Province to regulate body armour
 

http://www.edmontonsun.com/2012/03/1...te-body-armour

Regulating body armour won’t stick, said retailers.

Starting June 15, Albertans who own or want body armour need a legitimate reason under the Body Armour Control Act, or a permit from the Solicitor General and Public Security office.

Officers will soon be able to charge people wearing bullet or stab-resistant vests, along with seizing the armour if they don’t have a permit. And those people can expect to pay a fine up to $10,000, along with serving six months in the clink.

“Police now have another resource in their fight against gangs in our communities,” said Jonathan Denis, Alberta’s Solicitor General and Minister of Public Safety.

“This initiative doesn’t penalize those with a legitimate reason to wear body armour, such as police or security personnel.”

Albertans with professions in policing, security or safety are exempt from the act, while everyone else needs to explain themselves to the solicitor general and public security office.

A body armour permit costs $50 per year and takes five days to process. Citizens have to pass a criminal background check in order to get a permit.

Gordon McGowan, president of rearmament distributor MilArm in downtown Edmonton, thinks the act is “a knee-jerk reaction to a nonexistent problem.”

Body armour vests are just an Internet search away from anyone who wishes to hide their purchase from the government, McGowan said.

“If I have a reason to own body armour and I want it, why is it up to the government to determine if my reason is legitimate or not?” McGowan asked.

Milarms carries around a dozen VestFriend stab-resistant vests and McGowan said they sell only a few each month. Their most common body armour buying customers are nightclub owners looking to equip their bouncers and doormen.

He has a strict store policy not to sell body armour to civilians, which keeps the gang-bangers from inquiring said McGowan.

matthew.dykstra@sunmedia.ca





This is stupid. Why should the government get to decide who can protect themselves? We already can't have a gun or knife for protection from criminals WHO HAVE GUNS AND KNIVES. Is this anything more than a money grab?:sign0161:

What a bunch of morons. First you can't carry a firearm to protect yourself, and now you can't even wear clothing that can help protect you from attackers without purchasing a permit. This stupidity should gain even more votes for the Wildrose party.

I don't see the need for the average citizen to have body armour. We do not live in a society where you risk your life walking to the store every day. There are very few incidents of gunfire, and those incidents that do happen are between known people.

When I bought my body armour, I had to produce a document showing that I needed it due to my job. I was heading to Kabul to work on a UN contract. No problem buying the armour. I don't wear it here. I was asked about it by customs but showed my UN id, and problem solved.

Why should the risk of injury/death have to be greater than it already is, for it to be ok for me to do something that doesn't put anyone else in ANY danger?

sounds fair to me.... as long as you have a good reason for it who cares. not many valid reasons to have one unless job related...

The law is to protect the police from being put in harms way when they confront someone wearing body armour with the intent to do harm and they want to protect themselves from the police.

There is no reason for the average person to need to wear body armour.

You are assuming that criminals are law abiding.

The average law abiding citizen isn't going to go out, buy body armour, and then all of a sudden turn into a violent criminal because of the body armour.

I don't see the need for the government to regulate who wears body armor. If I choose to wear it, how does that harm anyone? There are many things that there is no "need" for the average citizen to possess, including firearms, tobacco products, alcohol, vehicles that can travel at twice the speed limit, etc.In fact tobacco products and alcohol result in more deaths than firearms in Canada, yet we are allowed to use these products, because we supposedly live in a free country. If we were only allowed to possess what we "need" to survive, I for one would not be living in Canada.

Exactly. Basically zero need for body armor (except hazardous jobs) unless you are planning some terrible act, or involved in some sort of illegal transactions and worried of being a target. Maybe preppers could be cut a break, but with background checks etc. Other than that, why else would you need it.

It is a LITTLE ironic that Rwm1273 has his location as "deadmonton" and is against the general public having access to body armour.

RWM : Do you think that wanting to protect yourself from some of the amateurs in the next bay at the shooting range is sufficient reason to possess body armor? I sure do, and the yahoo in charge of distributing these permits had best think so as well. As a strictly defensive piece it's quite absurd to ban them, but the opposition will be small and will be easily muted, and the bureaucrats will think they accomplished something and congratulate themselves. This will stop crime like banning fire extinguishers will stop arson.

Gives police grounds to seize, and charge criminals when they find them with armor though. Drug dealers and gang members with armor is not good for anyone.

I wouldn't be against criminal/background checks etc. Obviously gang bangers and known criminals are likely to have bad reasons for buying body armour.

A legitimate reason!!!! that's it! not that much to ask for!!!! Geeze!

with what you describe would then basically eliminaet all things in life outside , food , shelter , and clothing . :snapoutofit:

Another solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

What next? Legislation banning the use of land mines on Highway #2?

lol, why should the government get to decide if my reason is legitimate?

Is my point more valid if I make it huge?

Owning/using body armour doesn't hurt anyone else. Unless I am a criminal in which case, I don't follow the law anyways, and will have body armour!!

Gov fail

preventative maintenance
change your tires BEFORE they explode?

I could see a total ban being uncalled for, but they just want a good reason as to why you want/have it. Give a good reason. Job. Gun range safety, etc. Whats the big deal. Its intended to restrict access to those with bad intent.

It is a lot to ask for, if you let the government decide which reasons are legitimate.

if at one time in life i was a gang banger , got out of that life , but have a criminal record because of the ways in my past . I hung out with bad dudes and copped a deal because i snitched .

i did some time, and now a model citizen, but afraid for my life because of my past , does that work for a reason in your books ?

That is because I find Edmonton dead compared to other places such as Calgary.

It has nothing to do with it's high crime rate.

But thanks for showing your line of thought.

So would you be ok with a knife registry? Lot's of people get killed by knives every year.

works for me. If you have a legitimate reason to feel targeted for retribution, sure!

Every year, many times more people die due to alcohol and tobacco use, yet you don't need a permit to use either.

Unfortunately, you don't get to decide if the reason is legitimate, the government does, and the senate hearing today, is proof of just how clueless many people that have a say in our laws are.

So why are you so against the government wanting to issue you a permit to have the body armour? Are you talking from both sides of your mouth?

Ummm, Edmonton is the murder capital of Canada and has been reported in the media as deadmonton.

So you're welcome....?

ok, so what are some legitimate reasons you think would be turned down?

I think its much to do about nothing honestly.....

Is there a rise in the number of gang members getting fully suited up in armour now???

You would think putting money and resources into something so small and insignificant would have stemmed from a recent event?

LC

well I live next door to the guy i described , and I look a bit like him . does that work for you ?

see where this is going . . .

Redford is working hard to ram a pile of laws through before the election. Pretty busy for an unelected premier.

All my other thoughts have been covered by the rational, logical members above. You know who you are.