Great Service-Bullet Proof Vest

I only were mine a few hours a week, as I find it to heavy LvL-3A. Now I bought mine New from the Canadian distributor and from his mouth he said it only degrades about 2-3% each year.
Sweat & mosture will also factor, mine has never seen the rain & I take care of the outer shell.

Still if I ever buy another vest it will only be a LvL-2A vest
 
Mr. Ruger you are creeping me out! Sounds like the tip of the fanaticism iceberg. Wearing body armour while you are out with your girlfriend? What next? You know, someone from the general public reads post like this and they paint us all with the weirdo brush.
 
pbr streetgang said:
i think it was one of the old surplus vests that are no longer safe to use for ballistic protection, but more as a novelty item. I hope that the OP is aware of that if it is in fact one of the "surplus vests".
Click to expand...

If you get a chance you should look up the ballistic test that they did on 10 year old vests!
 
largeborewhore said:
Wouldnt the bullet proof vest protect you better if you put it on your girfriend and got her to jump in front of you.......
Click to expand...

LOL. Good point but there is damage that occurs to the soft tissue, I think its called cavity of force damage or something. Although the vest stops the bullet from penetrating it still has lots of kinetic energy which will break bones and f-up internal organs. I want my gf to stay in mint condition so I will take one for the team. lol
 
bluethunder said:
Mr. Ruger you are creeping me out! Sounds like the tip of the fanaticism iceberg. Wearing body armour while you are out with your girlfriend? What next? You know, someone from the general public reads post like this and they paint us all with the weirdo brush.
Click to expand...

Not to start a whole thing over this but I do not really know how or why you are "creeped out". The fact that I legally purchased armour to protect myself (and ones that I love) on certain occasions should not creep anyone out or invite labels of fanatical.

Are you freaked out by people wearing bike helmets?LOL I know that is hyperbolic but...which mass shootings on the rise why not. Especially with the gangsters in Toronto that cant shoot for sh_t, an extra 5 pounds is not an issue it it means stopping or lessening damage from a bullet.

Furthermore, you are freaked out by someone wearing a vest are you not freaked out that I as well as many other can possess firearms and ammunition that can penetrate vests, walls and metal? What you must realize here is that I as well as many other am a responsible, sane and social individual who values society, kindness and other people. However, I am not ignorant of the evils that men (and women) do.

So long story short better safe than sorry, and you and your fellow labellers should chill out or just stay of gun forums.

:cheers:
 
mr.ruger said:
Not to start a whole thing over this but I do not really know how or why you are "creeped out". The fact that I legally purchased armour to protect myself (and ones that I love) on certain occasions should not creep anyone out or invite labels of fanatical.

Are you freaked out by people wearing bike helmets?LOL I know that is hyperbolic but...which mass shootings on the rise why not. Especially with the gangsters in Toronto that cant shoot for sh_t, an extra 5 pounds is not an issue it it means stopping or lessening damage from a bullet.

Furthermore, you are freaked out by someone wearing a vest are you not freaked out that I as well as many other can possess firearms and ammunition that can penetrate vests, walls and metal? What you must realize here is that I as well as many other am a responsible, sane and social individual who values society, kindness and other people. However, I am not ignorant of the evils that men (and women) do.

So long story short better safe than sorry, and you and your fellow labellers should chill out or just stay of gun forums.

:cheers:
Click to expand...

Thanks Mr. Ruger, you just illustrated my point perfectly and confirmed my suspicions!
 
bluethunder said:
Thanks Mr. Ruger, you just illustrated my point perfectly and confirmed my suspicions!
Click to expand...

Classic anti argument.....

the more logic a person uses to prove their point the more they are "just illustrating" how crazy you are.....


its pointless imo

when ignorant people hate and fear ignorant people hate and fear.... ain't no stopin it!



BA is about as harmful as a bike helm, and in high crime high shooting areas why not wear it?

Hell, a guy got shot wearing BA in halifax so the police banned it! Follow the logic yet? if you are a VICTIM of gun crime you must have had it coming.......

the victim's mom was killed the year prior in a high crime are in halifax so he started wearing BA..... and he too was shot...with a rifle while wearing soft BA....

and the police used the fact that a person felt unsafe on the streets, used BA to protect himself, as a reason to ban BA for innocent civilians


there is no logic to fear
 
CanadianReich said:
Classic anti argument.....

the more logic a person uses to prove their point the more they are "just illustrating" how crazy you are.....


its pointless imo

when ignorant people hate and fear ignorant people hate and fear.... ain't no stopin it!



BA is about as harmful as a bike helm, and in high crime high shooting areas why not wear it?

Hell, a guy got shot wearing BA in halifax so the police banned it! Follow the logic yet? if you are a VICTIM of gun crime you must have had it coming.......

the victim's mom was killed the year prior in a high crime are in halifax so he started wearing BA..... and he too was shot...with a rifle while wearing soft BA....

and the police used the fact that a person felt unsafe on the streets, used BA to protect himself, as a reason to ban BA for innocent civilians


there is no logic to fear
Click to expand...

:agree:
 
CanadianReich said:
Classic anti argument.....

the more logic a person uses to prove their point the more they are "just illustrating" how crazy you are.....


its pointless imo

when ignorant people hate and fear ignorant people hate and fear.... ain't no stopin it!



BA is about as harmful as a bike helm, and in high crime high shooting areas why not wear it?

Hell, a guy got shot wearing BA in halifax so the police banned it! Follow the logic yet? if you are a VICTIM of gun crime you must have had it coming.......

the victim's mom was killed the year prior in a high crime are in halifax so he started wearing BA..... and he too was shot...with a rifle while wearing soft BA....

and the police used the fact that a person felt unsafe on the streets, used BA to protect himself, as a reason to ban BA for innocent civilians


there is no logic to fear
Click to expand...

Mr. Ruger since your occupation is a lawyer perhaps you can educate Canadianreich (not sure if that is some kind of reference to the third reich) on the fact that policing is law enforcement, they don't create laws, your government does. Therefore police can't ban body armour. If you are going to convey information as if it is fact, get your facts straight.
Both of you are free to wear body armour if you like (that is what our soldiers have shed their blood for) and write about it on gun forums but perhaps for one moment you should step back and read what you are writing. You sound paranoid. Generally speaking the only people that need to wear body armour are those that require it because of their occupation such as police officers, soldiers and security guards. In my experience the others that wear body armour are either criminals or paranoid beyond belief. Which are you?
 
bluethunder said:
" on the fact that policing is law enforcement, they don't create laws, your government does. Therefore police can't ban body armour. If you are going to convey information as if it is fact, get your facts straight. "
Both of you are free to wear body armour if you like (that is what our soldiers have shed their blood for) and write about it on gun forums but perhaps for one moment you should step back and read what you are writing. You sound paranoid. Generally speaking the only people that need to wear body armour are those that require it because of their occupation such as police officers, soldiers and security guards. In my experience the others that wear body armour are either criminals or paranoid beyond belief. Which are you?
Click to expand...

I DO have proof.

First, I wrote my MLA and her personally told me that the cops asked for ban on body armor for civlians, including legal gun owners, therefore they got it. IE The cops indirectly made this law. The MLAs accepted the police "logic" that victims being shot wearing BA was somehow proof that criminals are using BA. I could find the name of that black kid maybe too, he was the victim who sparked the BA ban, the story I mentioned earlier.

off to find that JPG from the MLA


ALSO cops, such as chiefs of police and CFOs are quite political. When they want something, as in the above example, often MLAs and MPs will give them want they want...because they are cops.... to "help fight crime".... another "tool".... regardless of if their logic makes any sense or if it actually targets *preexisting* criminals (in contrast to making criminals out of what was law abiding citizens.) So, you'd best be a member of a gun club or you will lose your firearms certificate... it isnt a law but if you do not do it you will become a criminal with a gun (CFO example).
So if the CACP want the long gun registry, they show up in parliament in their fancy uniforms and demand it....because they are cops.... that is reason enough. It need not matter that the toronto guns and gangs unit uses it to target "new" criminals created by the LGR rather than going after violent criminals etc, the LGR was passed for one reason and then used for another... .any gun taken form a law abiding citizen...well that is a "crime gun" and there is NO difference between criminals, right? I had a debate with the Halifax RCMP on facebook and thats what I got..... a violent gang banger with a gun is just as "dangerous" as a person that let their PAL expire......I do have proof of this but it would show my real name.

I've got lots of proof for all of this....but ill find the easy stuff for now...im not putting too much effort into this.


Also "paranoid" is an insult. It is a RIGHT to defend one's own life. I firmly believe it is a right to CCW, but hell it is darn well a right to wear protective clothing if it could save your life or help prevent you from harm. NO ONE has the right to deny you safety equipment if you are in an area where a specific type of danger could harm you. Lots of stabbings? Stab resistant armor should be legal. Lots of shootings? Shooting resistant armor should be legal....for the victims of these crimes....the citizens.... NOT just the bank guards and cops... the actual victims of these crimes...the ones that are not protected by law enforcement (if they were they would not be getting shot, swarmed, or stabbed, right?)

SO when a black kid wearing BA in halifax NS is shot and killed he did nothing wrong, he should not be assumed to be a criminal because he was a VICTIM and he should darn well not have been looked down on for having to reside in a high crime area. He had the right to wear protective clothing (at least) if the cops could not defend him, and he was right- the cops could not defend him- he is dead, shot just like he feared. Had that BA he wore SAVED his life I that would have been a GOOD thing not a bad thing.......a citizen's life saved by BA, oh the horror.

Rant subsiding..... time to look for some links..

on cops using their uniforms and autority to demand law changes at the federal level (they failed here as the LGR was destroyed...but if anyone has footage of the debates when the Firearms Act was being drawn up and debated no doubt you will find the police in there expressing their desires. Oh, do not forget all the press and media coverage the police put out to sway public opinion in favor of keeping the LGR, which itself helps to alter MP opinions during law making)
[youtube]WGI368nzHcw&feature=plcp[/youtube]


on cops using their uniforms and authority to demand law changes at the provincial level
NSMlaBodyArmor2011.jpg
[/IMG]

UG having a hard time finding that black kid's name.....

im sure its in here somewhere
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=601476
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=615514


nope...I give up.... if someone remembers that guy who was wearing BA and shot with a rifle sparking the BA ban... it was in Halifax Ns around the time of the posting of the above 2 links, "swarmings" were common as were stabbings.......to "fight crime" the police demanded the MLAs blanket-ban body armor..... please post the guy's name or the link to some articles.
 
Last edited:
I own body armour, it was sent to me to review. The only times I have worn it are to test its breathability and comfort on some hikes and extended cycle trips. Beyond that, Im pretty sure I will never wear it, but it is a cool thing to have in the collection.
 
bluethunder said:
Hey no argument from me that a law doesn't exist in Nova Scotia that controls body armour (take note...not ban) but the police did not author it nor pass it into law, your politicians did.d:h:
Click to expand...

at their request, based on the concept that a dead victim of gun violence in BA is a reason to ban BA from all law abiding citizens.... to keep them safe in high crime areas with lots of shootings and stabbings....somehow..... because the cops can not.


It is illogical...but as I said, the police are a political body and what they ask for they often get...... even laws.
 
WidowMaker said:
I own body armour, it was sent to me to review. The only times I have worn it are to test its breathability and comfort on some hikes and extended cycle trips. Beyond that, Im pretty sure I will never wear it, but it is a cool thing to have in the collection.
Click to expand...

The choice to wear it should be yours.

If your life is not in danger, do not wear it.

If your life is in danger, it is your choice if you wear it or not, if you defend your life or not- YOUR life....... not someone elses.

It is not as if that BA could ever harm another person.

YOU can not wear it because the cops think YOU, the law abiding legal firearms owner, could be a threat to them. Is that logical or is that discrimination and stereotyping legal gun owners (and all citizens in general) into the "dangerous criminal" pot?

If you go biking and want to wear a helmet the cops have no right to say you can not because some criminal wore a helmet once


again, it is safety equipment......... the entire "body armor" thing or "bullet proof vest" have hidden associated meantings with them, like "Assault rifles" have...... implied criminal intent due to negative press or movies.


Im going to stop now..... damn boredom with a high WPM = rant!
 
CanadianReich said:
The choice to wear it should be yours.

If your life is not in danger, do not wear it.

If your life is in danger, it is your choice if you wear it or not, if you defend your life or not- YOUR life....... not someone elses.

It is not as if that BA could ever harm another person.

YOU can not wear it because the cops think YOU, the law abiding legal firearms owner, could be a threat to them. Is that logical or is that discrimination and stereotyping legal gun owners (and all citizens in general) into the "dangerous criminal" pot?

If you go biking and want to wear a helmet the cops have no right to say you can not because some criminal wore a helmet once


again, it is safety equipment......... the entire "body armor" thing or "bullet proof vest" have hidden associated meantings with them, like "Assault rifles" have...... implied criminal intent due to negative press or movies.


Im going to stop now..... damn boredom with a high WPM = rant!
Click to expand...

Wow...anger issues. There is medication and counselling for that! By the way I believe the cops have the right to pursue such issues. You don't put your safety on the line everytime you walk out the door for work but they do so that you can live a relatively safe and carefree existance. When their is a shooting ask your self who is running in toward the gunfire....the police.
 
We get new vests at work every 5 years, not because after 5 years they go bad, but that is how long the manufacturer in our case Safariland through R.H Nicholls will give warranty for them.

At our department, we have a range for requal time and we shot old vests for ####s and giggles, a 10 year old vest stopped multiple shots of .40 black talons and 00buck.

I take care of mine and hang it on a hanger in my locker, after my shifts. but I have seen people fold them up and stuff them in bags and lockers and that cannot be any good for it.
 
bluethunder said:
Wow...anger issues. There is medication and counselling for that! By the way I believe the cops have the right to pursue such issues. You don't put your safety on the line everytime you walk out the door for work but they do so that you can live a relatively safe and carefree existance. When their is a shooting ask your self who is running in toward the gunfire....the police.
Click to expand...

I have tried to stay out of this after the path this topic has taken. But I just can resists.

1) you constantly make ad hominem arguments. Arguably the worst method of reasoning and or argument.
2) Since you like the police and believe that they are so great, especially in regards to keeping people safe during instances of violence (in keeping with the origin of this topic lets focus on mass shootings of random people lets further say in movie theaters as an example or other such public places). Please note the following, in instances of mass shootings where a bystander intervenes the average death toll about 2.5, however when people wait until police arrive and intervene, the death toll is closer to 14!

In sum, I would prefer to be able to either a) intervene and have some peace of mind that I will have a better chance of survival wearing BA and or b) if for whatever reason I do not intervene, if shot I will stand a better chance of survival, as opposed to what others suggest in just hoping I am the 15th person in line not the 13th.

I think this post has been taken over. I intended to give positive feedback to SFRC and not start a whole thing about the police and BA, not that these are not valuable issue, but merely that this is not the thread to do it on.

I thank everyone for their input, thoughts and contributions, but lets move on.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom