Communists putting children above adults? Say it isn’t so!

For adults, fathers and grandfathers, these boisterous games of the kids in the crowded conditions of camp could cause more anguish and be more hurtful than their robbing and their rapacious greed. It proved to be one of the most sensitive forms of humiliation for an elderly person to be made equal with a young whippersnapper–if only it were equal! But not to be turned over to the tyranny of the whippersnappers.

The Gulag Archipelago, Volume 2, p 460

USSR Criminal Code of 1926 vs. Canadian Criminal Code of 2023

In the Criminal Code of 1926 there was a most stupid Article 139 — “on the limits of necessary self-defense” — according to which you had the right to unsheath your knife only after the criminal’s knife was hovering over you. And you could stab him only after he had stabbed you. And otherwise you would be the one put on trial. (And there was no article in our legislation saying that the greater criminal was the one who attacked someone weaker than himself.) This fear of exceeding the measure of necessary self-defense led to total spinelessness as a national characteristic. A hoodlum once began to beat up the Red Army man Aleksandr Zakharov outside a club. Zakharov took out a folding penknife and killed the hoodlum. And for this he got … ten years for plain murder! “And what was I supposed to do?” he asked, astonished. Prosecutor Artsishevsky replied: “You should have fled!” [emphasis added]

…

The state, in its Criminal Code, forbids citizens to have firearms or other weapons [emphasis added], but does not itself undertake to defend them! The state turns its citizens over to the power of the bandits — and then through the press dares to summon them to “social resistance” against these bandits.

The Gulag Archipelago, Volume 2, p 431

Canadian citizens have a fundamental right to safeguard themselves and their property, and this right must be upheld as long as their defensive actions are reasonable and proportional to the circumstances. However, it is crucial to note that injuring an intruder or using lethal force is only justified when it is the only available option for self-defence against a perceived threat of severe bodily harm or loss of life. [emphasis added]

Any actions taken beyond what is deemed reasonable and necessary will not be condoned by the law.

…

Additionally, in relation to firearms, the use of firearms is generally prohibited for the defence of self or property. [emphasis added]

“Self-Defence Laws in Canada: Understand Your Rights”, StrategicCriminalDefence.com

Communists putting the state above the individual? Say it isn’t so!

Here is what our laws were like for thirty years–to 1947: For robbery of the state, embezzlement of state funds, a packing case from a warehouse, for three potatoes from a collective farm–ten years! (After 1947, it was as much as twenty!) But robbery of a free person? Suppose they cleaned out an apartment, carting off on a truck everything the family had acquired in a lifetime. If it was not accompanied by murder, then the sentence was up to one year, sometimes six months.

The thieves flourished because they were encouraged.

Through its laws the Stalinist power said to the thieves clearly: Do not steal from me! Steal from private persons! You see, private property is a belch from the past.

The Gulag Archipelago, Volume 2, p 429