        Of the officially registered hunting lot of people killed?
        - is one enough or not? But not one was killed from the hunting one, and there is no free carry.
        Quote: zcrb
        Let's ban cars - every day hundreds die due to the fault of idiots who were forced upon rights and they rushed to crush everyone in a row on the roads
        - you see, you contradict yourself, the machine is not for murders and not even for self-defense, but how many people die! What can we say about a focused tool as a short-barreled weapon.
        1. +4
          16 September 2014 23: 04
          Quote: Masterzserg
          And there is no free wearing

          Just the same permission is issued for storage and WEARING. There are transportation rules, but you can wear it.
          1. -7
            16 September 2014 23: 08
            Quote: zcrb
            There are transportation rules, but you can wear it.
            - here you do not have a hunting rifle, no, here you are the bazaar that you read this very minute and carry eggs like a chicken. I’m pretty red. In the hunting season, you still have to take him. What are you talking about?
            1. +8
              16 September 2014 23: 35
              Quote: Masterzserg
              you don’t have a hunting rifle, no, you’re bazaar reading that minute and carrying eggs like a chicken.

              You and I did not drink at brotherhood, no matter what you "poke" me. This is the first thing. I have a weapon, officially, according to all the rules - this is the second thing. This conversation is leading to the fact that in your previous post you stated that there is no free carrying of hunting weapons, but in fact you can carry them, observing certain rules prescribed by the law. And don't be rude, kid!
              1. -10
                16 September 2014 23: 44
                Quote: zcrb
                that there is no free carrying of hunting weapons, but in fact it can be worn, observing certain rules prescribed by law. And don’t be rude, lad!
                - I really hate stupidity. FREE wearing and "certain rules", in your words, are different things, dear, so important that they are very different))) Do you understand? And you have no weapons. Otherwise, you would understand such a simple thing that with a gun, even a very compact one, under a jacket, you will not take the subway)) Did you understand the difference about free and not free carrying?)))
        2. +4
          16 September 2014 23: 06
          Quote: Masterzserg
          the car is not for killing, and not even for self-defense, but how many people die

          A knife - it is for killing and for self-defense, moreover, any, from pen and ending with combat (we also need permission for such). Will we ban all knives?
          1. -5
            16 September 2014 23: 12
            Quote: zcrb
            Will we ban all knives?
            - Logic. A very necessary thing in the life of a modern person! And again, from experience I’ll say that you don’t, you can run away from a knife, even if you have three knives in your pocket of different lengths, it’s better to run away from ka, but I didn’t run from a gun, thank God and I don’t advise you, very dumb run from the gun. He can catch up. And more than once.
        3. 0
          18 September 2014 18: 34
          This is just a substitution of concepts. The murder weapon may be a car or a plastic bag. Weapons are not made for the sake of killing.
    2. +4
      16 September 2014 23: 12
      You do not need to distribute your own complexes to everyone else.
      Well, it was difficult for you at school ... Well, what can you do.

      Quote: Masterzserg
      And if the drunkards give away weapons to our culture with corruption, then there will be chaos!


      But this is strong! Drunks are uncultured with our corruption! Thing! I like it.
      1. -4
        16 September 2014 23: 25
        Quote: Darek
        You do not need to distribute your own complexes to everyone else.
        - how not to? Will he call me? That school grievances will prevail, and I’ll take an innocent citizen in the back of the head for the whole x ... and then it turns out that he was all hung up with rings and 20 kg in his suitcase! Tell me they won’t give me a weapon? And I’ll solve this issue while I’ll smash it and I’ll decide for sure!

        Well, I am not against weapons, the death penalty and even euthanasia, but society must grow to this. Some Internet fighters will say, they say, so that society grows, you need to give them something to grow up to. And I will answer: if I’m ready to lay down my life and the life of loved ones for my worldview, I respect you, but if you live in a virtual game and it seems to pass by you, he’s just a fool. In the same Ukraine, the revolution was started for good and a better life, and maybe they will have it, I don’t know, but when solving such radical questions, don’t hope that you personally won’t be hurt, Will! You need to think and not smile into the monitor and tear your shirt in the holes for ideals about which you have no idea.
  35. +9
    16 September 2014 22: 42
    I want Glock 18! + would take AK107 good I’m a hunter with 17 years of experience, I have 4 units 410k 12k and 7.62-51 and regarding the legalization of weapons FOR!

    Not scary without a weapon - a toothy barracuda,
    Big and without weapons - big, to console us -
    And small people are not people without weapons:
    All small people without weapons are targets.
    1. -2
      17 September 2014 14: 36
      ... the forest dwellers all shot,
      decided to take up urban laughing
  36. +3
    16 September 2014 22: 43
    Quote: Million
    If the police will fulfill its direct duties, then the population does not need any weapons, except for hunting, of course.

    Well, yes, according to the proverb: "It is not appropriate to impose on the Lord God what a good police can handle"
    Only if you have a right to a weapon or not, it depends on what society we and our children will live in.
  37. +2
    16 September 2014 22: 47
    The non-recognition of the right of the Russian people to have weapons is an attempt to hide the flaws in domestic politics and the impending external threats.
    And who is opposed mainly? Yes, the Communists. Paradox.
  38. +3
    16 September 2014 22: 47
    Quote: Siberia 9444
    I want Glock 18! + would take AK107 good

    GSh18 is enough for me laughing
    1. +4
      16 September 2014 23: 01
      GSH18 is strong but Glock 18 has automatic fire + an enlarged magazine. thing! hi
      1. 0
        19 September 2014 17: 08
        so take Stechkin under the Parabellum cartridge! Yes, even under PMSky it’s even nothing!
  39. +10
    16 September 2014 22: 50
    This is a very difficult question. With wearing. But storage - I'm only "for". To protect your home and family.
    This is for a start - because I would very much like to finally clarify the concept of "self-defense", otherwise it turns out that the criminal is our gentle and untouchable face.
    And one more thing - in Russia until the 1917 year, any law-abiding citizen could acquire a short-barreled firearm and this did not in any way provoke an increase in crime. And in ancient Rome, carrying weapons was the norm. Only slaves had no weapons.
    1. -7
      16 September 2014 23: 19
      In England, for example, there is no carrying weapons, and what, are there slaves?
      1. +1
        16 September 2014 23: 29
        Well, here we come to a very interesting point, --- in England, as everywhere or almost everywhere, slaves !!!
      2. +9
        16 September 2014 23: 35
        Quote: tomket
        In England, for example, there is no carrying weapons, and what, are there slaves?

        After the ban on carrying weapons, the crime curve floated up. Here you have England
        1. -3
          17 September 2014 00: 00
          I’ll draw you schedules about everything like that, in France there was a similar schedule, before the Åland elections, such as the more homosexuals the less crime and the city is calmer)))
  40. +7
    16 September 2014 22: 51
    Quote: Masterzserg
    Weapons need limbs weak-willed, in order to avenge the school pendol, they fiercely crave a pistol, only if the eggs are crumpled from childhood, then the gun will not help.

    Shaw, did you fall at school? Do you write with yourself? Or just a point? Pichalka ...
    Judge not lest ye be judged.
    1. -7
      16 September 2014 23: 03
      Quote: Ossetian
      Shaw, did you fall at school?
      - it fell, it was painful, it grew in the 90s, and it happened at the porch that you ran into a car, you were 16 years old, you put a snout at one another, and you ran away! And if they had weapons with their intentions? I’m not in control of the strike so that I can take advantage with the makarich and aim, shoot at the back of the head and lie with your legalized ones, defend yourself)) I got it because I know, and you sit on the monitor and you’re running around for bread, that's why you are greyhound. Aki Hari would have been cleaned up once, since peace would have become kinder. Go to the fight club, and there you will cool off to this kind of defense)))
      1. 0
        17 September 2014 17: 53
        By the way,
        Barack Obama: In the US, it is necessary to limit the sale of weapons

        Original article of September 17, 2014:
        http://russian.rt.com/article/50263#ixzz3Da1ZN2DG

        ... As part of the fight against so-called armed violence, Obama offers a number of measures designed to limit the possession of firearms, reports The Washington Post. The bill provides for a large-scale and detailed verification of the identity and past of any citizen who wishes to acquire weapons. Thus, it is supposed to exclude the falling of arms into the hands of people with mental disabilities.

        Serious processing, according to Obama, requires legislation governing the sale of weapons. It is necessary to close the "holes", allowing those who have passed all the checks to resell pistols and rifles to those who could not legally obtain the right to purchase them.


        As I understand it, "ate" ...
    2. -4
      17 September 2014 07: 41
      Loshars crave a pistol) It smacks of impotence)))) Minus-minus, with their short arms, and I’ll break you with a pistol)))
  41. The comment was deleted.
    1. +5
      17 September 2014 00: 04
      Quote: Amper
      it would be better: -to ban the carrying, storage of weapons and ammunition to everyone, with the exception of law enforcement agencies.
  42. +7
    16 September 2014 22: 54
    lBefore allowing a lethal weapon, it is necessary to clean up at least the injury! In fact, literally following the law you cannot protect yourself, but only exacerbate the situation! The law overwhelmingly protects criminals! Just read the law on weapons and imagine yourself in a situation of threat (but what the threat is, an important legal moment). In short. The concept of necessary defense is utter idiocy based on subjective factors!
    For example: if three Schwarzeneggers come up to you and say, "Come on, clothes, boots and a motorcycle," and you fill them up from an injury with a sniper shot to the temple, you will be jailed for exceeding self-defense, because they did not have pistols in their hands!
    The problem is that according to the law, the state has a monopoly on the protection of citizens! Citizens have extremely limited independent rights to protect their life and property!
    1. +7
      16 September 2014 23: 00
      And here I strongly agree! Unfortunately, the legislation in terms of self-defense is not very developed in our country. You will be saddled to prove that you threw a gangster because he attacked you with a hammer, and not because he wanted to help in hammering nails. Yes, and exceeded the limits of self-defense. They attacked with a hammer - find the same and defend yourself. Alas!
      1. 0
        17 September 2014 18: 04
        That's right, but where were our laws fully worked out? And at first, we will lobby this discussed law, quickly introduce it, because, as I understand it, a man with a weapon is cool ... But ... think about your loved ones. After all, you are not always with them with the coveted gun.
  43. RyazanVDV
    +2
    16 September 2014 22: 58
    Comparison of hunting weapons, which is full on hand, and a short-barrel, in my opinion, is incorrect. Nobody will wander around the city with a saiga over his shoulder, but always with a PM * ohm behind a belt.
    1. +2
      16 September 2014 23: 02
      If you want to carry Saiga or Boar under the hollow, you can through the whole city - and no one will even think anything bad.
  44. +12
    16 September 2014 23: 00
    I will repeat myself. The state stubbornly resists the law on weapons because it is afraid of its own citizens. It is clear that a law-abiding citizen will not take a barrel and will not go to put his neighbors in the sleeping area "on the gop-stop". At the same time, gopniks have the opportunity to acquire a "left! Barrel, and therefore they have an advantage a priori. If you are" good ", then you do not have the right to a weapon. And if a law-abiding citizen has the right to a weapon, then the situation will change dramatically. street crime has decreased by 2 !!! times after the adoption of the law on civilian weapons. And the government is afraid that citizens who have already gotten all, can anoint Chubais and Serdyukov's forehead with green paint. Do you seriously think that the state cares about the lives of your loved ones Yes s.r.o.t. it wanted on you. Diluted demagoguery. I need a weapon to protect myself and my loved ones. And if I have to use it, then I will answer as expected.
    1. +2
      17 September 2014 06: 42
      The state, on the one hand, has banned everything that it pleases, and on the other hand, it cannot cope with its duties in terms of protecting citizens. This is a paradox.
  45. -12
    16 September 2014 23: 00
    Strongly against.
    This law is needed:
    arms sellers
    to bandits and scumbags
    - officials for bribes for pushing the law
    - the powers that be for the shooting on the path of those who got up, they still will not be anything.

    better be:
    -to prohibit the carrying, storage of weapons and ammunition to everyone, with the exception of law enforcement agencies.
    - 20 years for wearing, 25 years for use, 25 years for trade and manufacturing, 15 years for storage, life-time for use with aggravating consequences
    - prohibit the movement of weapons and ammunition accidentally discovered, otherwise see above. (call and inform the authorities that you saw, do not touch under any circumstances! otherwise see above)

    The weapon in the hands of a Russian .. This is death, not always easy. We do it first, then think.
    Complete demilitarization. You can leave only gas, probably ..
  46. karachun
    -7
    16 September 2014 23: 03
    against clearly our people can’t have firearms from injuries and pneuma, and so they plant each other well
  47. +5
    16 September 2014 23: 06
    The concept of necessary defense is utter idiocy based on subjective factors!


    So I’m all about the same ... and when I have to decide to lose my life or take the life of a criminal who is forgiving me, I certainly prefer to stay alive, even at the cost of breaking the law. Alas, OUR REALITY.
  48. +12
    16 September 2014 23: 08
    I don’t understand! It seems to be adults, but hysteria, as if skia splashed in his underwear!
    Who told you all (almost everyone) that someone will shoot someone ???? Is everything normal with the head?
    I have friends in Moldova and the Baltics. Sometimes I go to them. The short-barrels are on sale both there and there. So what? Are aliens living in these former republics of the USSR? No. The same former Soviet people, as elsewhere in our country. Why did they not shoot each other en masse? But they did not have any "weapons culture", as there was no such thing anywhere on the territory of the Union. But, where are you, appeared! And shooting associations create, and weapon clubs "by interests", and family vacations at the shooting range have long been a good tradition for many. But the number of grave crimes against the person with the permission of weapons has decreased significantly. Why do you, gentlemen protesters, put your own people below the Moldovans and the Balts? Not ashamed?
  49. +11
    16 September 2014 23: 08
    BETTER OLD TT, THAN JUDO AND KARATE!
    1. +1
      19 September 2014 17: 15
      my favorite totoshka! trouble-free thing, especially the one that was done for the NKVD, its trunk is longer!
  50. Drunya
    +5
    16 September 2014 23: 11
    16.09.2014 - 21: 23

    The ex-Minister of Defense of the Donetsk People’s Republic Igor Strelkov reported that, under the guise of a ceasefire, 24 tanks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine entered the territory of the Donetsk airport this afternoon.

    “Under the guise of a ceasefire and due to the fact that the militia was categorically forbidden to open fire, 24 tanks of the Armed Forces entered the territory of the Donetsk airport this afternoon.”

    Well-known analyst militia Prokhorov commented on Igor Strelkov’s information:

    “Well - that's right. I talked about this. After September 5, Ukrainians increased their group at the airport three times (including armored vehicles). ”
    At the airport: the old building outside is a stall, and on the ground is a city, with bomb shelters, ventilation, water filtration and tunnels - right up to Avdeevka (20km). Built on the occasion of a nuclear war. Because it’s so hard to take.
  51. Gates
    +5
    16 September 2014 23: 12
    Well, why can’t we be allowed to have short-barreled weapons, smooth-bore ones are possible, rifled ones too (the Society is ready for these weapons), but this is not...
    That everyone will rush to shoot with a gun - I don’t think who purchased everything in accordance with the law
  52. +3
    16 September 2014 23: 16
    Quote: Masterzserg
    - it fell, it was painful, it grew in the 90s, and it happened at the porch that you ran into a car, you were 16 years old, you put a snout at one another, and you ran away! And if they had weapons with their intentions? I’m not in control of the strike so that I can take advantage with the makarich and aim, shoot at the back of the head and lie with your legalized ones, defend yourself)) I got it because I know, and you sit on the monitor and you’re running around for bread, that's why you are greyhound. Aki Hari would have been cleaned up once, since peace would have become kinder. Go to the fight club, and there you will cool off to this kind of defense)))

    I say that people are not judged by themselves; since 70 I have not lived on Mars, but in Togliatti. And I don’t run for bread, but walk sedately, not afraid of crowds, somehow I don’t piss in life.
    Don’t get sick, otherwise your illness is not good: you diagnose others, and on the Internet, too. laughing
  53. Stump
    +6
    16 September 2014 23: 17
    Legalize it of course! After all, the devil with a gun, if he’s planning something bad, will think twice, because the “victim” also has a gun. The type is equal. Well, you can chase blacks normally)
  54. Tomix
    +6
    16 September 2014 23: 22
    The problem is not that people have self-defense weapons. The problem is that they didn’t understand under what circumstances they should be used.
    To be honest, I am for a short barrel. But issuing a license to purchase it after passing the PFL for both employees and military personnel, I think 70 percent will be eliminated.
    At the moment, training is a kind of profanity, (supposedly it should be) and what can they learn in 8 hours? Never mind .
    I myself am a hunter. I have both smooth and rifled weapons in my safe; in 40 years there has not been a single case of the need for a self-defense weapon. It would not be bad to go to the shooting range to practice using a short rifled weapon.
  55. Drunya
    +4
    16 September 2014 23: 25
    Urgent statement by Alexey Mozgovoy: We need honest military advice
    http://rusvesna.su/news/1410887863
    Statement by the ghost brigade commander Alexei Mozgovoy.

    "Our gentlemen moved and accelerated in deciding on the creation of a reservation for dissidents (there is no other name for a territory with a special status. Today’s statement by Mr. Plotnitsky on LPR’s agreement with Poroshenko’s bill is nothing more than a white flag!

    But the gentlemen “leaders of the republics” forget that the days are gone when such decisions could be made without leaving the office, without taking into account the will of the people. I am in no way trying to cause a split, as some leaders claim. On the contrary, I want to consolidate society around one idea and a goal set by the people themselves. But this kind of agreement does not benefit our fight against fascism and the oligarchy that fed it. In this way, all the conditions and opportunities are created for the quiet and measured destruction of Novorossiya. But for us now Novorossiya is not just a territory with that name, it is, first of all, a chance to create truly popular power with the development of the social economy of the region.

    After so many years of pressure and humiliation of the Russian world, we simply must today put an end to the mockery of the people! The second difficult issue in today's history is the alleged creation of a unified military command. Let me remind you that the military council was never assembled! Many commanders are simply afraid of becoming outcasts after this, that is, of losing at least some support. I hope many people understand what it’s like when a unit is left without logistical support. Our unit has only now begun to receive what it needs and in the quantity without which it is simply impossible to exist at the front (this is an answer to those who accuse me of frequent trips to Russia. Only thanks to these trips we were able to get in direct contact with suppliers of humanitarian aid).

    The one-sided creation of a directorate and the appointment of a commander-in-chief without the participation of all unit commanders is nothing more than proactive work. In order to prevent an honest and long-needed military council from taking place. Truly, the fight is just beginning! Many ordinary militiamen give up and lose hope looking at all this swamp. Don't you dare! Don’t dare bury yourself and your idea ahead of time! There are wicked people in their offices, but the truth is behind us!”
  56. +6
    16 September 2014 23: 28
    Let's start with the basics. How many citizens know, not only their local police officer, but at least his phone number? Or who has the number of the nearest police stronghold? Or who tried to call the police as a “drill alert”? Has anyone thought about a legal remedy? The same pepper spray, I bought it and tried it out. Not necessarily on someone, but at least just like that, in a vacant lot, take it out and press it. Has anyone ever thought that a legal means of protection should be at hand, whether at home or in the car? Can anyone say, hand on heart, I tested all of the above, practiced it in training, applied it, it didn’t help, because only a firearm!
  57. -4
    16 September 2014 23: 28
    Under no circumstances should this be allowed!
    To protect a house, it’s quite easy to do what is allowed, and quite a few are allowed for hunting and traumatic purposes. Even if you shoot with both hands, who forbids it?

    They are screaming about the legalization of short guns or specially trained provocateurs with the aim of adding chaos to society. Or those who are not allowed to purchase hunting weapons due to dementia.
  58. +9
    16 September 2014 23: 42
    Quote: Krasnoarmeec
    Quote: MIKHAN
    I am definitely against ..! Again, the American experience is being imposed on us! already periodically hammered into the head .. Guess why and for what?

    American experience?!?!? Has anyone ever heard of some righteous “mattress guy” preventing a mass shooting, say, at a school or somewhere else?

    I heard. The fact is that schools, movie theaters and other crowded places in some states are gun-free zones. It is into such zones that, without fear of reprisal, armed psychos come and carry out mass executions of unarmed people. But what happens “somewhere else” when not only the criminal has a weapon
    vadimN RU December 18, 2012 11:03 ↑

    Cases where mass murderers were stopped by armed citizens

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

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

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

    - The shooting at Colorado Springs Church was stopped when the shooter shot one of the believers present, the holder of a license for the hidden carrying of weapons.http: //blutube.policeone.com/police-traini...hurch-rouble/

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

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

    - July 13 2009, Golden Food Market, pcs. Virginia: the shooter tried to shoot several people, was stopped by an armed civilian, a holder of a license for hidden wearing.
    http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/146...lives-takes-few

    - in Earley, pc. Texas, an armed citizen, Vic Stacy, fired and stopped a madman who had just killed two neighbors and shot a police rifle.
    http://www.ktxs.com/news/RV-PARK-KILLINGS-...2o/-/index.html

    - The peculiarity of mass killings that were stopped by the citizens themselves is that they do not have time to become massacres.
  59. -5
    16 September 2014 23: 45
    The legalization of weapons and nationalist gangs in Ukraine is known to have led to a fratricidal civil war and the murder of unarmed people. Butina pursues the interests of arms magnates, primarily the United States and Russian owners of arms factories
    1. +7
      17 September 2014 00: 27
      Legalization of weapons in Ukraine, more details please.
    2. +5
      17 September 2014 03: 42
      Quote: makano
      killing unarmed people

      THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE UNARMED.
      Quote: makano
      Butina pursues the interests of arms magnates, primarily the United States and Russian owners of arms factories

      There are so many people, so many opinions... For example, I believe that Butina defends my interests, even though I am never an arms magnate. And by the way, “My Home is My Fortress” from “Right to Arms” really appeals to me hi
    3. +2
      17 September 2014 09: 33
      Quote: makano
      The legalization of weapons and nationalist gangs in Ukraine is known to have led to a fratricidal civil war and the murder of unarmed people. Butina pursues the interests of arms magnates, primarily the United States and Russian owners of arms factories

      - What are you talking about? That they were “unarmed”, that’s how it was at first. When the “Tse Europeans”, armed not only with small arms, burned unarmed people, bombed and shelled civilians in the South-East. Just don't confuse cause with effect. It was not the presence of weapons that caused the massacre. It's not the weapon that fires. A man shoots. And the call “to the knives” and “to the gilyak” does not at all smell of goodness and mercy. These calls were the reason.
  60. +2
    16 September 2014 23: 45
    Why not?, we need to equate weapons with orders, for example, if you have proven by honest work or service that you are an honest and adequate person, get permission to store weapons!, only the fact is that only at the age of forty (not earlier) can one judge the adequacy a person in an emergency situation...
  61. -3
    16 September 2014 23: 45
    I AM unequivocally AGAINST!!!...Let me explain...our people are hot-tempered and, alas, drinkers...And much more often than the notorious robberies, against which supporters of legalization argue their position, banal domestic quarrels occur!...And if now two people got into a drunken fight, and, having punched each other in the face, they went off to treat at most bruises, then after the legalization of pistols, every such fight risks ending at least with a gunshot, and quite possibly with a corpse... Isn’t that too much to pay for that someone doesn’t know how to drink or watch their tongue?...
    And, by the way, if someone is so wealthy and fearful that he can’t even sleep and is afraid that thieves might break into the apartment, then, as advice, let him simply rent out the apartment for an alarm... After all, most of the intrusions of thieves into the apartment does not happen under the cover of darkness, but in the daytime, when the owners are not at home (and their lives are not in danger)... None of the thieves in their right mind would mess with apartments on the alarm...
    And if the fear doesn’t go away now and you can’t bear to protect your apartment to the maximum - just join the society of hunters and buy yourself a gun... This is more than enough for any scumbags... and it looks more impressive than some kind of “fart” "type PM...
    So if a short barrel is purchased for something, it is clearly not for home protection, but just for street use... and it is not at all a fact that a person with a short barrel will correctly assess the situation regarding its use and will not go to jail for 10 years later. your own stupidity...
    In short, I am against it!!! stop
  62. +11
    16 September 2014 23: 45
    Your word FOR! Culture arises only in contact with an object! Including the culture of handling weapons. At the age of 18, a citizen of Russia, by law, receives a machine gun in the ranks of the Armed Forces. And by the age of 20, he loses his legal capacity so much that he cannot even be trusted with a gun. He's like a moron... We expect rampant crime with the use of weapons, etc. Why won't anyone look at the level of professionalism of the police. After all, the culture of communication between law enforcement agencies and citizens holding weapons in their hands implies a different professional level of police officers. Another form of control and interaction, transferring the vertical relationship to a horizontal, partner plane.
  63. +12
    16 September 2014 23: 46
    Quote: tomket
    In England, for example, there is no carrying weapons, and what, are there slaves?


    England is a special case altogether. They rushed from one extreme to another with weapons. The right and OBLIGATION of every FREE man to own arms was enshrined in the Bill of Rights in 1689. However, William of Orange already established restrictions - everyone except Catholics could own. Gun ownership was finally banned in England only in 1997. Only criminal elements began to own it. As a result, the number of violent crimes increased over 5 years by 88%, the number of robberies by 101%, and the number of rapes by 105%. Criminals gradually lost their fear of armed resistance from a potential victim.
  64. +5
    16 September 2014 23: 56
    Quote: isker
    law enforcement agencies - which are policemen? and kada it was so that the policemen would protect the people?


    I don’t know how mature our society has become, it hasn’t, there are many pros and cons of owning a weapon, just gentlemen, if when it is legalized you reach into your pocket when checking your documents, let’s say for your mobile phone and get 5-6 bullets in your liver from a policeman, then don’t be offended, he was defending himself. It will happen to our policemen, even if you were unarmed and voted against its legalization. Those who have not grown up to this law are their dear ones. hi
  65. +1
    16 September 2014 23: 58

    Goblin on the legalization of firearms in Russia
  66. +5
    16 September 2014 23: 58
    Why should someone decide for me what I can and cannot carry? Carrying a weapon is a personal matter, when some drunk guy waves a table in your face and you have nothing to answer with what to do? I had such a case and another one, two with knives and I have nothing to answer, I still don’t know how I survived in that fight! But the matter of control and prevention is for them to let the district police do, don’t push their buns into their offices! Carrying weapons is allowed in Moldova, but at first they often shot until the idiots and gopniks were calmed down, but now it has become much calmer.
  67. archimedes 33
    +2
    17 September 2014 00: 00
    We will legalize weapons, but at the same time we should make the issuance of weapons extremely strict so that weapons do not fall into the wrong hands. if the weapon is under the control of a mature, sane person, it does not pose a danger to society
    1. 0
      17 September 2014 00: 30
      How many “permits to issue” have you received? And so it’s tightened almost to the limit.
  68. The comment was deleted.
  69. +4
    17 September 2014 00: 13
    Quote: Major Yurik
    when checking documents, reach into your pocket, let’s say for your mobile phone and you get 5-6 bullets in your liver from a policeman, then don’t be offended,

    You are absolutely right, because this side of the issue has been completely overlooked.
    But how many “untouchables” will be cured of the habit of reaching into their pockets for their cell phones at the slightest disturbance... wassat
    1. +1
      17 September 2014 14: 17
      Quote: Corporal
      But how many “untouchables” will be cured of the habit of reaching into their pockets for their cell phones at the slightest disturbance...
  70. +4
    17 September 2014 00: 26
    Quote: ZU-23
    Also categorically against it, then it remains only to throw firewood on national soil and away we go, plus weapons will begin to fall into the hands of children.

    When your wife gets fucked, call the mili...... the police.
  71. +4
    17 September 2014 01: 04
    Oleg Divov: Fear of Civil Defense
    Inducing our society to quarrel over civilian weapons is as easy as shelling pears: just declare publicly that Russians should not be given guns. Or you can.
    ...
    The patriotic option: “it’s possible, but it’s not possible - because we are Russian.”
    ...
    Пshort-barrel advocates are confident that “guns” will be sold in every beer stall.
    ...
    Weapons are a responsibility, a burden, and then everything else. To fill responsibility with meaning, willy-nilly we will have to create a Russian version of the castle doctrine. Having realized his home as a fortress, protected not by ephemeral legislation, but by a heavy trunk, a person receives what we have traditionally been bad at - territory. But territory is not only a feeling of peace and strength, it is also responsibility. By joining rifle association, a person learns that there are many such territories.
    ...
    National rifle association can become a powerful and independent political force - most likely, moderately conservative - the likes of which have not existed in Rus' since the time of the Novgorod veche.
    ...
    From here it is already one step to understanding the territory within the country’s borders, to understanding that the country is truly yours, and you are responsible for everything here.
  72. +3
    17 September 2014 01: 15
    With a pistol you are a Citizen, without a pistol you are!
    1. +1
      17 September 2014 01: 41
      Quote: Shtynsky Dwarf
      With a pistol you are a Citizen, without a pistol you are!

      You have so much of this crap in your head that “under pressure” it spills out in all directions. It’s a pity, you don’t have any brains; otherwise you might have thought about it.
  73. 0
    17 September 2014 01: 19
    against - where does 44% come from?
  74. +9
    17 September 2014 02: 11
    If anyone categorically objects to the legalization of short-barreled guns, then what is the problem? As a sign of protest, do not buy a pistol, and that’s the end of it. There is no need to make loud statements on behalf of the entire Russian people about the unpreparedness of society, no one gave you such powers. I, apparently , I live in another society, in which everyone has marks on their military IDs for completing military service. Therefore, getting a certificate from a psychiatrist is not a problem. And there are enough hunting weapons, but for some reason I don’t kill people. If someone is terribly afraid of weapons, then it’s better in fact, do not have it. Just remember - when they really kill you, there will be no police around, the criminals are at least no more stupid than you. And they have weapons.
  75. equity
    -1
    17 September 2014 02: 14
    I wonder what we still have left to learn from the Americans!
  76. +1
    17 September 2014 03: 10
    Definitely: arming the population with firearms is a huge evil for the country! Now in various “broken lanterns”, “cops in law” and other “cop” television series “opera” they “joke” that the most popular and effective murder weapon in Russia is a kitchen knife. But this is because, thank God, there is no permission for a full-fledged “firearm”. If, God forbid, such a “firearm” is allowed, then the “effectiveness” of murders in the country will increase significantly. If now “frostbitten” punks, drug addicts, insolent “ migrants" come out to rob citizens with fists, sticks, brass knuckles, knives, as a last resort; then they will then come out with pistols and shoot without hesitation (the realities of racial life). If in the first situation the beaten, crippled citizens have any chance of staying , in the end, alive; but in the second scenario, not. Moreover, in the first scenario, citizens have an incentive to train “physics”; engage in martial arts, because the chances of fighting back against the scum are increased. In the other case (with a pistol), there is no chance. Hurray! Supporters of free pistols will scream - he contradicts himself: he proves that only with a pistol you can fight back. But no! If you think that they are drug addicts; frostbitten youth - lovers of “easy money to make money” at a nightclub; hardcore street “earners of funds for living” - all this trash will easily give up their usual occupation, but in vain! They will change tactics! They will attack, taking into account the possible presence of a “trunk” in the potential victim. Even currently; How do robberies often happen? A citizen comes into the entrance, they hit him from behind with a pipe, a piece of fittings, a bat on the head, and that’s it! How the hell will a gun help?! As a result, the robber has both the wallet (purse) of the drunken citizen and his weapons. In general, they “gave” it to the street the bandit "firearm", otherwise he had neither money nor the rights to purchase it before. Next time it will be easier for the bandit: no need to carry the bat, hide it under his jacket; tremble from the thought that the victim will feel something at the last moment and dodges (then the characters can switch roles) - he took it and fired from behind a bush at the entrance! How about this option: a couple of passers-by animatedly talking in the evening, having caught up with the victim, suddenly grab him by the arms and deprive him of ..... a pistol. And no need to find fault with details!
    1. +1
      17 September 2014 18: 38
      Before the well-known events that occurred under Khrushchev, the entire population of the USSR had weapons. Guns were sold like bread in a store. Every second house had a short trunk. And nothing - they lived! It's not the weapon that kills, it's the MAN that kills!
  77. -3
    17 September 2014 05: 52
    I'M AGAINST! We don't NEED an American EXAMPLE! and it’s time for this MADAME to go to BUNK for such CALLS!
  78. +5
    17 September 2014 06: 00
    The cops have always been against it, their credo is “don’t give and don’t let in,” but to do something positive in this direction, to really control and streamline the circulation of firearms in the country is weak for them, stupid and lazy, and the statistics in Russia are such that whoever wants to have a weapon, he has it, and regardless of whether the weapon was acquired legally or illegally, but this is a fact. This way we will never have a gun culture. It is still necessary to legislatively organize and implement the processes of ownership, storage and use of short-barreled firearms by the population, of course there will be costs, not without that, and they must be minimized as much as possible, but the issue of circulation of short-barreled firearms in the country must be resolved now. ..
  79. -8
    17 September 2014 06: 06
    Russians should not be allowed to carry firearms. Because of an injury, things can be done, but if there is combat, the troubles will be twice as great.
    1. +1
      17 September 2014 14: 48
      Quote: sgr291158
      Russians should not be allowed to carry firearms.

      What are you saying, dear??? We are no more crazy than the Moldovans or the Brazilians, and the Balts are in no hurry to shoot each other wassat Or did the Russians personally offend you in some way???
    2. 0
      17 September 2014 18: 23
      Nationality has nothing to do with it.
  80. +2
    17 September 2014 06: 30
    The paradox is that in the USA, weapons can be purchased and stored, but only people with a license can carry them, such as private detectives, security guards, etc. If you want to shoot, then the weapon is carried to the shooting range in a case and unloaded. Also to the place of hunting. The problem is that any crazy person can buy it due to the fact that the sale is practically uncontrolled. I think that at the first stage it is necessary to allow people to buy short-barreled weapons under the same conditions as hunting weapons. And not to rip off tracing paper from other countries in terms of ammunition such as civilian and military and sell any cartridges except armor-piercing, tracer and incendiary.
  81. -2
    17 September 2014 06: 32
    Definitely against it! Carrying a weapon for self-defense is one thing, but there are thousands of crazy and hot guys in the country. Somehow I don’t really want to go home from work every day and look into the eyes of passers-by and try to understand what’s on their mind or send my child to school where some 9th grader was given a bad grade!!!
    1. 0
      18 September 2014 17: 47
      Yes, minus as much as you like. Then they themselves oh..those when a crowd of armed thugs organizes a rally similar to the Maidan. We do not need a state like the United States, where anyone can grab the barrel, anyone, whether it is a ghetto niger or vice versa a thick evil copper, who to fill a teenager with a toy gun like two fingers.
  82. +6
    17 September 2014 06: 50
    Read it, it’s a very interesting article. smile http://bashunter.ru/zakonodatelstvo_ob_oruzhii_v_rossii

    For example, on January 21, 1835, the position of the Siberian Committee “On the prohibition of exiled convicts from having firearms” was approved by the highest authorities.

    prohibit access to the mountaineers, in addition to bank notes, and “weapons of all kinds”

    Professor of the Imperial Moscow University I.T. Tarasov: “Despite the undoubted danger from careless, inept and malicious use of weapons, the prohibition of having weapons can in no way be a general rule, but only an exception.

    PS I have a saiga, I shot it a couple of times, and I never carried it with me, I think a short-barreled firearm would also be collecting dust in the safe.

    From the forum “I’m not 27 years old and I’ve been living in the states for 10 of them, and in a big city where there’s a lot of crap. And I myself and many friends/acquaintances have a permit to carry a concealed firearm. And I’ll honestly tell you what it’s like for everyday use there is much less crime here due to the laws on the Constitutional Court. Yes, there are shootouts here (and often), BUT mostly all sorts of natives from the ghetto kill each other. And there is much less of any baseless/drunk piss/fucker here precisely because there is a good chance running into a man with a gun (even my girlfriend always carries a .380 in her purse) and getting a .45 in the forehead and an arrow for this will not be on the grounds of self-defense, at least in my state, and you can’t even bury a greyhound in an open coffin they can. But on the other hand, here the control over the cops is at a different level - if you start pointing at them for no reason, they’ll grab you and you’ll get the fuck out of it. And the laws on self-defense here are very strict and you can easily get 25+ years if you shot and were wrong. The thing is. in competent laws and their uniform application to all citizens without exception. "
  83. +5
    17 September 2014 06: 57
    Understand the law of self-defense first. Otherwise, if you try to stand up for a stranger, then you will also find yourself guilty, since in fact you attacked a person whose guilt still needs to be proven. So those around them calmly watch how a person is killed and do not come to his aid. Because it is actually prohibited by law. More about the short barrel. Hours, months, or years spent at a shooting range does not mean that you will be able to shoot at a criminal at the moment of an attack.
  84. +2
    17 September 2014 07: 07
    Bandits and maniacs do not need permission to own and carry them; they already own and use them. So you just need to increase the chances of survival of law-abiding citizens.
  85. +3
    17 September 2014 07: 10
    By the way, here’s a good example! Park maniac in Moscow! He ran with a knife through the park, seriously wounded one and killed an 18-year-old boy, they ran after him for a long time until the police arrived, and if there had been a gunshot, they would have shot him like a mad dog.
    1. +1
      17 September 2014 08: 07
      Many examples can be given, from both sides. I repeat once again: there are many different situations, it’s not about maniacs, although they also apply, but about the fact that we are all human and are all susceptible to stress and irritation. A typical situation is when a drunken fight in a cafe or even a cinema, or anywhere, can lead to casualties, only now it’s not beatings, but gunshots. A typical traffic accident can escalate into a shootout, and how many clashes will occur on racial grounds when all the Dags and Highlanders will be allowed to carry guns as well. Do you think in such conditions you will increase your survival rate and level your chances?
    2. +1
      18 September 2014 17: 05
      Quote: Rodriques
      If there had been a gunshot, they would have shot him like a mad dog.

      If there had been a “firearm”, the maniac would not have been running after anyone with a knife. He would have come to the park with a “firearm” and from behind a tree (bush) he would have killed at least a dozen!
  86. +2
    17 September 2014 07: 26
    I have one acquaintance who is a licensed security guard, but I wouldn’t trust him with a slingshot or even a weapon. What I mean is, where were the people who gave him this license? Personally, I am for the legalization of short-barreled guns, but traumatic ones must be banned, which is why everything was described above, and the right to carry requires a separate permit. I remember how 15 years ago I applied for a permit for a smoothbore, a young girl policeman decided to examine me, I thought back then if you knew how tired I was of Kalashnikov in the army and how much I ran around with it and shot at it, when you were still walking under the table, you wouldn’t have asked I don't have any stupid questions. The police themselves say that most murders in Russia are committed with kitchen knives, what does this have to do with a pistol that will have to be kept in a safe under lock and key if there is no permission to carry it.
  87. -1
    17 September 2014 07: 35
    I hope this doesn't happen.
  88. Erg
    +1
    17 September 2014 07: 56
    Personally, I’m not sure that it will be easier for me with a pistol against armed hooligans than now, when we, too, are, in principle, on equal terms. Complex topic. There are a lot of things *for*, plenty of things *against*.
  89. +5
    17 September 2014 08: 06
    I am for the legalization of short-barreled rifles. And categorically against trauma. Trauma is the main problem today. One question, how often are hunting firearms, which are an order of magnitude higher in lethality than a pistol, used illegally? Because a person understands that he will 100% get imprisoned for such “jokes”. But trauma is not taken seriously, which is why it is used indiscriminately. The only thing that needs to be improved is the legislative framework. I am for.
  90. +1
    17 September 2014 08: 34
    Recently, a program talked about the initiation of a criminal case against a man who pushed a masked robber out the window, who had previously stunned his daughter (13 years old). As a result, the robber broke something for himself, and a criminal case was opened for both attempted robbery and abuse of self-defense. It is unknown who will be given more. We don't have a law on self-defense. What is reasonable defense? If a couple of gopniks approached you, and you were able to fight them off, but for example, you injured one of them’s knee, you can get from 2 to 5 years. When a person knows that he can defend himself without regard for the consequences, there will be no need for a knife or a gun, or a pencil to pierce his eye. And every riffraff will know about it. Even a pistol will not help against a professional robber. He strikes from around the corner in the back. He will take both the wallet and the weapon. Which will shoot in the streets.
  91. +2
    17 September 2014 08: 54
    I can’t imagine how an unprepared person would defend himself with a firearm. To issue it, I believe that a person must take a self-defense course for a year, have a military rank, be well prepared legally and have high moral principles, in general he must become a combat-ready reservist soldier. It is also prohibited to wear it in stores, shopping centers, and public transport. Increase the term for negligent handling, wearing, storage.
    1. +3
      17 September 2014 09: 38
      Exactly.
      Quote: Leo7777
      he must become a combat-ready reservist soldier

      Carrying is implemented through the shooting association.

      Let's draw an analogy with a driver's license. But only here it is much stricter.

      * Violated, judged - in flight.
      * Caught drunk with a weapon - permanent deprivation, without it - from a year.
      * The employee was found to be issuing a wrong permit, for corruption - a very long detention, unlawfully refused - the same thing, the wording - for causing damage to the training system within the framework of the country's defense capabilities.
      * * *

      On the other hand

      *Available via rifle association sports facilities, and for the entire official family.
      * Ready to stand watch as a vigilante - for skills tested at training camps, no significant amount is charged of income.
      * Qualitatively integrates into the system of army (pre-, post-, instead of any) training.
      * * * Both lists should be continued.

      Possession with storage for home protection, without removal - separately.
      Everything is easier here: both trauma and caliber, until the first violation during storage.
    2. +1
      17 September 2014 18: 45
      I can’t imagine how an unprepared person would defend himself with a firearm. To issue it, I believe that a person must take a self-defense course for a year, have a military rank, be well prepared legally and have high moral principles, in general he must become a combat-ready reservist soldier. It is also prohibited to wear it in stores, shopping centers, and public transport. Increase the term for negligent handling, wearing, storage.
      "To prepare for the position of IPSC INSTRUCTOR, 2 WEEKS is enough!" These are the words of a professional! There are similar courses, for example, in Finland. You'll shoot as much there in a week as a riot policeman did in his entire career! Therefore, your “year” is, excuse me, nonsense!
  92. 0
    17 September 2014 09: 38
    It is good to have a weapon to protect an individual home. I can’t quite imagine how carrying a weapon will help with safety. A planned attack is unlikely to help. Maybe the possibility of retribution will have a positive effect on criminally active areas? Again, it's not about the wearing. The police will become much more nervous, I guess.
    I would allow more or less free (for normal people) purchase and storage of pistols and revolvers.
    1. +2
      17 September 2014 09: 43
      Quote: Lockout
      How

      When the legislation supports the law-abiding, combat-ready ordinary citizen, and not the bandit, as now, then it will help.
      He will support you with a base, stimulate you, prepare you, praise you, and teach you.

      The very possibility of having a defender nearby in the crowd will effectively cool off a significant portion of the public.

      Without laws (with legislators like now, who are always on the side of the gopnik), hopes are useless.
    2. +1
      17 September 2014 15: 28
      Quote: Lockout
      It's good to have a gun

      This is a glorious thought, as the Basmach Ablullah from the white sun of the desert used to say: “The dagger is good for the one who has it and bad for the one who does not have it at the right moment.”
  93. Alexander I
    +4
    17 September 2014 09: 44
    Weapons should be allowed and there is no need to pound water in a mortar. The criminal will not ask anyone about a weapons permit. But the one who may suffer from a criminal turns out that he simply has nothing to put against such lawlessness. There are plenty of bandits in the law enforcement agencies. I came across this myself. He also has nothing to deliver. He comes into the house and behaves like a pig. shouts “the one who has more rights is right.” But as soon as he received a rebuff, he began to look like a sheep. They just know that the common man is not protected and should not be afraid, but they will know that they will receive a rebuff and will be polite.
  94. +2
    17 September 2014 09: 49
    Quote: Finches
    America is a good example of the full legalization of weapons - constant massacres!

    ...and these murders occur in "gun-free" zones, i.e. where they obviously cannot answer adequately.
    Have you ever heard of massacres at shooting ranges?
    1. 0
      17 September 2014 15: 37
      Quote: Dragon-y
      Have you ever heard of massacres at shooting ranges?

      laughing laughing laughing
      Quote: Dragon-y
      These murders occur in "gun-free" zones, i.e. where they obviously cannot answer adequately.

      This means there should be no gun-free zones!
  95. +1
    17 September 2014 10: 20
    Quote: Dinko
    The problem is that any crazy person can buy it due to the fact that the sale is practically uncontrolled.

    Please tell me in which states firearms can be bought in a STORE “virtually uncontrolled”?

    (By the way, if they allow it, you can add the clause “only for those who have completed military service”...)
  96. +1
    17 September 2014 11: 23
    I have hunting experience since 1978. Served for two years, and then served. I am definitely FOR. Why does the state allow an 18-year-old boy to take a machine gun, or something else “heavier”? And in civilian life - lowly. And the bandits are already all armed. Recently, some thief in law tried to smuggle a gun onto a plane.
  97. +2
    17 September 2014 11: 38
    Any normal person should be able to protect himself, his family and the weak from violence in ANY way, including a short gun. Talking about the unpreparedness of society is crap, the rulers are simply afraid of the people and limit their rights as best they can... When some kind of scumbag humiliates you, and God forbid kills you, will you be happy that you are not armed? But there is no ideal society and there never will be, and there will always be bandits and various trash.
  98. The comment was deleted.
  99. +4
    17 September 2014 14: 01
    Quote: Karachun
    against clearly our people can’t have firearms from injuries and pneuma, and so they plant each other well

    So our PEOPLE are worthless, right? Americans and other Europeans have “grown up”, but you and I are still underdeveloped. The people's weapons are taken away by the government that fears them. In the Republic of Ingushetia, anyone could buy a pistol (who had money, of course) and tsars somehow existed and Russian society was considered humane. For everyone who thinks that ONLY storage should be allowed, but not carrying a short barrel, the question is: why then such a permission? It is easier and more effective to purchase a pump-action multi-shot shotgun for home security through a hunting license. For those who insist on super selection without serving in the armed forces of the Russian Federation, the question is: what about denying our women the right of self-defense?
  100. 0
    17 September 2014 16: 21
    Quote: BYV
    Have you often heard about crimes committed with the help of legal, SHOTED weapons? As for me, I am for the legalization of the short-barrel, but categorically against traumatism. A person subconsciously does not perceive trauma as a weapon, so he uses it without hesitation. In addition, shooting injuries is problematic. And a man who decides to commit a crime will get a firearm without any problems. Thus, a law-abiding citizen finds himself in a deliberately losing situation.


    Why can only one plus be given?...
    I fully support this position - it is not the weapon that shoots, it is the person who shoots. Injuries are definitely prohibited, people perceive them as non-lethal weapons (after all, that’s what it says in the technical passport wink ), and expose the trunk for any reason or without it. A firearm is a weapon without any reservations, and a person, before taking it up, will think hard and will not wave it around with or without reason. A firearm is, first of all, a responsibility. Criminals who want to have a gun are all armed. How is a law-abiding citizen - who has served in the army, has no criminal record, has no problems with the law, and has been trained in the rules of handling weapons - worse than a criminal? There is a good film on this topic on the Internet called “The Right to Trust.” I advise everyone to watch it - everything is laid out on the shelves.
    Regarding the fact that all Russians are inadequate, they will all shoot each other, etc. - why didn’t anything like this happen in Moldova and the Baltic states after the short-barreled barrel was resolved? After all, we all come from the USSR and have a similar mentality. But the level of street crime after the permitting of short guns in the country is decreasing - a verified fact.