oblast, we will not have a parade eh last question eh when is the second reading of this draft law and when is it possible to enter into force, well, this question is not really for me, it is more of a question for our parliamentarians who today are actively working on finalizing eh this law until the second reading there are many such a large number of amendments a-a i am convinced that the discussion that we are having with you will definitely take place and will be transferred to the parliament, unfortunately , now is the time for such long discussions in the parliament. it is quite limited by programs, it works as the rule there is a day or a week, so i cannot now clearly predict when this bill will be passed . and you are the parliament, but the fact that we are discussing this topic with you today, the fact that the survey is being conducted will undoubtedly affect the final version of this bill that will be voted on in

the parliament, friends can we release the minister? yes, thank you very much for joining our broadcast, they gave an explanation of what will be adopted, and let's hope that the draft law is still supported. denys monastyrskyi was with you at minister of communications, minister of internal affairs, uh, well, friends, i think it's clear to you. no, i want to listen to more speakers. to be honest, i said at the beginning that i would have a spoiler there about how much i'm for or against, but that's all well, i still remain an adaptor of the alternative draft law , because for me it is not completely clear , for example, i can, after certain stages , get permission for a short barrel, it will be at my home, but for example, i will not be able to keep it on easter, go out on easter, sit in a car that is i will need some kind of special suitcase there, conditionally speaking, you understand, maybe we need to pass this

draft law, this will be the first stage, then when society adapts more and gets used to it, then there will be a second stage, so that a step-by-step solution to this problem does not kill , people are killed, and the culture of using weapons is necessary educate acquire by hand well, we perfectly understand that one way or another there must be a law, because we did not have one from the word at all, but regarding the regulation of the circulation of weapons and that, friends. let's go we will add two more speakers to our broadcast - this is giorgiy chaykin, a representative of the association of gun owners, a person who has been pedaling the topic of the legalization of weapons in ukraine for many years, and grigory usatoy, a criminologist who speaks with his arguments, but against legalization, so i think that we will have such an interesting discussion let's start with grigoriy the mustache, mr. grigoriy, we listened to the position of the minister that it is necessary to legalize, and

in fact this law can close the gaps that we had due to the fact that there was no some kind of regulation. what do you think about the fact that in the version that the law was adopted in the first reading, that it will be adopted as a whole and will work? good evening, studio. well, look what the story is right here, the situation is as follows if we are talking about the regulation of the legislative regulation arms circulation, in the version in which it was before the war, this draft law has obviously lost its relevance to a certain extent, today we are already talking about completely new challenges and completely new threats risks of danger because we have a full-scale war, obviously, and other challenges, that is, from what i know, the challenges we have today are that the enemy

is not standing at the gate, but has already found its way into our country , and we need an adequate repulsion of such an attack this is the first, the second is that the introduction of any legislative and regulatory act, well, it is wrong to do without reliable fuses , i defended this position even before the war, i stand on these stakes even now, that is, without serious fuses, it is not possible to liberalize the bore of the weapon eh question this is what the third part appears, the third element, the third, the third difficulty. today, a lot of weapons are issued by the state to citizens, and we are not talking about short- barreled firearms, we are talking about different weapons automatically, well, about kalashnikov assault rifles, simply put, that is, according to open information in the press, there are 45,000 of them in their hands, and already today, law enforcement officers have questions. and what will we do after the

war ends, that is, these questions are obvious need to be regulated. i think that these issues are the same as the issue of uh well, let's say that uh, the elements of uh chest weapons that we have now, well, simply put, when citizens understand on what grounds this well, rifled firearms are prized on the right and left, that is, to some extent, i am not an opponent, but an ally of those who are in favor of legalization, for the liberalization of the circulation of weapons, only at this moment, in relation to all others, i well, if necessary, i will go into more detail about what the risks are well, let's say if you don't provide the proper fuses that is the law, that is, what can happen and what

possible scenarios can be given. with this illegal weapon, turn to the ministry of internal affairs and legalize it. well, that seems to me. well, that's the answer to your question. well, no, not quite the answer to my question, because it's here. it's worth saying that this could be done before, not after in the war started today, we have a law dated march 3 called on ensuring the participation of civilians in the defense of ukraine, which in fact provides for the possibility of obtaining firearms and ammunition for them by civilians during the period of martial law and if the martial law in your country ends they must surrender these weapons within 10 days, otherwise criminal liability is what we are talking about, mr. hryhoriyu chaykin, our society is not ready now

for the legalization of weapons, geology is better, after all, eh see friends well, it's hard for me to master everything at once, first of all, i hear you back again, that is, if you can, please clean it up, well, look, i only caught the end of the minister's speech, i like the fact that, after all, everything crosses the constructive plane... the only thing i would like to say is that in the hands of the population there are automatic weapons that were allocated in accordance with the law mentioned by mr. mustache. well, not 45,000, but much more. why? because a-a, some of them were even issued from trucks, as we warned that it can happen because they were not fully prepared. therefore, it is still a separate issue. let us automatically take out our weapons by the paws and deal with the

basic law, which should become the foundation for any other legislative initiatives on this topic , which means that we need a law that is clearly settles the question of who from what age will own what weapons after what training under what conditions, we need to understand clearly that the demand of society is not in weapons but in the right to self- defense. instead, it was necessary to adopt an alternative, it no longer makes any sense. people could use them, questions about a-a should they

be kept at home or be with citizens during their movement in the city, for example, or in general, in our country, it has already been removed from the agenda why therefore that well, all the studies, pay attention not only in action, the study took place, this is, let’s say, only a confirmation of that study that was published literally 10 days ago by a sociological group , the rating is the same 58%, that is, the vast majority of our citizens want to have weapons that they will carry with myself, and most importantly, i would like to point out to you that 1,200,300 did not vote. these are those who do not turn on their phones because they are close to the enemy. believe me, they could also have influenced the result, so i think that a-a in general a-a question from pistols should already be decided because there is a group of those who just want to keep it at home, there is a

majority, a significant majority of those who still want to carry it with them, that is, somewhere around 80%, in principle, said with a pistol yes, and 58 of them want to carry it with them, what are we talking about can we still talk about your main claim to the basic law, i know that there was a discussion about the fact that it is not the ministry of internal affairs that should introduce this register, but rather the ministry of justice, yes, or you, in order to avoid corruption in the ministry of internal affairs around this topic, this is the only claim, which is on the surface and which, well, around which there are disputes. see, this is not so much a claim as it is common sense. for example, our colleagues who are now also in the occupied territories, who are quite there close to the front line, they inform us that, unfortunately, the representatives of the permit service who have gone over to the side of the

enemy, and unfortunately there are such cases, they, together with the rioters, go after the owners of weapons and seize weapons, often exposing people to death danger. that is, we are fighting to ensure that access to this data is very strict. that is, i do not know. we are already trying to find some solutions at the level of our specialists . i'm sorry, i don't want to blame everyone in the ministry of internal affairs, but there is a problem and when this happens, unfortunately, people just suffer from all this, that is, first of all, control over access to this data. and the fact that we had some comments on that draft law are they essential or it is important now, son, it is important that we have a war now and

we have to understand that as long as we have a war, as long as the flow of the flow of unaccounted trophy weapons will not stop, that is, the water broke through the dam and flowed somewhere, and we need to understand that we have to restore it from the previous one state until february 24, we will not be able to, we must be realistic, not fight against the elements, but try, let's say, to adapt and manage the consequences, because well, that's all about other important remarks. and i would like to emphasize the fact that the age at which people should, purchase, of course, after very thorough training. well, and in particular, a short-barreled one, it can’t be sky-high as was offered there 30 27 years 5 years in the previous experience, well, this is absurd, why. because, again, i say, there are a huge number of people with automatic weapons around us, and despite

everything therefore, as of today, crime has fallen by 50% in the peaceful part of ukraine, unfortunately, this will not always continue . the maximum age at which people should receive the right to own pistols and their seeds and use meaningful self-defense is 25 years old, this is the maximum age in general, i would consider the situation with 21 years old well, here the question is again ah ah not mine a question of the deputies is it just because 25 is the edge of the fireplace that can be why today people our boys fight at 20 years old at 22 at 25 they give their lives for ukraine i apologize well we should all be ashamed that they, uh, even with the law, they will not have the right yet there for a long time to receive

some funny, funny weapons, by the way, about the weapons themselves, because for many people who are not very familiar with such processes, when they hear the issue of legalization of weapons, what is the first picture? then everyone has a gun, well, this is the reality, as it is also perceived in this way for many, but it is still necessary to understand for people who do not have trophy weapons, who are thinking about it, this is also first of all and not a cheap question, because, for example, i am there looked through e-e sites there for sale there, for example, short-barreled pistols, again, this is not a representative price. yes, but the plus-minus there is from 30,000 uah. yes, it is also not a penny. in addition to the fact that you purchased this weapon, you also need to learn how to use it. we still need cartridges there, so what if they don’t distribute them on the street, eh, this is what

is needed in practice, eh, this moment, it can be exactly one of the, you know, so-called internal fuses . hands in arms these will not get or on the contrary, no. do you agree with the walls? if so, mr. george, yes, here we have gathered everything in a pile and i would like to clean it up a little. years operate under such legislation, you can buy a pistol there of domestic models, i apologize, of soviet models from 80 to 120 €. this is a small price, that is, of course, if we are talking about modern models, and there are well-known brands

, the price will be higher. but again, who can afford a car cheaper, who can afford a car more expensive, again, it all turned out to be your wallet. i believe that the key parameter should be quality education and a sufficient and significant amount for this, i will explain why. that is, we need to install, you know, such a margin fuse, that is, to we clearly understood that a person who is not able to collect, let's say, 2-3 hundred dollars in order to complete a training course for a month, let's say, and alka is addicted to drugs , then she just won't come for such the criterion and training should be the thesis. here we have the biggest high-profile road accident, uh, with scumbags hit all over their heads, well, we can call them that, they happen on elite cars that are

very expensive and these people who have money , that's why it's such an argument what is a person who can earn money there? she is more adequate than someone who cannot earn money. no, i can't. i didn't say that . in other words, we need to put an entrance barrier so that the education is not too much, only those who p georgia yes, and we continuously a little eh p grigoriyu what is your position regarding such fuses, and see? thank you very much for saying that, in contrast to what was voiced by george, i have a different opinion, it is as follows: if we introduce such a fuse, which in fact will not be a fuse, but a discriminating one this is a factor, i am talking about the constitution, that is, any discrimination on any grounds,

including property, is prohibited, that is, the poor will not be able to, in other words, and i think that after the war and during the war , weapons will definitely not be the first item what is necessary for people, they need housing , they need food, they need some conditions, but the question is not about if we are already talking about fuses, it is worth saying that these fuses must be legal and they must be, well, not manipulative, therefore what is what is being observed now, well, my visa says that it is not necessary to stop the dam has broken, well, it reminds me of the saying that the barn is on fire, the house is on fire. you can't ask the question like that, because when we talk about a sociological survey, which supposedly clearly indicates obvious things, i want to say, as a candidate of legal sciences, that there are certain requirements for a sociological

survey, and therefore, regarding the survey in action, i have a very big question about its objectivity, impartiality, well, and about whether there is manipulation here, a certain reason why i say so look what time was chosen for this survey at a time when people feel fear panic danger and so on well of course what will be their answer during the introduction of war it is obvious that well you want security everyone answers yes uh look how do we ask a question in this sociological survey contrary to the rules of sociology. by the way, i remind you that there is a convention of verbal answers for in variations, that is, for special use and for free wearing, well, in such a context , something and only one element against, that is, two against one is already an advantage, one more moment it was said that uh, well, can we talk about the

representativeness of such a survey, well, that is, its comprehensiveness of the entire territory of ukraine, when we have people in the occupied territory who, trivially, do not have a connection and why will they vote for and not against? well, i wouldn't say that exactly, the question is also that instead of abstract answers that people don't quite understand, that is, for special use or for self-defense, in fact, if the weapon is for special use well, it can be kept at home and also used for self-defense, well, these are incorrectly asked questions, you should have asked the question, otherwise , the survey is in action, then it’s just a slice of opinion , because in fact, it doesn’t affect anything. let me call it an absolute honor to finish, yes, because when we talk about uh, right, wrong answers, we

're probably going to get a solution to the question. in public places, are you in favor of keeping such weapons at home, because this is the main problem that was in all the draft laws and with which we argued to the point of hoarseness with our opponents, including with the person present here regarding whether it is necessary to give people the opportunity to keep such weapons or carry them on the street, i want to say that as a person who is 17 years old, had nothing to do with weapons, what is the question right here, that the pistol he never saves well, let's say from a well-armed enemy army, this is a weapon of concealed carry, that is, if tanks enter our territory, they shoot guns . imagine yourself with a gun, what will you do with it

? and enbloc i think the opening will be plus-minus, and they will want it, of course they will, but this does not mean that it is necessary to replace self-defense with self-defense, replace professional forces . it's just that they are loyal citizens, amateurs, although of course, at what stages at the level of a tyrant, it is really effective. but again, until professional actions go into military action, and until mastering, we have such a discussion. please i will not allow myself to be, dear candidate

of legal sciences, i am a modest person, i have just been dealing with this issue all my life, i will only allow myself to point out what has gone down in a pile of horses, flies, meatballs, soft heat, we already do not understand anything, that is, we have something some kind of discrimination for some reason there is a price of 200-300 bucks , and any smartphone is more expensive, that is, there is already a reference to the constitution, there are pistols against tanks, what is it about ? population i would like us to separate these processes if we are talking about e-e tireo dtg i can give you a whole lecture and the same to the candidate well, i don't think this is necessary, this is the next step, today we need to make a basic bill that will settle the extremely complex issue that has not been settled for 30 years, we need to solve this, society is ready, everyone is ready, i

thank the minister of internal affairs for raising the issue so that we can already remove it from the agenda, let's just build a foundation on which we will later figure out who in we have the right to own automatic weapons, who doesn't have the right to build up a tire defense system, it will happen later. let's make a base today with the alphabet p . georgiou. you are very right about the fact that we need a law that regulates fundamental things , that's the main question that people need to understand. and we also want to to get an answer to this bill, which is currently in the parliament, it regulates this fundamental problem in general in the version in which it was adopted in the first reading, of course no no, but those amendments which in particular, the representatives of our association submitted to the

people's deputies, and according to the information i have , it is quite possible that if they are taken into account, then he will generally close all these issues, which gas stations 1 2 3 please, weapons, that is, their e-e operation, that is, not only in general therefore , it is not provided for in the draft law at all. it is only for athletes, and those who are engaged in sports and there participate in international competitions no more than twice a year, i.e. first, that is, to introduce the institute of short-barreled weapons in general, then eh, accordingly, eh, to establish the age from which this weapon should be available to allow its carrying and use for self-defense purposes. well, there are plus a few more professional ones . there is also a normal, in principle regulated issue of self-defense and a more or less normal

article 36 of the criminal code that allows us to defend ourselves with weapons, that is, everything is there. in the world regarding trophy weapons, the version that was voiced by the actions of the sanatorium, which reminds me very much of what we insisted on, that is, you have a trophy gun, well, you found it there, it’s impossible, but there is such a term found on the weapon , came and gave it for comparative ballistics examination, during this time he received a certificate of the owner of a weapon of the appropriate category and kept it with him when he was shot and they already clearly know that he is behind you fixed about him came brought a machine gun or let's say an automatic weapon caliber there well, you have to decide according to the criterion , this is again a question of the law, they will offer you a semi-automatic state, she populates in queues, and again, after passing the

courses for obtaining the appropriate license, you can put her on the record, there is no more logical way this is ukraine and here people who have experienced what they have experienced will not return their weapons. i simply call for a sober approach . citizens have much more automatic weapons than well , unfortunately, we can also count those that were issued , including from e-e trucks, this is just how they were issued when this active part of our group began in the united states, the number of weapons in the hands of people is more than the number of citizens in the country well, even there they are now talking about stricter rules for the sale of weapons, and joe biden spoke about it after the last case in texas, an 18-year-old boy from pskov mass murder, you

can now see the video on the screen and in two days before the summer vacation, an 18-year-old boy shot the children of 19 junior high school students and two teachers , at least 13 more people were killed, and with serious injuries in the hospital, the attacker salvador ramos himself was shot by the police, and by shooting at the school, salvador killed his grandmother, and here is an important nuance of the registered weapon of a semi-automatic rifle was purchased by her boyfriend legally and joe biden he says the very idea that an 18-year-old boy can go into a store and simply buy an assault rifle and a pistol is fundamentally wrong and this position must be changed, we know that most republicans from the gun lobby they are against but joe biden says he will communicate with them let's listen to the artemension i have

renewed efforts to get congress especially republicans to pass a new gun control law that would possibly expand background checks on more gun buyers and include other measures that they are there, so we see that they are used to something, the usa is the most loyal country to ownership well, but there they started talking very much for the sake of justice, so i was just researching it's just a question, the places where these mass shootings happened in the united states are conditionally this fanatic who comes to shoot someone, he comes to those places where the legal carrying of weapons is prohibited, that is, roughly speaking, when you go there. you go to this or that place. if you are a law-abiding citizen there, then you you can't come there with weapons and rudely speaking, let's all call them that, or let everyone call them what they want to kill, so they purposefully go to those places where they know for sure that you won't get those bullets in return

an important point about what you need to know, for example, why do we see so many victims, for example, because there is no one to shoot back, this is just a fact, but hryhoriy usatoy wants to recommend friends, let's briefly and briefly summarize our program, see allow me to continue what you voiced to say that not only the states today are thinking about restricting the circulation of weapons in connection with such events, because in the states only in the last 15 years 500,000 people have died from firearms, think about this figure half a million canadian government it is also introducing a national ban on the possession and purchase and sale of firearms this was stated by the prime minister of canada justin trudeau e. weapons in everyday life , moreover, i will say that in the state