Quote:
I don't think there is any direction to ban the purchase of body armour, only to restrict who can purchase it and for specific reasons. I am sure you may be able to make a strong argument for wearing body armour if you claim you are scared of the idiots at the next shooting bay, but I would bet that there would be an investigation to the range, and it could face closure, then eliminating your need for body armour. |
If it was really meant to protect society, or the police, they wouldn't be charging $50 per year for a permit, it would be worth doing for no charge.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Don't get me wrong, I don't own body armour and I can't see myself ever buying any, but I HATE the fact that I can't if I wanted or felt I needed to. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
It is not like body armour is a fashion statement. It is heavy and intrusive. But if you need it, it is worth the trouble, and nobody is banning you from it. Just prove why you need it. |
Quote:
Kind of like a handicapped sign. |
Quote:
|
while they are at it they should also ban all handguns , all the gang bangers are popping caps with hand guns . also ban cadilac escilades , they are rolling busting caps in escilades . ha
:snapoutofit: same logic really |
Quote:
|
Quote:
What about a baseball bat? I bet there are more baseball bats used during crimes in Alberta than bullet proof vests. Should we have to show that we are a part of a softball team and then PAY the government for the privilege? |
Quote:
LC |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I can't possibly imagine a scenario where I would ever want to buy or wear body armour, but why the heck should the government be deciding that?
Kinda weird to see so many people that are OK with the gov treating us all like criminals. Maybe if they did their job and put criminals in jail, they wouldn't have to come up with so many assinine excuses of laws pretending they are doing something to fight crime. Typical liberal BS. |
Quote:
Here is BC's law. Alberta wants to go to something similar. Part 1 — Possession of Body Armour Prohibition on possession of body armour 2 (1) In this section: "armoured car guard" means an individual who performs the work of, or provides any aspect of the services provided by, an armoured car guard service, as defined in the Security Services Act; "private investigator" has the same meaning as in the Security Services Act; "security consultant" has the same meaning as in the Security Services Act; "security guard" means an individual who performs the work of, or provides any aspect of the services provided by, a security guard service, as defined in the Security Services Act. (2) A person must not possess body armour except under the authority of a valid body armour permit issued in the person's name. (3) Subsection (2) does not apply to a person who (a) holds a valid security worker licence authorizing the person to perform the work of (i) an armoured car guard, (ii) a private investigator, (iii) a security consultant, (iv) a security guard, or (v) a body armour salesperson, while the person is in the course of employment under the security worker licence, (b) holds a valid security business licence for a security business described in paragraph (a), (c), (d), (e), (f) or (g) of the definition of "security business" in the Security Services Act, while the person is in the course of employment in relation to the security business licence, or (c) is exempt under the regulations. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
It's another Emperors New Clothes law; a tactic grab by the police that will also be treated just like our firearm laws: if it gets to court, the prosecution will have already pleaded out all the annoying little charges to get a plea on whatever meatier one looks best on their resume statistic chart. Except in Toronto, where the police will use it as a ruse to search your whole house and then sieze and destroy your property before your first court date. |
Quote:
This is not about weapons. It is about body armour. There is no legitimate purpose for wearing body armour other than to protect yourself from being shot or stabbed. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
This is just more of the same stupid, tyrannical, inane, dumb, ineffective, offensive, insulting, useless, distracting, bozo kind of placebo laws that take the blame for criminal behaviour away from the criminal and instead regulate the behaviour of the law-abiding in an attempt to prevent a criminal from committing a crime. (I assume we are not all in a knot about somebody who buys a BP vest to, say, gather honey from hives. I also assume it's about stopping crime. If not, we are all on a looney farm.) Criminals don't obey laws. That's why they are called criminals. This does one thing, and one thing only - it requires obedience from the law-abiding. Criminal intent is thrown out the window - again. The law-abiding are regulated in a stupid attempt to make certain criminal conduct impossible, i.e., resisting arrest or robbing a bank with a vest on. News flash: Resisting arrest and robbing banks are already illegal. If criminals don't obey a law that says: No Bank Robbing, why'n hell are they going to obey a law that says: No Bank Robbing While Wearing A BP Vest? If it's about "bad intent", bloopbloop, (as it should be) they why doesn't the law say that? It SHOULD be about "bad intent", I agree with you that far. But that's not what is regulated, is it? We already have those laws on the books, don't we? :angry3: I'm too tired to lay it out any more intelligently than that tonight; but that's the gist of it. |
what about bulletproof niqabs???
Why not just have a law that if you commit a crime and are wearing body armour and the police want to shoot at you, you have to stand still and let them catch up to you so they can have a good head shot. That law makes about as much sense as this one. |
Quote:
This is not a ban. Why does everyone here see this as a ban? It is just a restriction to have some control on body armour. Now the article says that body armour is a internet search away. Yes if you want to buy old out dated body armour. I would not risk my life with an old surplus piece of body armour. I bought mine for a reason, and that reason is where I work some times I risk being shot or blown up. My body armour may only provide me marginal protection from this risk. There is no reason for me to ever wear my body armour here in Canada, unless I become a security guard or bouncer. |
Quote:
with the above law its like sayign you can only own a butcher knife if yur employed as a butcher , and so on , and so on . . if this passes i think ill buy some body armor just because . abssolutely assenine |
Quote:
You've got a good grasp of the insanity of these emotion laws.:happy0180: |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.