“Boom… From the barrel of your automatic gun sexy Smoking smoke. A thief is shot in the face. The death has come instantly. Call 911. The police come. You proudly tell the Sergeant the circumstances of the case. You are asked to ride to the station. You drive. There you two hours interrogating detective. Then you sign the Protocol of interrogation. The next day you get seven years of rigorous imprisonment in one of the prisons of the state.”
Mikhail Mayorov.
Of course, in theory, I need to write this article (not lawyer, not policeman and not even copower), go and pent – speak. But somehow it’s dull and mixed in this matter, need some clarity.
First of all – Korotkova. One popular theme, definitely. So: in our terms this is an absolute fail. The fact is that even those who has a service weapon on duty, categorically don’t like to use it. There is such a theme, is actually boundless. Often even in situations that threaten everything. Don’t like. It seems as though “at execution” and weapons personnel… Estimate: two “politionele” in a patrol car, in uniform, on the approved route and their task is to confront the crime. But the weapons of our law enforcement officers don’t like to get very much – ask why.
An old, sore subject. Written about it plenty. And this despite the fact that our crime – quite a crime, “at the level of world standards”. Although it must be said that professional criminals in Russia is not very widely used. Compared with Brazil, for example. And even our banks are robbed often with dummy guns: American gangsters would simply laughter died, looking at it. No, they would just “move phase”: a career criminal, robbing a Bank, essentially, with his bare hands. They may not understand ever. The culture is different.
I live here in this glorious metropolis as Yekaterinburg, not Peter, of course, nevertheless. All that I remember from the news and blogs about the “shootings”, – the conflict is not divided a crossroads drivers (duel on the traumatic). And I just “Professionals” are not aware of the advantages of pillow? Maybe all they need is to read a lecture? But theorists tear and throw. Let me just give. All the matter in the legal aspects of using firearms. It is not enough to allow him to buy, must be allowed to wear it. And further, if the application of a service weapon to a COP, detaining a dangerous criminal, is the subject of many trials, how to enter in the framework of the law shooting at live targets ordinary citizens? You, forgive, imagine that? What will happen to an ordinary citizen after the first well-aimed shot? Yes, he was attacked by hooligans, he was defending himself. But it is, sorry, words. And in fact will be the body and the suspect (the rest escaped). What do you want? Will always walk with a video camera? Then all at once in the Internet to spread…
In order to effectively use the same gun, must reserve space about five meters. But you will come close… to Ask what time it is or how to get to the third street Builders. Will always wear it unbuttoned outer holster? Funny, interesting. But one thing, you can not make it. I think for the defense to apply it will not. By the way, is the traumatic and we often serve as a means of attack. Something like that happened historically. Just replay in my head the situation outside the major cities, where you use the gun as a means of defense. Hard as it seems. Except in blissful countryside, where everyone knows each other and the stranger seen from a distance, but to make money? Rural paramedic, priravnivaetsya you to the milkmaid the Nura? But as a means of confrontation, where “they are to blame/started”, of course. After all, when you already started to beat for the trunk to grab something late. Criminals usually do not go in black cloaks with pirate flags. And in General, before and after the incident is quite law-abiding burghers who just went about his business. And you are so brutal, they were attacked.
The police, who are categorically against it, just not willing to deal with the controversial founder of “Samooborona”. “The man legally bought a weapon, to defend myself from criminals, and him in jail!” the police and without that have enough problems. You see, followers of the pillow for some reason assume that they were given “license to kill”. It would be nice but unlikely (although I would, of course, bought myself a couple). Itself the investigator, Prosecutor, defense, and executioner. Justice in Texas. I here about this the more I listen, the more I see it some “inflatable fake”, the whole story with a pillow. Somehow I think that after the legalization of the sales will go up, as many will rush to arm themselves in self-defense from abnormal holders of short barrels…
About the “abnormal” I accidentally mentioned: the use of firearms is a big responsibility. Something that is fully in control and aware of what is going on. By the way, a professional gangster/police/military and different from ordinary people. Even in the most critical situation it needs to coolly evaluate the necessity of firing, while the ordinary citizen may well start to shoot in the heat of passion. He became very afraid, and he began to shoot. And in the bodies began to form holes. And as has been said, from the point of view of the Russian legal system is okay. I mean the use of firearms for self-defense in the street Lenin.
Here is the way you can remember the most: “the limits of necessary self-defense.” And the theme is just fabulous. The fact that the effective action of self-defense involve damage to enemy/enemies. Otherwise – no way. And here we are on very thin ice: you’ll fight in a dark alley from last forces, and your actions will later be analyzed in light safe room, while in that, you, of course, no one at all to beat would not, being a law-abiding citizen. How, in your opinion, can win in a fight, where there are chances of winning? Well, first of all, you have to beat the first one, necessarily – that you pretty much win. And suddenly and strongly. How will it look from the point of view of the law? That’s what it is. Secondly, it is impossible “to play the nobility”: the fight in the garage is you don’t joust, opponents should “take the field”. By any means, leaving them with a chance. And then it will look like, what are you first attacked a group of peaceful citizens stood and began to zapisyvat fallen feet, not good-not good C. Very.
I specifically leave aside the question relating to career criminals/athletes. But from a small group of drunken idiots to fight back, of course, possible, being physically prepared and acting decisively. That’s just to put in those limits will not work from the word in any way. The thing is that the situation will not be analysed since the beginning, when you blocked the road, and from the end, where there are victims. And someone should be responsible for their suffering. For example, you. They also know how to write statements. Note – we are talking about the defense literally “bare hands/feet” and gently “swim for the buoys”. I know now the correct laws, such as in the direction of empowerment “samooboronets”, but there is always some but. In our case, it’s an established practice, and it is disappointing. And it is self-defense from criminals with his bare hands. And you Korotkova, Korotkova. Funny. There is usually customary to begin to throw stones in the direction of the authorities/police officers. Well there is a certain system – in some ways it is bad in something good. But this is a system. In serious matters should always be a systematic approach.
It’s not that the authorities/policemen such bastards, matter formed in the system of laws and practices. Other system (including legalized a pillow) may be worse. While it may be better, of course. But in fact to combine a successful self-defense and absence beyond certain limits only by a professional. The very professional, perfectly trained and fully controls and knows how, where and why to beat. And not even one hundred percent of the cases. For the average citizen self – defence is flying blind without instruments. That is a classic of the genre: you have become heroically to fend off a bunch of muggers. And strayed, which is typical. And with someone’s point of view, you became the participant of fight in which he struck somebody something… then have all your actions you will have to explain and justify, then in the debriefing. I assure you the reasoning pals can sound far more imposing (they live).
Now understand, what hitch in the U.S. when arrested, the man said: “Everything you say can and will be used against You”. Clearly, correctly and clearly. No one is trying to portray the great friend of all honest people. In the USSR the system was somewhat different: all from childhood taught that an honest man has nothing to fear and everything is wonderful – this is our native Soviet state. And we do not need any expensive bourgeois lawyers. By the way, the Soviet system in any case was not a lie: the security of citizens it is very well provided, and splurge on a lawyer is not required. And this was a definite plus, although some of honest citizens, accustomed to speak the truth to the native state, sometimes following the process learned the full break pattern. The system still worked in the interests of the system, and not separate individuals. The big disadvantage is that this system is no more, and we continue to talk about the fact that “all is well” and an honest man has nothing to fear.
Any professional lawyer will cheerfully laugh at this wording. In the U.S., for example, people are divided not on honest/dishonest, and those who can afford a good lawyer, and the other rogue. And impartial American law looks at them very differently. No, taxes no one will forgive if you’re not really bill gates, but with a serious crime the situation is very funny. The severity of the punishment depends on the thickness of your wallet. Already interesting, right? And we’ve been told about the impunity of the Soviet nomenclature. “They” did it all much more cynical. All the talk about the “good lawyer” means only that the law can be bought. Expensive, of course, but it’s worth it. Am I wrong? I’m going to expose, and will expose? And American “layery” will waive their fees and begin an honest life for the good of society? That is, the Soviet legal system in its best years was not quite what she was given, but in the modern legal world, the law is as good as you can afford it. This excuse, is the practice of the USSR and the USA, the two superpowers.
Someone will argue that Russia in this area okay? Therefore, his arguments about what the right of self-defense you have “by law”, have very little in common with reality. Written law and its application in practice – things are very different. So it depends on the specific situation and specific people. Even more it all depends on the existing enforcement practice: to break the existing system, few have. So in the existing system to persistently make people think they have the inalienable right to self-defence, several of the Jesuit course. Don’t do that. Or we need to show that after the implementation of self-defense they will have to prove that it was self-defense. And these things are not so simple (you beaten Gopnik can be affected by your cruelty, and I bystanders). So life is not so logical, as in the pages of the textbook. “Theory, my friend, and the tree of life forever green…”.
A little further: almost all demonstrations on all types of martial arts involve the demonstration of techniques against a knife. In the movie we constantly see here this knife is blocked/knocked fell swoop. So – don’t do it ever. Don’t even try “to repeat it at home.” The knife is a very dangerous melee weapon. Deadly. In my life (not in film) to come at him with bare hands was an outright suicide. All these workouts – it is the case of the “professional foul”, not just too stupid to look. One hand with the knife is always faster than two hands putting on the block. Yes and you can “chopping”, and there arteries… So – forget it as a nightmare. A great tool against a knife is an ordinary stick, even in inexperienced hands. Actually the stick is the historical arms of the humanoid, which it is used from half a million years, if not more. So the stick is our “everything”. Really powerful thing, and don’t laugh: human brush – it is a subtle manipulator, and not the striking surface. We, sorry, not tigers and mountain goats. She knocked hard with his fist, you can severely damage your brush (and the violin play can not!). Not she invented, a human fist, to beat. But the stick squeezed in the fist, increases your combat capabilities (and the force of impact and the radius of the drawing). And if the stick grows to the size of the shafts, in the hands of strong men – the ultimate weapon (and no kung-fu will not save and no shepherd will not help).
But as we all know, a stick in your hands is already a crime tool. Such things. But if you peace Burger – why do you stick? Another interesting point I would like to mention: it is believed that hand to hand combat (karate, Boxing, Sambo…) – this is an excellent tool to provide security. It is not a fact. All melee, as a rule, are prepared on the principle – fight one on one. Secca. The principles work against one strong opponent and weak against several completely different (consider only options with real to win). Unbelievable, but it happens: the strongest single fighter can “stutter” a few people if he gets lucky. And on the back of his head-eyes not, and he will likely be out of luck. Meanly, of course, but that’s life. There screaming a Prince of amber Corwin to his “unfair pierced by a sword” sverhelitnogo the enemy: “It’s not quite the Olympics!”. So. But look at the video where a trained soldier is in conflict with a bunch of nerds/paleobotanical. You will laugh. He chooses one, gets a counter and begins relatively slowly step by step “to go forward with a kick”. He was taught and not taught anything else. Excellent technique, and the nerd will get what they deserve. If everyone else will play the role of frightened spectators. But if they intervene amicably, then the athlete survives, he’s just not ready for such a situation. And on the back of his head his eyes no, and watch it closely, but straight forward.
The technique of “stubborn tank”, which guarantees victory in the same ring against a trained opponent, in the alley can guarantee a blow with a heavy object in the back of the head. Ignoble, I know, but effective! Coach about this, of course, guess, but it’s easier for them to prepare a fighter in the ring one on one, to score anyone, as that would mean that he’s a champion everywhere and always, and in the alley is also not taken aback. Maybe not confused, but appropriate to a situation of technology it will not. All, Hello. And then everyone is surprised that a professional boxer… But a professional boxer does not have eyes on the back of his head. And he can be easy prey. So everything teaches you fight one on one, is to fight one on one. But if opponents more (within reason)? Pechalka. So all the talk about what’s the coolest yard fight: karate or Boxing is a bit abstract. And karate and a boxer, learning to work as one (strong and dangerous) opponent. Against a group of drunken youths in these skills may not even work.
I know that some scriven: they say, it is bad manners to beat the man in the back. It’s not bad manners – it’s the life that loves to beat a monkey wrench on the head. Well, for some devilry, I’m sorry, seven years to practice martial arts, if you instantly “kick” in a banal street fight? Or karate is a type of heroic ballet? And what about “the pillow” yeah, sure, just charge it immediately inscribed silver bullets, with no one to claim your fame “fighter of street muggers”. Although, seriously, a certain (small) grain of truth in legal “the pillow” will definitely present: the action is usually the defenders are divided into those that are within are needed and those that are outside (the last glass is always too much). In the case of a precise shot is that logic is not working: you only pressed the trigger, the rest of the work was done “mechanism”, i.e. the gun and the bullet. So here or all you, or all is impossible. And Yes, for example, a harmless gas canister, with its skillful application (quickly, strongly, all of a sudden), is a very effective and quite a legitimate weapon of self-defense against one attacker. Especially compared to a gun that was never cleaned and never fired.
Those who laugh at low energy shots and “inefficiency” so-called “rezinoplast”, somehow do not think that “effective” weapon with great energy shot could easily send the victim to the land of eternal hunting, and the arrow at the edge of the permafrost.
Author Oleg Egorov
