There is a widespread opinion that legislation should fix independently established social norms and it is such legislation that will be legitimate in the eyes of citizens, and it will be respected naturally. In complete contradiction with this maxim, the observed parliaments of the entire “civilized world” operate (we do not see others). These parliaments invent new social norms and try to implant them by force. Some kind of "fake news", some kind of "personal data," that's all. Of course, no one will observe such laws, because a citizen has a lot of his own affairs, rather than still wanting members of parliament who are concerned only with personal indicators and personal security.
And in this semantic context, the statement by the Prosecutor General of Ukraine Lutsenko about the need to legalize weapons and prostitution looks completely logical. And even some envy takes that we have no such honest politicians and officials.
“From my point of view,” says Yury Vitalyevich in his interview to Ukrainian journalist Dmitry Gordon, “it is necessary to legalize weapons ... with an obligatory gilzotekoy, with psychiatric, drug and alcohol expertise. It is possible ... I am not joking, there are from three to five million illegal trunks in the country. ”
It is the last phrase (in which Lutsenko is not joking) that tells us that the prosecutor general is not involved in political populism, but suggests formalizing and fixing the social norms that are really established in Ukraine. These norms are: total prostitution and total armed forces of the population. What report of an enthusiastic hipster from Kiev can’t be taken - even in him there will definitely be told about armed people in civilian clothes who walk the streets of the Ukrainian capital. Once one of the most beautiful cities in Europe. And now it looks like the capital of an African state.
Well, about Ukrainian prostitution is not for me to tell you. She even flourished in pre-revolutionary Ukraine, and now, when there are no prospects and no money at home, Ukrainian girls are completely without choice.
And since all this is there and has developed as a social norm, then why not fix it in the legislation? And then let the prostitutes go through mandatory medical examinations and pay taxes, and armed people in civilian clothes register their weapons and carry them around Khreshchatyk with full legal grounds for that.
There is, however, another way. Sometimes, legislation is still conceived as a tool to combat the naturally established social norms that are recognized in a healthy person, as it were, and not quite norms. Because the concept of the norm is changing. Well, let's say, all these methods for combating society with smokers, despite all the initial resistance of smokers, have non-illusory results. Perhaps because the influence of healthy people has become noticeably prevail over the influence of smokers. Just because of the changed quantitative ratio. As a result, we can already live to see a society where public smoking is considered as shameful as throwing garbage from windows.
Or, as it is now almost impossible (at least in Moscow) it is considered to smoke in the elevator. But once in the elevator all smokers smoked. As once and all of Europe threw garbage from the windows.
But in order for such legislation to mature, the appropriate support for it must ripen in society. And if at least some public support had ripened in Ukraine to combat prostitution or free carrying of weapons, then Prosecutor General Lutsenko would most likely offer something different on the eve of the presidential election.
And by the way, notice that I am not at all against prostitution as such. A woman is free to dispose of her body as she wants. But precisely “as it should be”. Prostitution at will and vocation is no worse than any other profession, and in many professions it is even better - for a woman in this way brings joy and pleasure. But forced prostitution, prostitution from despair, against the desire of a woman, is, of course, a social evil with which to fight. But the prosecutor Lutsenko does not offer any methods to combat this evil. He offers to legalize it and calm down on that. That is, to legally fix the transformation of the Ukrainian woman into a prostitute as a result of all the revolutionary changes.
The same with weapons. In Russia, for example, despite its declared position against free possession of weapons (which I, I note, strongly share), anyone can have weapons completely legally. If he really needs it, if he wants to, he can go through the necessary formalities and put at least even the Saiga carbine, which differs from the Kalashnikov rifle, only in the absence of an automatic firing mode, in his weapon safe. But only if you really want - as a woman wants to sell her body for money. Legalization of weapons on the proposal of the Prosecutor General Lutsenko is an opportunity to buy any weapon to anyone, as a spontaneous purchase. Will it make modern Ukraine safer? Hardly. But this decision seems simple and obvious, so easy to convey to the voter.
Yury Lutsenko is historically deeply involved in the Ukrainian revolutionary process. And it seems that now his nature is becoming somewhat more understandable than before. If all of them are there (and others, however, have long been extruded), then there is no point in negotiating with them. Their rule is "take everything and share." Building complex, long-term and fine-tuned relationships with such politicians is simply wasting time.
I would not.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.