Body Armor Ownership and Personal Defense: Separating Facts from Myths

Recently, a friend of mine told me that owning body armor makes one a right-wing extremist. This claim is not only inaccurate but also dangerously misguided. What is the reality behind body armor ownership, and why should civilians consider purchasing or owning it for personal defense?

Legal and Regulatory Context of Body Armor in Australia

Ownership of body armor in Australia is regulated through the Australian Firearms Act. Specifically, ballistic body armor is classified as a category E firearm. While anyone can apply for a permit, the act restricts the acceptability of applications to those who are members of the police service or the security industry. This regulation is based on the principle of public safety, rather than political affiliation.

I think this is reasonable. It is not because body armor is a firearm in and of itself, but because it is an essential accessory to firearms. If we were to allow universal access to body armor, it could encourage the use of firearms among criminals. This concern especially pertains to outlaw biker gangs, who are notorious for using such equipment. Thus, by limiting its availability to individuals with a specific need, we can mitigate the risk of firearms misuse. This approach also aligns with non-discrimination laws, ensuring that access to body armor is not based on political or social affiliations, but rather on individual circumstances.

The Right to Self-Defense

The right to self-defense is enshrined in the Australian Constitution. Owning body armor is not a political statement – it is a practical measure that any intelligent person should consider when protecting themselves and their property. Burglars, robbers, murderers, and psychopaths are all potential threats, and being prepared with the right equipment can significantly enhance safety.

Busting the Myths

Claims that owning body armor or firearms make one a right-wing extremist are not only untrue but also damaging to public discourse. Let's address these misconceptions:

Owning a firearm and body armor are just examples of common sense precautions. Don't get fooled into thinking that politics should stop you from defending your life and the lives of your loved ones. Your family is far more important than any political agenda.

Empowering Criminal Victims vs Law Abiders

The individuals who implement and advocate for anti-gun laws are often not the ones who commit crimes or engage in mass shootings. Criminals disregard laws because they are indifferent to the consequences. Consequently, when a criminal shows up, the first thing they will do is call the police. Unfortunately, by the time law enforcement arrives, it is often too late, and the situation can be avoided with the right preparation.

To summarize, having body armor or a firearm is not a political stance, but a responsible and pragmatic decision. It empowers individuals to take personal safety seriously and defend themselves against criminal threats. These tools are a common-sense solution in an unpredictable world, and there is no need to let political fears or myths prevent you from ensuring your peace of mind and security.