Do Russian citizens have the right to arms? Poll

Do Russian citizens have the right to arms?

Yes - 504 (80.51%)
80.51%
No - 110 (17.57%)
17.57%
I do not know - 12 (1.92%)
1.92%
Arguments for"

- By this act, the government will prove its focus on the interests of the people, which refers to people not like cattle or electorate. A “signal” of trusting the people will be sent.


- The armed people will be able in the event of any unrest (the sample of the beginning of the 17 century) to protect themselves and the Russian statehood, to organize themselves.

- The arming of the people will be a factor deterring the potential aggression of our eastern and western "partners".

- This act will be the beginning of the restoration of Russian historical traditions: our people have always been a warrior nation, weapon It was an everyday part of the life of the Russian people from primitive antiquity until the 1917 year, when the new authorities began to pursue a policy of prohibiting the possession of civilians by arms. So, December 10 1918 issued a decree of the Council of People’s Commissars (SNK) of the RSFSR “On the surrender of weapons”, according to which the right to own weapons was retained only by members of the RCP (b), but not more than one rifle and one revolver per person .

Do Russian citizens have the right to arms? Poll- There will be a gradual change in the psychology of people - they will become more responsible, their self-esteem will increase.

- A blow will be struck at the criminal world, including ethno-mafia, armed rural communities will be able to stop a possible crime with only one fact that they are armed and can fight back (example: events in Sagra).

“As a result of the wrong migration policy of Moscow, our country was flooded with thousands, hundreds of thousands of migrants with an alien mentality and culture, who are organized into diasporas, have leaders, are united. In case of potential socio-economic upheavals, armed people will be able to fight back.

- MIC and industry in Russia will receive a new market.

"Against"

- The most common argument of opponents of possession of civilians weapons: if "our people allow weapons, everyone will immediately shoot each other." An argument with which it is difficult to agree - our people were armed for centuries, but did not interrupt each other. Yes, now, if a person really wants to kill another, he can do it - there are hunting weapons, axes, knives, hammers and a mass of objects with which you can kill a person. In the USA, Canada and Switzerland (and in a number of other countries), the population also did not kill each other. Russian and other peoples of Russia - that inferior, some savages who immediately begin to kill each other?

- The weapon will fall into the hands of bandits. But in reality, the bandits are already armed, plus there is elementary control.

- There will be a surge in crime. It seems that it will be the other way around - armed people will be able to stop the activities of large gangs as well as stop the actions of petty hooliganism. So, according to the American statistics: in more than 80% of cases, an attempt to rape a woman fails if she is armed, but unarmed women manage to fight off a rapist or rapists only in 5% of cases. There are examples of states, or individual US states, where the legalization of weapons has reduced the crime rate. According to the American statistics, in those US states where citizens were allowed to carry secretive weapons, the overall level of violent crime was BELOW by 18% compared to those states where it was forbidden to carry a firearm. Homicide rates in states where the population is armed, BELOW by 33%, robberies - by 37%. In the US states, where it is prohibited to carry weapons to the population, 289,7 is committed by 100 killings in thousands of people. In those states where the secretive carrying of weapons to the public is allowed, there are 183,1 murder cases per 100 thousand. In the US capital, Washington, the authorities were able to impose a ban on the possession of pistols and revolvers since 1976. As a result, crime in the US capital has tripled, while on average in the state crime over the same period grew by only 12%. In the most important metropolitan areas of the United States - Washington, New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles - only 5% of the population of the state lives, and 15% of all murders in the country are committed. Although it is these American cities and have the most brutal laws on the possession of weapons.

Results


Due to the great intellectual, spiritual degradation of the multinational people of Russia, it’s impossible to give weapons to everyone at once. The process should be gradual. First, the right to possession and carrying weapons (including automatic ones) must be received by officers of Russia and other security forces - first of all, various types of special forces, due to the fact that people with special psychology (warriors from birth) who pass hard psychological selection.

It is also necessary to equip the Cossacks, to promote in every way the revival of a special military estate of Russia. Then gradually, the majority of Russian citizens, who have no mental abnormalities or a criminal past, should receive the right to arms.

It is clear that the degree of availability of weapons should also be graded: officers and special forces soldiers can be allowed to have weapons from machine guns, sniper rifles to light machine guns, grenade launchers; Cossack communities can be entitled to the full range - from small arms to light armored vehicles; ordinary citizens should have the right to revolvers, pistols, rifles, including semi-automatic. Not giving the weapon to the people, the authorities admit that they do not trust them, they fear the population.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

226 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in