On the eve of the conversation about the insults of a person and their consequences can serve as one case in life. Let's start with the literal transmission of a curious dialogue.
- Tatyana! Why did you break the door of Baba Shura’s neighbor?
“Why did she call me a fool?”
“So you have a certificate from a psychiatrist!”
“So what, I didn’t show her to her,” the large-bodied girl smirks with a rustic but sly expression on her face.
Tatyana, of course, did the wrong thing because of her ignorance. Meanwhile, in the legislation there is an article for insulting a person! She should have written a statement to the court and received decent compensation from her grandmother, who, although she does not have a relevant certificate, doesn’t differ much from Tatiana in development, she also does not shine with the presence of a sense of tact.
Indeed, there is an insult to the person, article 130. Some may doubt the correctness of my assumption that the girl with a certificate can count on winning in court. It seems that it turns out that Baba Shura simply “called things by their proper names”?
But no, my dears! Even a drunken person in a detoxification center, workers are not entitled to call them “drunks” or “drunk”, and according to the rules they must contact him strictly by name and patronymic. Every citizen of Russia has a responsibility to insult a person, and it does not matter if he is drunk or lags behind in mental development.
By the way, if we recall the story with which this article began, then we can emphasize another feature of the legislative article on insults. Even telling the truth, but expressing it in indecent form, a person thereby commits a crime. And especially insulting is the insult, which is applied indicating any physical disabilities of a person.
Another thing is that it is very difficult to prove an insult to a person (Article 130) - the law does not always work in full force in our country. And therefore, the percentage of insulted hourly people who decide to go to court is extremely small. And even less is the percentage of those who win the dispute ... After all, during the trial , irrefutable evidence of corpus delicti is necessary, which is extremely difficult to submit to the plaintiff in court.
Article 130 recognizes an insult to the person, whether personally inflicted or expressed to another person. And if a third party can still testify in court the corpus delicti, then a personal meeting may well be held in confidence. How to prove in this case an insult to the person?
It is also considered a crime if insults are inflicted by telephone, on the Internet, in writing: notes, telegrams, letters, drawings or even symbols or with the participation of the media. Insulting a person Article 130 considers a crime and wordless when a degrading person uses indecent gestures or actions. Offensive actions are considered to be spitting in the direction of a person, tearing clothes off of him, dousing with liquids. In practice, such actions cannot cause real harm to human health, but the fact of humiliation is evident here.
You should respect yourself and avoid any insults. And if, nevertheless, such a thing suddenly takes place, then all efforts must be made to punish the offender with dignity.
An example of correct behavior is the story that happened at one state farm even during the Soviet era. The young livestock specialist went into the accounting department with some complaints about payroll.
The chief accountant, accustomed to doing her "unclean" deeds with impunity, drove the visitor away in anger. And even out of her village habit, she was careless to look out the door and shout after her: “Blue chicken!”
The young woman calmly inquired of those around her: “Are there blue hens? Why did she say that about me? ” And they explained to her with pleasure that the blue chicken is thin, such people are not very quoted in the village. The village woman must be strong and strong in order to stop the horse, and if necessary, replace it in the furrow.
The girl shook her head and immediately wrote a statement to the court, which she asked to sign those present. Not everyone, of course, agreed, but a couple of witnesses were found. Question: why did the livestock specialist become interested in people who watched an ugly scene about what the phrase “blue chicken” means? Yes then to get attention! And to give everyone the opportunity to understand that the chief accountant wanted to insult the livestock technician.
As a result, the girl received decent compensation from the offender, she was demoted. And the most important thing is that from this moment not a single person made any attempts to speak out against the visitors in a rude manner.