VAK Russia 5.1.4

COLD STEEL WEAPONS: A MAZE OF STATE STANDARDS AND LEGAL UNCERTAINTY Cold steel weapons: a maze of state standards and legal uncertainty

Published in Vestnik of the St. Petersburg University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia · Volume 2026, Issue 3 · Pages 169–184 · Rubric: CRIMINAL LAW SCIENCES
Received: 29.01.2026 Accepted: 25.09.2026 Published: 30.09.2026 Language of publication: RUS
Introduction. The question of whether an object is classified as a cold steel weapon is of critical importance in law enforcement practice. The classification of administrative and criminal offences relating to the use and trafficking of such weapons, and consequently the degree and extent of the offenders’ liability, depend on the resolution of this issue. In Russia, forensic examination of cold steel weapons is based on a number of regulatory documents, amongst which state technical standards occupy a special place. Materials and methods. A key prerequisite for the effectiveness of forensic activities and, more broadly, for the success of practical jurisprudence, aimed at interpreting theoretical concepts through the optimisation of law-enforcement processes, is the accuracy of the data obtained and the persuasiveness of the researcher’s conclusions. In order to satisfy these conditions, the author has employed methods of critical analysis and synthesis of information, as well as a comprehensive and detailed examination of statutory and technical regulations governing the classification, circulation, and expert assessment of cold steel weapons and items outwardly similar to such weapons. Results. Despite the abundance of state standards related to the standardisation of cold steel weapons and similar items, there is no uniform and comprehensive classification in this field. The state standards themselves, which are intended to ensure the quality and safety of products, describe the characteristics and properties of such items but do not define their legal status; consequently, their provisions cannot form the basis for legal decisions in administrative and criminal cases. The key distinction between cold steel weapons and items that do not fall into this category lies their intended purpose and use. The poor quality of the legal drafting used in developing and updating the current state standards, which largely duplicate one another whilst also containing contradictory information, makes it impossible to identify such differences. This leads to legal uncertainty for citizens and difficulties for law enforcement agencies, associated with potential errors in the application of the law.
cold steel weapons, characteristics of cold steel weapons, forensic examination of cold steel weapons, civilian cold steel weapons, knife, hunting knife, survival knives, cold steel bladed weapons, blade, state standard
Text References
Text (PDF)
Read Download

1. Lozinskiy O. I. Kriminalisticheskaya harakteristika holodnogo oruzhiya: sovremennye podhody; innovacii v klassifikacii; problemy standartizacii profil'noy normativno-pravovoy bazy // Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel'stve. 2024. T. 17, № 7. S. 139–146.

2. Kosenko M. V. Holodnoe oruzhie v sovremennoy klassifikacii ruchnogo oruzhiya // Vestnik Yuzhno-Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Pravo. 2016. T. 16, № 1. S. 57–61. https://doi.org/10.14529/law160109

3. Kokin A. V. O ponyatii, predmete, zadachah i ob'ektah sudebnoy ekspertizy holodnogo i metatel'nogo oruzhiya // Teoriya i praktika sudebnoy ekspertizy. 2017. T. 12, № 4. S. 48–52.

4. Omel'chenko V. A., Arutyunov A. S., Faniev P. A. Problemnye voprosy, svyazannye s kvalifikaciey ob'ekta v kachestve holodnogo oruzhiya // Obschestvo i pravo. 2021. № 1 (75). S. 66–70.

5. Soshina L. A. K voprosu o razvitii i sovremennom sostoyanii zakonodatel'stva, reglamentiruyuschego nezakonnyy oborot oruzhiya v nekotoryh zarubezhnyh gosudarstvah // Sibirskiy yuridicheskiy vestnik. 2007. № 4 (39). S. 72–75.

6. Ponezhina L. Yu., Ponezhin M. Yu. Administrativno-pravovoy rezhim kak chast' mehanizma pravovogo regulirovaniya oborota holodnogo oruzhiya // Yurist'-Pravoved'. 2024. № 4 (111). S. 61–67.

7. Dul'cev M. V. Ekspertiza holodnogo oruzhiya: sovremennoe sostoyanie i perspektivy razvitiya // Trudy Akademii upravleniya MVD Rossii. 2015. № 1 (33). S. 37–40.

8. Malyh A. A. «Takticheskiy» nozh kak ob'ekt kriminalisticheskogo issledovaniya // Policeyskaya i sledstvennaya deyatel'nost'. 2019. № 2. https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-7810.2019.2.28824

9. Gol'cev D. S., Gusev G. Yu. Metodicheskie problemy kriminalisticheskogo issledovaniya holodnogo i metatel'nogo oruzhiya // Obrazovanie i pravo. 2024. № 10. S. 485–490. https://doi.org/10.24412/2076-1503-2024-10-485-490

10. Arutyunov A. S., Faniev P. A. Kriterii otneseniya metatel'nogo nozha k holodnomu oruzhiyu // Vestnik Krasnodarskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2019. № 1 (43). S. 51–54.

11. Glazkova L. V. Osobennosti sovremennyh organizovannyh prestupnyh grupp // Monitoring pravoprimeneniya. 2019. № 1 (30). S. 56.

12. Rostokinskiy A. V., Akkaeva H. A. K voprosu ob otvetstvennosti za noshenie holodnogo oruzhiya v Rossii // Obrazovanie i pravo. 2022. № 1. S. 182–185. https://doi.org/10.24412/2076-1503-2022-1-182-185

13. Yarovenko V. V. Ugolovnaya otvetstvennost' za primenenie holodnogo oruzhiya // Yuridicheskie issledovaniya. 2018. № 3. S. 58–75. https://doi.org/10.25136/2409-7136.2018.3.25553

14. Pogrebnoy A. A. Kriticheskiy analiz Metodiki ekspertnogo resheniya voprosa o prinadlezhnosti predmeta k holodnomu oruzhiyu // Ekspert-kriminalist. 2007. № 3. S. 14–19.

15. Koreckiy D. A., Goncharov A. V. «Oruzheynoe» zakonodatel'stvo: kriminologicheskie, terminologicheskie i ugolovno-pravovye problemy // Zakonnost'. 2024. № 2 (1072). S. 52–58