At the end of last year, the Riga City Council (RD) adopted the rules for welcoming the new year’s fireworks. Now it is allowed to shoot festive fireworks only one hour after the arrival of the new year in Latvian time. At all other times, fireworks are considered a violation and will be administratively punished.
This RD initiative already received criticism and ironic remarks from all sides at the time of its adoption. Some believed that this step was a measure to polish the feathers of Riga vice-mayor Edvards Ratnieks, others expressed doubts about how compliance with these rules could be controlled, because “there will be those who follow Moscow’s time, as always”.
Already on the first day of the new year, January 1, Ratnieks announced that “On New Year’s Eve, the Riga municipal police received 46 calls about the use of pyrotechnics. In five cases, they were “caught red-handed”. In the rest, an in-depth investigation will be conducted, identifying the culprits from the neighbors or building video surveillance cameras. The full report will be available next week.”
This RD’s attempt to limit the use of pyrotechnics in the city should be evaluated from several aspects. From a political point of view, these fireworks restrictions were pushed as a ban on firing fireworks after Moscow time. The delivery of exactly such a message was apparently also planned, as the fireworks restrictions could easily be justified by purely domestic reasons. If only that less stress (shorter time) would have to be endured by the family pets of many residents of Riga. Or out of respect for the refugees of the Ukrainian war, who may associate this firework shooting with other types of shooting.
Instead, without pretensions and political trickery, the direct text said: “The new rules were created to break the traditions rooted for years in the part of society that uses pyrotechnics on New Year’s Day to glorify the aggressor state.”
It is too early to judge the effectiveness of this step, although in any case, the geopolitical situation does not allow us to look tolerantly at even the smallest manifestations of “glorifying the aggressor state”. What can be afforded in Paris or Berlin for that matter, we cannot afford. Although they too would have their own, no less serious reasons for limiting the permissibility of fireworks.
If we refer to the experience of other countries, then we should talk about the main one. About the danger of using pyrotechnics, the necessity and usefulness of its regulation. In the already mentioned France and Germany, the main news of January 1 every year is: how many cars have burned, how many fires have occurred and how many people have been injured. About twenty years ago with us, on the day after Midsummer’s Eve. Ten years ago, there were similar headlines in China as well, but in 2017, this pyrotechnic madness, which had reached completely unprecedented levels in China, began to be severely curtailed.
This year is no exception. The burnt-out church in the Netherlands is just another proof that Western Europe is late with the implementation of these fireworks restrictions. In Germany, France and elsewhere in Europe, skepticism has increased against restrictions on fireworks, because there is a fear that these restrictions will not be fulfilled anyway and it will be a big burden for the police, who in that case would have to additionally confront that part of the society there, with which no one in Europe wants to confront.
As a result, welcoming the new year in the centers of many large European cities has turned into an adventure full of sharp feelings, near which it is better not to be seen for an ordinary, calm city dweller. That’s putting it mildly.
In Latvia, this fireworks mania has not yet reached such extreme manifestations as in some parts of Europe, where rockets are shot deliberately, aiming at building windows and other targets. In the last few years, since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, fireworks in Latvia had even become “used to”, because shooting fireworks was no longer considered “good tone” and at the official level, it was removed from the agenda of celebrations almost everywhere. However, in the fourth year of the war, people are “used to” the war, and this year the tradition of fireworks has returned to the same intensity as before.
Practice shows that curbing vice in time, already in the bud, is the most effective way to prevent its uncontrolled spread. As we see it in many places in Western Europe. It is not just about the prevention of deliberate hooliganism. Fireworks, as already mentioned, have a severe effect on pets and cause a lot of stress for dog and cat owners as well. Likewise, a birthday celebration firework of an unscrupulous citizen in the yard of an apartment building at two in the morning is a clear disturbance of public order.
Therefore, one should think about developing strict fireworks regulations at the national (Parliament) level. Long before an accident happened.
I can already hear two types of objections. First, it can be left up to each municipality. There is no need for the state to interfere in matters that are within the competence of the local governments.
Taking into account the already mentioned experience of Western Europe, where pyrotechnic rockets are used as firearms in some cases, the use of pyrotechnics can also be evaluated from the aspect of national security. Therefore, it requires state, general national regulation.
The second objection is about the regulation itself. There is a widespread opinion in Latvia that almost any state regulation is bad because it restricts people’s freedom. In other words, it is socialism. On the other hand, free, unhindered activity is good a priori because it promotes people’s initiative. Consequently, the development of the country. Therefore, if we want our country to develop in a healthy way, we must reduce state regulation and allow people to express themselves freely, without unnecessary restrictions.
This sounds good in the statements of these preachers of “freedom”, but world practice shows the exact opposite. The more developed the country, the more regulated, regulated and organized everything is. On the other hand, in underdeveloped countries there is chaos and everyone does what they want. The fact that in the West over the past twenty years, under the pressure of tolerance, inclusion, and “mutual understanding,” the rigor of regulation has been greatly relaxed, only confirms this connection. Namely, the leadership of developed countries is becoming weaker and weaker.
In the same oft-cited Singapore, the breakthrough was secured by strict, draconian regulation. It is still one of the most regulated countries not only in the region, but in the whole world. It is not free to spit on the street there’. And it’s good that it’s not free.
The favorite phrase of the opponents of regulation – bans do not help, he will drink as before (will break the speed limit, fire fireworks when he wants, etc.) – would hardly earn the praise of the father of Singapore’s economic miracle, Li Guanyao. He, like another “father” of the miracle of Europeanization, Rwanda’s long-time president Paul Kagame, did his “miracles” not by letting everyone do what they want, but with a firm iron hand, for which the left-liberal society calls both of these “fathers of miracles” dictators and usurpers of power.
I’ve seen many times how people live in countries where everyone does what they want, where the state regulates little and where 70% of the population are entrepreneurs (that is, they try to make a living, not by working for a salary, but by doing something by themselves). I’ll tell you how it is. Live badly. Much worse than in Latvia.
Not only animal lovers, not only lovers of sound sleep and a quiet night’s sleep, would benefit if there were strict regulations at the national level in Latvia: where, when and under what conditions fireworks can be fired and when and where they cannot be fired. Everyone would benefit. The whole society. The country of Latvia as a whole.
