# Issue BEWs in Civvies



## Needtims (27 Oct 2013)

I just watched another member get lightly chewed out for wearing his BEWs on vacation.  I'm of the opinion that my eyes need protection on and off duty, and if I'm a poor no-hook, I don't see why they shouldn't be protected just because I can't afford a set of impact resistant eyewear.  I'd be a pretty liability to the CF without eyes.

I understand most issue kit mixing issues, but this one seems like a pretty reasonable exception.  I can see how wearing your helmet and frag vest everywhere would be pretty ridiculous, but come on, I can buy these on the street for like $60.

Your thoughts?


----------



## x_para76 (27 Oct 2013)

In the past I've seen plenty of blokes rocking about downtown Pet in B'dubs and civi's. IMHO you look a bit of a spanner wearing them out of uniform, kind of like wearing your course t-shirt out to the bar. However, by the letter of the law you have transgressed against the policy of mixing issued kit with civilian attire. IMO a pair of sunnies isn't a big deal but if you're in a place like Meaford or Pet with plenty of uptight Snr Nco's then you'd be best off playing by the rules.


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Oct 2013)

Was subj mbr wearing their dogtags outside their shirt with a unit PT shirt on as well? If your eyes need that much protection, do you wear ear plugs, mouthguard and hockey helmet too? You could walk around in a red-man suit to protect the CF's investment....  :facepalm:

Its BEWs. They're not "cool" looking glasses unless you're trying to look like a army guy with a kit problem. Do I wear my BEWs civvie side? Yep, when I'm doing wood-working, or cutting the grass. Am I going to wear them on a beach in Cancun? 100% no.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (27 Oct 2013)

Some would also cite the issue of "BEWs get smashed up while dude is playing some beach volleyball.  Exchanges them."  Cost is on Joe and Jane Taxpayer to replace military kit rendered U/S on a beach in Cuba.


----------



## chrisf (27 Oct 2013)

You can pick up a pair of sun glasses that don't make you look like an idiot in civis for $1 at the dollar store.

I picked up a pair of combo safety glasses+sun glasses at princess auto last week for $4.

Have one less beer next weekend, and splurge on the sun glasses.


----------



## George Wallace (27 Oct 2013)

a Sig Op said:
			
		

> You can pick up a pair of sun glasses that don't make you look like an idiot in civis for $1 at the dollar store.
> 
> I picked up a pair of combo safety glasses+sun glasses at princess auto last week for $4.
> 
> Have one less beer next weekend, and splurge on the sun glasses.



At those prices, you can be the Imelda Marcos of sunglasses.


----------



## chrisf (27 Oct 2013)

After some research, I have determined that your analogy is obscure but apt. Bravo.

Also, the local dollar store sells sandals and rubber boots as well, so you could be the Imelda Marcos of shoes. Which would basically make you Imelda Marcos. I'd be careful though, she has some outstanding criminal charges.


----------



## Dissident (27 Oct 2013)

Revision Sawfly for sale on the civilian market:

http://www.dstactical.com/product_info.php?cPath=127_190&products_id=885

I wear my personally purchased ones on a regular basis, as well as other wrap around type. You might have guessed that I am not a big stickler for fashion and you would be right.


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Oct 2013)

Needtims said:
			
		

> I just watched another member get_* lightly chewed out * _ for wearing his BEWs on vacation.
> 
> Your thoughts?



I'm thinking that this wasn't much of a big deal for the 'chewer outer' either. 

My thoughts? Back to the beer fridge with you  :


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (28 Oct 2013)

Needtims said:
			
		

> I just watched another member get lightly chewed out for wearing his BEWs on vacation.  I'm of the opinion that my eyes need protection on and off duty, and if I'm a poor no-hook, I don't see why they shouldn't be protected just because I can't afford a set of impact resistant eyewear.  I'd be a pretty liability to the CF without eyes.
> 
> I understand most issue kit mixing issues, but this one seems like a pretty reasonable exception.  I can see how wearing your helmet and frag vest everywhere would be pretty ridiculous, but come on, I can buy these on the street for like $60.
> 
> Your thoughts?



I'd chew you out for poor fashion sense and acting as a woman repellent for the rest of us .... FOR SHAME!  



> I'm of the opinion that my eyes need protection on and off duty, and if I'm a poor no-hook, I don't see why they shouldn't be protected just because I can't afford a set of impact resistant eyewear.  I'd be a pretty liability to the CF without eyes.



Maybe I should get the CQ to procure you some cotton-wool and bubble wrap so you can wrap yourself in it.  In all seriousness though, this is the biggest load of crap I have read on here in awhile.


----------



## Lightguns (28 Oct 2013)

Get an extra pair from CPGEAR and wear them if you want, better yet you can be like me and get yellow lenses and WALT your shooting skills.  Seriously, I have a CPGEAR pair to use my prescription while afield a chasing the whitetails.  They do not cost much not at the rates of pay we get now.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (28 Oct 2013)

Needtims said:
			
		

> I just watched another member get lightly chewed out for wearing his BEWs on vacation.  I'm of the opinion that my eyes need protection on and off duty, and if I'm a poor no-hook, I don't see why they shouldn't be protected just because I can't afford a set of impact resistant eyewear.  I'd be a pretty liability to the CF without eyes.
> 
> I understand most issue kit mixing issues, but this one seems like a pretty reasonable exception.  I can see how wearing your helmet and frag vest everywhere would be pretty ridiculous, but come on, I can buy these on the street for like $60.
> 
> Your thoughts?



My thoughts are that it was completely right to chew the member out for wearing BEW's on vacation. 

Do you wear your dogtags all the time in case you are rendered unrecognisable by some catastrophic accident? Do you wear your issued SOG/Gerber on a DEU belt with your jeans, just in case?


----------



## Lightguns (29 Oct 2013)

Guess I will stop wearing my M48 Tomahawk while grocery shopping......


----------



## Danjanou (29 Oct 2013)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> At those prices, you can be the Imelda Marcos of sunglasses.



Dollerama does a great set of fake Oakleys at $1.00 a pop. A week in Cuba 8 pairs one a a day and they make great tips  for the bartender. 8)


----------



## myself.only (29 Oct 2013)

Needtims said:
			
		

> ...BEWs on vacation...I can't afford a set of impact resistant eyewear....



OK not sure what the member is actually doing when he/she required eye protection, and I can't speak for the fashion choice...but what the heck, I'll be the guy to ask the collective wisdom of the forum: could the BEWs be considered an accessory permissible IAW Chapter 2, section 1, para. 46 of the 265?


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Nov 2013)

myself.only said:
			
		

> OK not sure what the member is actually doing when he/she required eye protection, and I can't speak for the fashion choice...but what the heck, I'll be the guy to ask the collective wisdom of the forum: could the BEWs be considered an accessory permissible IAW Chapter 2, section 1, para. 46 of the 265?



Mr. Data - translation please


----------



## Lightguns (1 Nov 2013)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Mr. Data - translation please



Capt

A-DH-265-000-AG-001 - Canadian Forces Dress Instructions.  He is referring to it by the old CFP number.  Chap 2, Sect 1 Para 46 states:

Visible civilian items of apparel shall not be
worn by members with any uniform, except where
specifically authorized in these instructions.
Conversely, items of uniform shall not be worn with
civilian attire, except for accessories and garments
(e.g., top-coat, raincoat, gloves, scarf and footwear)
which do not include any CF insignia and by
themselves do not explicitly identify the wearer as a
member of the CF.

Regardless, the Army C of C has been very explicit that you will not wear BEW in civies PERIOD.  I am sure that this "barrack room lawyer" crap would not pass very quickly.


----------



## myself.only (1 Nov 2013)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Mr. Data - translation please



Sorry D&B, my apologies for not quoting my ref, but what Lightguns helpfully quoted is the regulation that came to mind.
I'm unaware if there's any policy or instruction distinguishing between safety equipment vice accessories or anything specific to BEWs.


----------



## armyvern (1 Nov 2013)

No one is going to get charged for wearing their BEWs out of uniform --- for woodworking, chopping down trees or vacation.

Fuck; mine sit in their spot in my dashboard and sometimes (often actually) even make their way onto my damn face in the glaring sun should my civ ones be at home.

How uncool.  I'm over it.


----------



## Armymedic (1 Nov 2013)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Capt
> 
> A-DH-265-000-AG-001 - Canadian Forces Dress Instructions.  He is referring to it by the old CFP number.  Chap 2, Sect 1 Para 46 states:
> 
> ...



Thank you for answering the OP question. As highlighted; If your BEW are without (as my issued pair are) markings identifying them as a piece of CF issued kit, then you can wear them while in civilian clothing.


----------

