After talking about it for what seemed like decades, the people who run our northern suburb finally managed to get rid of their hated, hideously expensive long gun registry. Clearly not happy about a net increase in freedom in the Great White North, the Powers That Be scanned the terrain for an equal and opposite reduction in liberty for the average poutine-eating Canuck. Their regulatory radar beeped loudest when it came to their attention that just about anyone could buy body armor. Apparently, all that Kevlar openly available on the street’s posing an unacceptably high threat to, well, someone. And since gang members had occasionally been apprehended wearing body armor, the True North, strong and not so free, is gonna do its damnedest to make sure no one can protect themselves. Just remember, boys, when body armor is illegal, only criminals will have body armor.

26 Responses to Canada Giveth, Then Almost Immediately Taketh Away

  1. Seriously, wtf. Will they ban seatbelts next?
    “And since gang members have occasionaly been apprehended while wearing seatbelts…”

  2. Rumor has it that the body armor folks neglected to contribute money to all of the politicians election campaign funds. Seriously, all these government actions are window dressings avoiding steps to honestly and intelligently acknowledge the deep core issues of where social problems are coming from.

  3. This makes me feel ashamed to be half Canadian. Heaven forbid somebody wants to protect themselves by wearing a heavy article of clothing. Gimme a break.

  4. It’s a shame, really. Body armor makes a bold fashion statement, especially with formalwear.

    Even in the semi-sane Commonwealth of Massachusetts, body armor is legal for the proverbial law abiding citizen. If I chose, I could wear body armor to a school, in a bar or at the local house of worship. What I would not be allowed to do is wear the body armor during the commission of a crime, because then I’d get an extra five-spot as a guest of the Commonwealth. Which is really bizarre, because if I committed the same crime nekkid, I wouldn’t get an extra day.

    You’d think it would be the other way around, right?

  5. Big surprise; I was just waiting for some kind of political backlash. Nothing offends tyrants more than gains in personal freedom, and they have to lash out like the mental children they are.

    The thing I don’t get is why this is a problem for antis. Typically, antis love criminals more than lawful citizens and gun-owners and fight to repeal things like Castle Doctrines that protect innocent people and put bad guys in danger. Wouldn’t they WANT criminals to wear body armor to protect them? I mean, they’re allies after all; both groups want to victimize law-abiding citizens.

  6. This has been the work of PROVINCIAL governments, not the Feds. And, here in Alberta, this is one reason why we’ll be glad to get rid of the Wicked Witch of the West (Alison Redford, who introduced this legislation), in the coming election.

  7. Seems like you could cut down on firearm related deaths by requiring everyone to wear body armor. just sayin’.

  8. Can’t buy body armor in CT unless you are face to face with the seller (no mail order), and I see NY is possibly going to outlaw civilian ownership of body armor.

    A felony conviction will block you from getting body armor under federal law and several stare laws.

    I see nothing about it on the TSA web site, but what happens if you show up to board an aircraft wearing body armor? Since I see no prohibition listed, I’m assuming you just get the “enhanced” multiple cavity probe and search?

  9. In Copenhagen Denmark there is a commune type enclave called Christiania. While visiting I saw a sign stating the Christinia Common Law. Amoung the prohibitions of weapons, fireworks, private cars, and biker colors, one of the things listed was bulletproof clothing. I thought at the time how stupid it was to ban what is possibly the most purely defensive items that could be. But now I see that an entire country is attempting the same. Sometimes I despair for the human race.

    http://tinyurl.com/car7hb6

  10. The only reason they want to do this is so that their precious gun death statistics don’t. If people have access to life saving equipment, they’re less likely to die. Then when gun deaths start averaging barely over 50 a year, the antis will lose their jobs.

  11. When I bought my first gun in the early 90s, one great motivator was the realization that a significant number of politicians and fellow citizens didn’t want me to have one. Now I’m feeling the same strong urge to invest in body armor.

  12. Wow, what a business opportunity! Just like the Canadians smuggled booze into the US during prohibition, Americans can now start smuggling body armor into Canada! And set up illicit body armor stores in the basements of tenements in the dark recesses of the inner cities of Saskatchewan! The Roaring Teenies will start next year in Canada! Be there or be cubical! Or something…..

  13. The last sentence of the original post says it all. I would understand if there was a way to regulate criminals, but the fact that they are criminals is just about the definition of “Unable-to-Regulate”. Now… I would understand if Canada made armor piercing rounds illegal and permitted their law enforcement officers utilize them. Common sense anyone? Not so common any more I suppose.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *