St. Petersburg School Incident and Online Market Practices
In St. Petersburg, a ninth grader fired an air pistol at School No. 633, an event that sparked immediate scrutiny of how air guns are sold and monitored. A spokesperson for Ozon stated that the company could not confirm whether the teenager or his family had purchased any pistols from the marketplace, noting that no law enforcement requests had been received yet regarding the incident. This response followed reporting by Fontanka, which indicated that the student obtained the gun in Ozon, though the company did not verify this claim independently.
Ozon’s press service emphasized that the marketplace does sell pneumatic guns, but with a muzzle energy below 3 Joules. The firm clarified that devices with such specifications are not classified as weapons. They explained that, under gun laws, air guns with muzzle energy under 3 Joules are legally saleable and may be bought without age restrictions. The site advertises only these low-energy pneumatic pistols. Before any listing is approved, Ozon says it requires a certificate of conformity and a test report from the seller, and items are not allowed to go on sale until those documents are provided. The company also asserted that firearms and high-energy pneumatic devices are not sold on Ozon.
The Main Investigation Directorate of the Investigative Committee of Russia for Saint Petersburg, specifically the Kalininsky District’s Investigative Department, released a photograph of the gun used in the incident. Socialbites.ca confirmed that a model matching the police image is available on the Ozon marketplace, with the pistol priced at just over 5,000 rubles. This linkage between law enforcement materials and the marketplace listing has raised questions about how such products are marketed and controlled online.
OnThursday, April 13, authorities reported that the shooting began with an air pistol on a street near the school and continued inside the building. The student later described his actions as a joke, and he was taken into custody. The education committee characterized the gun as a toy equipped with a rubber bullet, a description that has been contested in discussions about safety standards and weapon classification. The incident drew considerable attention to how toy-like devices are regulated and perceived within educational environments.
The Investigative Committee subsequently opened a criminal case against the student. Five classmates sustained injuries during the attack; medical officials reported that the wounded were discharged after examinations and a period of treatment. The episode underscored ongoing debates about school safety, youth access to air-powered devices, and the adequacy of existing regulations in preventing harm while balancing legitimate consumer markets.
Overall, the episode highlights the tension between online marketplaces that offer low-energy air guns and the public safety measures intended to keep these items out of the hands of minors and unqualified buyers. It also stresses the importance of transparent documentation and verifiable risk assessments for product listings. As authorities continue to investigate, stakeholders in e-commerce and policy discussions are likely to revisit how certification requirements, age restrictions, and warning labels are enforced across digital marketplaces, especially when products resemble everyday toys or are marketed to a broad audience. The public discourse increasingly centers on ensuring that consumer protection laws align with evolving online retail practices and with safety standards that protect students and communities from potential harm. (Attribution: Fontanka; socialbites.ca)