Co-author of the Draft Law of Ukraine №1222 “On Weapons” and administrator of the movement of gun owners “Your Voice Will Make a Difference” Serhiy Krymets answered journalists’ questions.
In early September, a bill on the legalization of firearms in Ukraine was registered in the Parliament.
First of all, for a correct understanding of the essence of the issue, we must be much more attentive to details: it is not about “legalization” of weapons at all. In Ukraine, weapons are legal. Currently, more than one million barrels of registered weapons are in the possession of Ukrainian citizens. Therefore, we are talking exclusively about the legislative regulation of legal relations that have existed in Ukrainian society for years.
How relevant is this issue at the moment?
This issue has at least two aspects: practical and legal.
In practical terms: it is obvious that the issue of personal security has always been, is and will be relevant for every citizen. Given the obvious failure of law enforcement reform, personal security is a personal matter for everyone.
For example, according to the Instruction on the organization of response to criminal and administrative offenses in the units of the National Police of Ukraine, the estimated time of arrival of the police unit at the scene may be up to 10 minutes – in the city, and up to 40 minutes – in rural areas. But in reality, it is much larger. Not to mention the fact that in a huge number of cases the police simply do not come to the call (unless you are killed, of course). And, to our great regret, criminals know about it and take advantage of it.
In cases when the police do arrive, it is usually too late. The trouble has already happened to you. The attacker fled. And the only thing you can do is to apply to the investigators with a statement about the crime and, if necessary, request a referral for a forensic medical examination. But we remember the statement of the head of the criminal police Vyacheslav Abroskin that: “the overall level of crime detection in Ukraine is 43-45% (2018)”. You’ll be waiting for years.
So you need a weapon to have a chance to wait for the police alive, because the police report on the disclosure of your murder will not add to your joy. Own weapons are not a substitute for law enforcement agencies, but shifting the responsibility for your life, health, property to them is a mistake that can be costly.
It should be very clear that at the moment of danger the police officer will not be there. Do I need to explain what a motivated attacker can do to his victim in the minutes that the police (possibly) come to you? I don’t think so.
In the legal aspect: Weapons are property. The same as a car, household appliances, etc. And Article 92 of the Constitution clearly states that the legal regime of property in Ukraine is determined exclusively by the laws of Ukraine. Therefore, in the absence of a specialized law on weapons, which would determine a special procedure for the circulation (acquisition, carrying, storage, etc.) of weapons, citizens of Ukraine should be guided by the provisions of the Civil Code, as with any other property. But the Civil Code does not establish any special rules for the control of weapons, does not establish the procedure for obtaining permission to own and use weapons, as well as does not establish any restrictions on their manufacture. De jure, the circulation of weapons is not restricted.
Instead, today the entire circulation of weapons in Ukraine is regulated by by-laws of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, in particular, which are not based on any valid law, and some of them directly contradict the requirements of the Constitution. And de facto, we have a shameful judicial practice of bringing citizens to criminal liability under Article 263 of the Criminal Code for violation of the non-existent, not established by any law of Ukraine, procedure for possession of weapons (according to which more than 50 thousand people have been convicted in Ukraine).
This state of affairs has been in place since 2007. And the issue of legislative regulation of arms circulation is long overdue.
How can this affect the crime situation in the country?
Now we have, to put it mildly, not the best situation with crime. We open the statistics of the Prosecutor General’s Office on registered crimes against human life and health for 2019. And we see:
– Intentional homicide: 5,576
– Robbery: 1,296
– Intentional grievous bodily harm: 1,372
– Intentional bodily injury of moderate severity: 2,003
And these are only those accounted for the year that has not yet ended. For other years, the figures are the same or higher.
And what should citizens oppose to this? Mobile phone with the dialed number 102? Not convincing.
The experience of countries where the right to arms for self-defense is regulated by law shows a decrease in the crime rate – look at the statistics of the Baltic States, the Czech Republic, Moldova (for the relevant years of adoption of laws on arms in these countries). After the adoption of laws allowing citizens to own self-defense weapons, the number of serious and especially serious crimes dropped significantly.
After all, a criminal who plans an assault always has a threat to be repelled by an armed victim.
In addition, it should be understood that registered weapons are not used to commit intentional crimes. Firing a shot from your weapon is the same as leaving your passport details at a crime scene.
There is another aspect – a large number of unaccounted weapons (and short-barreled ones in particular). According to the current “legislation” and the police’s idea of citizens who found weapons on the battlefield (ATO), received them in battle, simply kept the weapons inherited from their parents without re-registration are criminal offenders.
Although in fact many of them have no intention of using these weapons other than to ensure their own safety. The adoption of the law on civilian weapons will allow all these citizens to return to the legal field, from which they were pushed out by the state, and become full-fledged law-abiding owners of weapons.
What are the pros and cons of legalization of weapons in Ukraine?
Once again I want to emphasize the inadmissibility of the term “legalization” in this matter. It is inappropriate.
If there were any serious risks in case of adoption of such a law, they should have been realized long ago without it. According to the official statistics of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, for more than a million barrels of registered weapons, they count 30-70 cases of misuse of registered weapons per year, which also includes careless handling, accidents, etc. These are insignificant fractions of one percent. This means that the registered weapons are not dangerous for the Ukrainian society.
The adoption of the law on weapons will put into practice the constitutional principle that citizens of Ukraine have equal constitutional rights and freedoms and are equal before the law.
In addition to establishing uniform rules for access to self-defense means, the adoption of the law will lead to the opening and development of a network of institutions (schools, shooting ranges, clubs, shooting ranges, etc.) throughout the country for the training of weapons owners. And this means thousands of jobs and millions of hryvnias of taxes to the state budget.
Also, the existence of such a law will ensure the clear functioning of the arms market, not distorted by non-transparent monopolies, due to which we have prices for any kind of civilian weapons many times higher than in any European country.