Civilian weapons as a guarantor of respect for basic human rights in society

Introduction. The right to necessary defense, which has its roots in natural law doctrines and Roman law, remains an important civilizational reference point. Modern Russian legislation, by enshrining this right, legitimizes the active protection of the individual from illegal encroachments as an indisputable principle of justice. Therefore, necessary defense is not just a legal norm, but an embodiment of the eternal idea that the law protects the right to live honestly, not to harm others, and to "suum cuique tribuere," which means to give everyone their due. In the context of defense, it's not about revenge, but about restoring justice.

Purpose. To carry out an analysis of the solution of modern problems in ensuring the security of society and the state as a whole through the institution of necessary defense, as well as to consider the prospects of its development and the removal of shackles.

The theoretical foundation is based on the works of N.V. Reingardt, A.F. Koni, A.O. Kistyakovsky, V.D. Spasovich, and N.D. Sergeevsky. These authors form the golden fund of Russian criminal law thought, creating a solid and profound theoretical foundation. The classical Russian school of criminal law, embodied by these thinkers, is based on a triune foundation: humanism, legal precision, and judicial service. They were united by the idea that the law is not a tool of punishment, but a tool of justice that protects society.

Results. A systemic problem in the doctrine has been identified. Modern criminal law theory demonstrates a shift in emphasis from protecting the victim to protecting the rights of the offender. Negative social consequences have been established. Theoretical imbalances lead to destructive effects. The inadequacy of the discriminatory approach has been substantiated. Positive directions have been formulated. The study proves that the right to effective defense is a logical extension of the constitutional right to protect life.

Conclusions. In this article, it is proved that: 1. Modern authors create an emphasis on the “adverse consequences for the attacker” and constant warnings about “abuse of the right”, which creates a paradoxical and vicious logic in criminal law. There is a shift in the protection of rights from the victim to the offender. 2. It creates a “paralysis of courage” among citizens. The opinion of modern authors creates  a logical error: the criminal acts instinctively and aggressively, while the victim must act calmly and in accordance with the Criminal Code. This psychologically paralyzes the will to resist. 3. The "audacity of predators" is encouraged. The legal nihilism of criminals is directly fueled by such questionable views. Public opinion about the necessity of self-defense and the danger of using one's rights for their intended purpose directly affects the perception of impunity among offenders. 4. Discrimination based on ownership occurs. It is incorrect to consider all gun owners potential criminals a priori. 5. The right to effective defense. This is the central legal argument. If the State recognizes the right to life protection, then it is logical that a citizen should have access to effective means for this protection. 6. The practical value of owning civilian firearms for the interests of society and the state.

These theoretical and practical constructions need to be improved, due attention should be paid, and explanatory measures should be carried out with citizens. 

1. Reinhardt N. V. Necessary defense: a monograph. Kazan’: Type. I. S. Perov; 1898. 84 p. (In Russ.)

2. Koni A. F. On the right of necessary defense. Moscow: Univ. tip. (Katkov and Co.); 1866. 104 p. (In Russ.)

3. Tikhanova N. E. Problematic aspects of the use of weapons in a state of necessary defense. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Law. 2018;1(32):186–190. EDN: YVHRBU. (In Russ.)

4. Kistiakovsky A. F. Elementary textbook of general criminal law: textbook. Kiev: University printing house; 1857. 385 p. (In Russ.)

5. Spasovich V. D. Textbook of criminal law. St. Petersburg: Type. Iosophata Ogrizko. Volume 1. 1863. 178 p. (In Russ.)

6. Sergeevsky N. D. Russian criminal law. General part: a manual for lectures. St. Petersburg: Publishing house of the A.F. Tsinserling bookstore; 1887. 238 p. (In Russ.)

7. Kolotushkin S. M., Loseva S. N. On the concept of civilian arms trafficking. Gaps in Russian legislation. 2018;(2):169–172. EDN: YVMCJM. (In Russ.)

8. Tagantsev N. S. Russian criminal law. Lectures: General part: In 2 volumes. Vol. 2. Moscow: Nauka; 1994. 195 p. (In Russ.)