For protection in case some crazy dumbass were to walk around with a gun in the neighborhood, I could feel safer at home. I can feel safer. Already have a PAL.
For protection in case some crazy dumbass were to walk around with a gun in the neighborhood, I could feel safer at home. I can feel safer. Already have a PAL.
Elaborate.
I made myself clear.
You need therapy if you are so afraid of the world outside, in Canada, that you think you need to be wearing a bullet proof vest. Which already should disqualify you from holding a PAL.
Self defense is specifically NOT ALLOWED under PAL rules. You are violating the requirements of your PAL.
While I applaud your effort to set op straight, you reasoning here is convoluted and incorrect.
In short, PALs only govern firearms not vests. Self defense is never a qualifying reason to get your license or a gun, but self defence to defend yourself or another “from greivous bodily harm or death” qualifies as a reason for reasonable and proportionate force. If armed intruders put you or someone else in that specific situation, you can respond with violence using any means available, from the frozen tuna in your nighstand to the gun in its safe in your closet. As long as your application of force is reasonable, proportionate and defensive.
An hypothetical example for illustrated purposes only: armed intruders break into your home. You barricade yourself in your bedroom and lock the door. When they hit your door, you know hiding isn’t an option so you yell to warn them “ive called the police”. They keep busting down the door anyway. You have seconds left.
At this point, presuming you know they are armed, they have instigated a crime against you and you have reasonable fear for your life it is legal to pull the frozen tuna from your bedside freezer, the taxidermied swordfish off the wall, the baseball bat in the corner or a gun that was previously stored in accordance to Canadian regulations. There are many quick access safes designed for these scenarios. The intruder busts through, scans the room with a gun raised and points it at you. You have every right to defend yourself by whatever means are available.
Vests have some provincial restrictions I’m only casually familiar with. BC restricts them, others do not I think. Anyone can correct me. They are legal to buy, own, wear. Many canadian manufacturers are available. They don’t hurt anything but your back and wallet and offer very limited protection. You see tacticool mall ninjas in vests at gun ranges all the time. No violation here.
Firstly I never claimed that a PAL governed vest I said that OP needs mental health help, not a vest.
Secondly I’m well aware of the proportionate force laws in Canada. That doesn’t change the fact that you cannot own weapons for the express purpose of self defense, period.
How else was anyone supposed to interpret this?
hes just on a high from being right for once, this person doesn’t appear to be all that likeable and is getting a rare win socialy for his prickly nature. his excuses are just cover.
Body armour rules vary by province. In BC, pal or rpal can buy body armour legally.
To be fair, I think this was a lot more clear than your first comment. Certainly it’s more clear for those of us without a PAL.
I actually didn’t know body armour had any relation to a PAL. I thought the body armour restriction was its own thing.
You’re blowing this way out of context, and starting off very rude. I hopefully would never need to wear it.
Also I don’t even have a gun or plan to use one. Its to protect my vital organs, at least a bit of extra percentage, if ever an emergency situation called for one.
Its also one person less for police and military enforcement to have to worry about protecting.
To say if there is someone ramped in my street shooting, maybe because of war, or maybe a deranged shooter, whatever else, and to say I can’t put the armor on because it’s self defense – go fuck yourself.
You aren’t making a great case for getting suggested answers from volunteers.