The free bearing of arms is not suitable for


Свободное ношение оружия не подходит для России

The massacre in Las Vegas sparked a new stage of debates about the free sale of weapons, and not only in USA but also in Russia. But if America were active supporters of the ban or limiting the sale of weapons in our country, on the contrary, those who advocate the “legalize korotkostvolov” that is for the free sale and carrying of guns. Whether it is Russia?

Nearly six dozen people shot dead 64-year-old Steven Paddock in Las Vegas, died at the whim of a killer rifle to become a mere instrument of punishment. But the mass shooting in U.S. history has caused an opposite reaction of supporters and opponents of the free circulation of weapons: the first to say that it is not the weapon, but in the murderer, and the second claim that free access to arms provoke the crazies. In our country, thank God, no such mass shootings in the US, but

questions about whether citizens have the opportunity to walk the streets with guns, are becoming more insistent.


In the USA at the hands of the people is nearly 300 million barrels. This is slightly less than one barrel for each inhabitant. If we translate this into our reality, it turns out that our citizens should be in the hands of about 125 million barrels. It is clear that we are not Americans, and anyone else in the world is in the hands of so many weapons: the US accounts for 40 percent of all weapons held by civilians.


But still – if we have allowed and promoted the free sale of weapons, it would be a huge market for gunsmiths. Hundreds of millions of barrels – that’s tens of billions of dollars! In reality, Russia has on hand is less than 7 million weapons, it is every thirty, that is, 5 million people (there are still illegal guns, albeit still a million or so, mostly in the Caucasus).

In the United States own weapon owns one-third of American men, and several million of them have more than a dozen trunks. That is a massive hobby, a lifestyle, a habit. U.S. as a country of armed people and do not want to part with the right of free wearing and acquiring weapons. Although mass shootings every year are becoming bloodier and scarier, in society there is no common position on arms. In Russia, the situation is fundamentally different – and because of the history and national character.

We bear arms was completely legal before the revolution, but in 1918 it was banned. Again – it’s about handguns, i.e. pistols that you can carry: rifles and shotguns are not considered neither by the opponents nor the supporters of the “arming the population” as the subject of the dispute. The so-called hunting is available now and wishing it was available almost always – get the hunting permit and forward.

After the death of Stalin even allowed to sell weapons to all comers, but six years later changed his mind, and then the laws were tightened. Since the mid-70’s to buy guns had to obtain permission from the police, and after the collapse of the USSR in the early 90’s, the notion of “civilian weapons”. Since 1996, citizens of Russia have the right to purchase smoothbore long-barreled weapons. You can buy “weapons of limited scope”, that is guns, but only with gas or traumatic cartridges. It is called weapons of self-defense.

So now we can buy guns such as firearms and traumatic guns – but you need to obtain permission from the police to provide help and so on. Nothing particularly difficult, but just walk in and buy guns without a license and permission, we are not.

So what does not suit the supporters of the free access to weapons? They say that the fact that citizens of Russia can’t buy the gun battle, a bad effect on the crime rate. Supposedly it will be significantly less if everyone will know what’s in your pocket or handbag any can be firearms.

In support of his thesis, they cite different numbers, tell that to the safest countries in Europe include Austria, Norway, Switzerland, Slovenia and Iceland in their average murder rate of 0.5 per year for every 100 thousand inhabitants and 30 weapons for every 100 inhabitants in average. As they say in Russia, as in other countries of the former Soviet Union, and arms much less (on average 6.5 units per 100 inhabitants) and the murder rate is much higher: 7 per year for every 100 thousand people.

What’s the deceit? That neither in Norway or in Switzerland, nobody walks the streets with a gun in your pocket, it is kept at home. And the low crime rate is associated with both a rich life and stability of the economic and social situation. Similarly very low murder rate and in a much more populated China and there is no free purchase no weapons. And in India, killing less than in the United States – and this despite the fact that Indians don’t keep a billion barrels.

Yes, Americans are accustomed to arms – they consider him as the guarantor of personal security and their freedoms. Including the right to protection from the state, which many perceived as hostile to “the free man” institution. Any assault on freedom of sale and carrying of weapons is perceived as an attack on the very foundations of America – and with each mass shooting the split in the society on this subject will increase.

It is clear that guns do not kill, but people. It is clear that the disarming of Americans cannot, and do not need. More precisely, not needed – yet mass shootings did not become a mass phenomenon. Testifying in the first place that American society is on the verge of a nervous breakdown. Similarly, as evidenced, for example, and the campaign for the demolition of monuments to the Confederacy, and the hysteria about “Russian relations” trump.

But the American problem is an American problem caused by their own crisis. It’s a different “culture” – a stranger to us, and equally unacceptable, as much of what we in the 90 years trying to learn from the West. We in Russia, with our concentration of population in Metropolitan areas and big cities, with our turbulence from ethnic issues and irregular migration, with our traditions of a strong state that is trusted by the citizens, why would a hundred million guns in the hands of the people? Not hunters, mountaineers, or “lone wolves” – and ordinary citizens, pushed in the subway and in stores?

It is clear that a madman or a terrorist will find a way to murder civilians – but why easier? Yes, and suicides in the United States, by the way, 30 thousand dying per year from gun shot wounds, two-thirds is suicidal.

An argument like that we legalize Korotkova and no mass epidemic for the purchase of weapons does not occur, very crafty.

As soon as the citizens realize that from now on any counter to lawfully may be a gun in your pocket, it may alter all perceptions about the behaviour in the city and security.


Very nervous scared and start to arm themselves, to buy weapons to wives and parents. Begin to spin the spiral of fear. Why do we need these experiments?

Military weapons should be available to those who protect the Homeland and order in the country. Hunting – hunters, of course. And for fans of “feel the barrel” is quite a traumatic gun in his pocket.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here