Author Topic: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements  (Read 25486 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline NinerSix

    is getting the itch to deploy.

  • Has been
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 316,211
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,043
  • Retired!
CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« on: March 02, 2013, 00:44:17 »
This has been on my mind for a little bit and lo and behold I was passed down an email which is asking to review the requirements for the next SBA contract.

To my astonishment it seems we are looking at purchasing again a over the uniform type SBA and carrier to wear with OPDs. A separate requirement is also being drafted for concealed SBA.

Has it not been established that a overt SBA creates a visual clue, leading to bag guys shooting at the head of armor wearer? Have we not had multiple situations where MPs found themselves with their armor ripped off their bodies during a melee? These two examples seem like a good enough reason for me to seek a concealed/under the uniform type SBA.

I'll be sending my feedback up, but I am just a reservist with little at stake in this particular fight.
The process is not the mission.

Offline Precept

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 2,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 99
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #1 on: March 10, 2013, 14:15:11 »
People always go right for the "externals cause the bad guys to shoot at the head" argument. I don't get it. In this day and age, everyone and their mother know police officers wear bullet resistant vests. I'll say this:

1) I have never worn an internal.

2) I like my External for the easy access pockets, loops on the shoulders, and the fact that I can take it off in July when it's 35 degrees in the office and I'm hanging out with our friend SAMPIS. I have never been in a physical, so I can't comment on it coming off. I have heard of it. I see a lot of officers (civi and MP) with vests that are to small for their size. Where both side Velcro patches are almost maxed out leaving very little Velcro to keep the vest on. That's a big reason the vest comes off, especially if you have worn it for a few years and your Velcro patches are starting to wear. When my patches start to wear I will either take it in and try to have new Velcro put on or have the vest exchanged(Beauty of a small base-Supply is actually your friend).





jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #2 on: March 10, 2013, 15:09:39 »
When I graduated from Borden in 89 I stopped by the Second Chance factory in Michigan on my way to my first posting in Calgary.  I purchased a vest which I wore under my uniform for many years afterwards.  Yes it was hot in the summer, however, I've worn external armour too in the summer.  They're both hot. 

Of the two, I prefer the innie not not outtie.  It is I suppose a matter of choice and preference.  At least they're buying them for the guys.  Mine was not not cheap, it would have been nice to have had the system provide.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 251,351
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,910
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2013, 15:10:26 »
There are a few schools of thought that deployed soldiers dressing like a shock trooper have a negative effect on a local populace. Even in our CCO we keep the guys armed with batons and shields hidden away. for the SURPRISE 1%ers!  effect.

Do you guys think that a bulky external set of body armor might have the same type of effect when dealing with people in your line of business? Creates stand off between you and someone you're speaking with. Makes you less personable for lack of a better term.
There are no wolves on Fenris

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2013, 15:25:50 »
That's a valid point.  I'd tend to agree that you look somewhat less approachable with external gear on.  If you weaken connections with the people you're there to serve I believe it makes your job that much more difficult.  It still is at the base level a "people" profession and I always found that how you interact with people is at the core of what you do. 

I am by nature an introvert and when I was in that profession I needed to become an extrovert while on duty.  It's all connections.  If you're able to connect with the public easier, you'll accomplish more and be more successful.  But, that's just my  :2c:


Offline PrairieThunder

    And that\'s why we can\'t have nice things.

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 598
  • For Queen and Country
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2013, 20:25:59 »
When I graduated from Borden in 89 I stopped by the Second Chance factory in Michigan on my way to my first posting in Calgary.  I purchased a vest which I wore under my uniform for many years afterwards.  Yes it was hot in the summer, however, I've worn external armour too in the summer.  They're both hot. 

Of the two, I prefer the innie not not outtie.  It is I suppose a matter of choice and preference.  At least they're buying them for the guys.  Mine was not not cheap, it would have been nice to have had the system provide.

I love the product line that Second Chance puts out. I wear a Second Chance internal ballistic vest with steel trauma plates, even in the dead of winter I sweat like a pig.

In my old employment, there was argument of the same: Internal or External and why. The Execs and Administrators demanded that both were not to be worn PERIOD, citing that people thought it was intimidating that anyone was wearing body armour regardless of whether it is visible or not, body armour is a catalyst in physical confrontation etc. One of our favourite supervisors got canned after he took time on his days off to go around to every hospital in the region and surveyed 100 people at each location on what they thought of having Protective Services/Security personnel equipped with body armour. The results? Majority of the nearly 1200 people surveyed said they felt more comfortable knowing that the people protecting hospital-goers and staff, having to restrain violent people and such; were protected with body armour.

Now that I've moved up into the Junior Leagues from tee-ball and awaiting draft by the Pros, we have an option to wear internal or external. The external is good for summers as echoed because you can doff the sweat-magnet while in the safety of an air conditioned office as you become intimately acquainted with Enspire/CPIC/AMAG/PPM 2000 etc. However the whole thing about "external vest provokes people"/"Makes officers less approachable" is a load of horse-feces. People are intimidated by police because we're police/law enforcement and carry a gun, especially in the light of every single foul remark and "Excessive Force" being put into the public eye (ex: RCMP lately) people are just generally intimidated and are incredibly biased these days. The vest is not the repellent, it's the firearm, the uniform, the badge, the authority that further divides the people and the police because a handful of bad apples is ruining the orchard.

I for one like having the option of wear either Int or Ext and not worrying about who thinks what. If it came down to becoming Int only, I'd have no problem wearing my Second Chance vest, while none are comfortable I have it is the best one I've worn yet. 

Offline C.G.R

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 11,427
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 324
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2013, 21:59:05 »
I don't know anyone who fears the police regardless of what they wear or carry. The only thing most people are worried about when it comes to cops, is the fact that they are the ones who will give you the tickets.
Don't outsmart your common sense.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 251,351
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,910
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2013, 22:17:21 »

Now that I've moved up into the Junior Leagues from tee-ball and awaiting draft by the Pros, we have an option to wear internal or external.
That sounds pretty high speed.  Just to be on the same page here, who are the junior leagues you're with now and who's the pros you're awaiting to join?


Quote
However the whole thing about "external vest provokes people"/"Makes officers less approachable" is a load of horse-feces. People are intimidated by police because we're police/law enforcement and carry a gun, especially in the light of every single foul remark and "Excessive Force" being put into the public eye (ex: RCMP lately) people are just generally intimidated and are incredibly biased these days. The vest is not the repellent, it's the firearm, the uniform, the badge, the authority that further divides the people and the police because a handful of bad apples is ruining the orchard.
In response I gotta say this sounds like horse crap, too. While I'm not a LEO it sounds like a mix of ego, leg humping and inexperience.

1. Saying why exactly people are intimidated by the police is a pretty big assumption. I don't think you can rightly speak for all Canadians, can you?

2. Canadian police don't appear to have the same image that US State Troopers do. I don't think most Canadians have had police pull pistols on them or are very much intimidated by police because of their handgun.

3. You should do some reading. You might be surprised at what kind of difference wearing something large and visual like a vest can elicit from people. In Bosnia we noticed a huge difference in our interactions with people when we took our LBVs off.  Could that apply to Canadians with Canadian police? It's possible.
Something even as silly as how you arrange crap on your desk can have a considerable reaction on a conversation you have with someone.There is a lot of psychology involved. Like the difference between crossing your arms by your chest and crossing your hands over each other by your crotch.

Quote
One of our favourite supervisors got canned after he took time on his days off to go around to every hospital in the region and surveyed 100 people at each location on what they thought of having Protective Services/Security personnel equipped with body armour. The results? Majority of the nearly 1200 people surveyed said they felt more comfortable knowing that the people protecting hospital-goers and staff, having to restrain violent people and such; were protected with body armour.

I don't remember hearing about that in the news. Your old boss interviewed 1200 people on his own time? That's pretty big, he must have really believed in what he was doing.  Was this survey posted anywhere or was it word of mouth?
« Last Edit: March 10, 2013, 22:23:18 by ObedientiaZelum »
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline PrairieThunder

    And that\'s why we can\'t have nice things.

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 598
  • For Queen and Country
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2013, 23:05:39 »
That sounds pretty high speed.  Just to be on the same page here, who are the junior leagues you're with now and who's the pros you're awaiting to join?

Sorry, I was in the process of editing to clarify my post. I am currently an Alberta Sheriff and I'm hoping on moving up into municipal or military policing in the near future.

Quote
In response I gotta say this sounds like horse crap, too. While I'm not a LEO it sounds like a mix of ego, leg humping and inexperience.

1. Saying why exactly people are intimidated by the police is a pretty big assumption. I don't think you can rightly speak for all Canadians, can you?
Well, yes, I am making an assumption as it is also my opinion, it is what I think people are intimidated by; I'm not saying it's fact. In roughly 4.5 years of experience as a Community Peace Officer and Sheriff (CPO being the greater bunch, I've been a Sheriff only for about 8 months now, outside of Staff College trg) that the people regardless of "friendly" or "unfriendly" encounter are not paying attention to and do not care about the body armour, they're too busy looking at what's on your belt, your hands, the insignia on the uniform. I've had more stops and warnings and warrants go south from a calm verbal discussion simply because I'm "a fake cop" or "a power trip" "abusing my authority", "are you going to beat me?" "I know my rights" etc. into people gesturing and beaking off (Mind you, these were only say about 30 out of hundreds of contacts with the public). These people were likely biased to begin with, however I have many of what would appear to be "average Canadians" tell me off to "go fight real crime." However, the majority were pleasant and cooperative.

Quote
2. Canadian police don't seem to have the same image that US State Troopers do. I don't think most Canadians have had police pull pistols on them or are very much intimidated by police because of their handgun.
No they certainly don't but if you live in a region where the RCMP are the standard for all policing, it certainly is the case. While working in hospitals in BC, I have witnessed many people getting arrested (many of which were probably just under stress of being at a hospital) to which visitors and general public would walk by and tell off the Constable with things like "Are you going to put your gun to his head if he doesn't listen pig?" "There it goes, BC's notorious street gang in action, harassing the people." etc. I often get news updates from Global or CBC and I have seen all the mess the Vancouver PD and RCMP get into, and the Police Hate Parade comes out in full force. There was the supposed beating of the detainee in Prince George, the RCMP officer kicked a guy in the head, VPD officer shot a guy 7 times etc. There is definitely more than enough public exposure of these things to have the Canadian people on a hate parade like the US State police, but not nearly as severe in some cases. People are still afraid, especially so lately of the RCMP... "BC's most notorious street gang" that they'll get harassed, mistreated, beaten, wrongfully arrested. It's insane, but it's the public.

Quote
3. You should do some reading. You might be surprised at what kind of difference wearing something large and visual like a vest can elicit from people. In Bosnia we noticed a huge difference in our interactions with people when we took our LBVs off.
Something even as silly as how you arrange crap on your desk can have a considerable reaction on a conversation you have with someone.There is a lot of psychology involved. Like the difference between crossing your arms by your chest and crossing your hands over each other by your crotch.
I am well aware of the effects of body position during contact and how it affects a contact. I too have heard about the doffing of LBVs in Bosnia having a more positive outcome with people; however in our line of work, when the Community Peace Officers (especially when working for Alberta Health) were given the body armour, it appeared that nothing had changed except our sense of safety and security. Our physical interventions remained at the usual level, contacts remained the same, many of the positive contacts even exclaimed that they had no idea we didn't have body armour to begin with.

Quote
I don't remember hearing about that in the news. Your old boss interviewed 1200 people on his own time? That's pretty big, he must have really believed in what he was doing.  Was this survey posted anywhere or was it word of mouth?
It was when we were working for a contract security company, it was kept within the department, within the region, it was nothing huge. It came after had been slashed with a a piece of metal that was being carried by a No Fixed Address person. He showed up to work after recovery wearing a thin internal slash vest that matched our uniforms that you wouldn't have noticed if you weren't looking for it, he was getting geared up for a shift and the manager sent him home and suspended him for coming in to work with it on not even 2 weeks after the incident. He then went and did his lobbying... had powerpoints and spreadsheets and cost layouts done up, employee injury statistics, encounter statistics and everything. The Directors took one look at it, threw it in the trash and told him to collect his Termination Slip, "No employee of ours will be wearing any kind of body armour, it scares people."

I am just talking from my experiences and what I have observed and my thoughts on what goes through the mind of the average Canadian. I'm not saying it's fact and I'm not trying to speak on all Canadians either. I hope that that's not how I'm trying to come across, it is not my intent.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 251,351
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,910
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2013, 23:26:40 »
Sorry, I was in the process of editing to clarify my post. I am currently an Alberta Sheriff and I'm hoping on moving up into municipal or military policing in the near future.
I dunno, the name sheriff sounds pretty badass.

Quote
Well, yes, I am making an assumption as it is also my opinion, it is what I think people are intimidated by; I'm not saying it's fact. In roughly 4.5 years of experience as a Community Peace Officer and Sheriff (CPO being the greater bunch, I've been a Sheriff only for about 8 months now, outside of Staff College trg) that the people regardless of "friendly" or "unfriendly" encounter are not paying attention to and do not care about the body armour, they're too busy looking at what's on your belt, your hands, the insignia on the uniform. I've had more stops and warnings and warrants go south from a calm verbal discussion simply because I'm "a fake cop" or "a power trip" "abusing my authority", "are you going to beat me?" "I know my rights" etc. into people gesturing and beaking off (Mind you, these were only say about 30 out of hundreds of contacts with the public). These people were likely biased to begin with, however I have many of what would appear to be "average Canadians" tell me off to "go fight real crime." However, the majority were pleasant and cooperative.
That's surprising. I'd think that Alberta would be a province most accustomed to firearms.
I've never dealt with the public as a LEO. I'm just saying that there's examples in the context of body armor/low profile body armor, helmet/no helmet, rifle/pistol  etc.. where some people seem to feel it makes a difference.  Not saying it's always the case but how I read your response you just brushed it off as irrelevant. Mix up in communication I guess.


I'm not dismissing the rest of your response but I think getting into RCMP, good cop/bad cop might be taking the thread off topic.

 I remember reading about prison guards not being allowed body armor because it upset the inmates or some crap like that and couldn't believe it.

LEO's should be allowed to use whatever body armor their department feels they should be using.  Being flexible, agile and fast is never a bad thing. If low profile body armor can provide the same level of protection it may not be that bad of an option to consider.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline PrairieThunder

    And that\'s why we can\'t have nice things.

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 15,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 598
  • For Queen and Country
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2013, 23:46:15 »
I dunno, the name sheriff sounds pretty badass.
That's surprising. I'd think that Alberta would be a province most accustomed to firearms.
I've never dealt with the public as a LEO. I'm just saying that there's examples in the context of body armor/low profile body armor, helmet/no helmet, rifle/pistol  etc.. where some people seem to feel it makes a difference.  Not saying it's always the case but how I read your response you just brushed it off as irrelevant. Mix up in communication I guess.


I'm not dismissing the rest of your response but I think getting into RCMP, good cop/bad cop might be taking the thread off topic.

 I remember reading about prison guards not being allowed body armor because it upset the inmates or some crap like that and couldn't believe it.

LEO's should be allowed to use whatever body armor their department feels they should be using.  Being flexible, agile and fast is never a bad thing. If low profile body armor can provide the same level of protection it may not be that bad of an option to consider.

Sheriff is pretty badass, but I'm only on a Temp Posting so when it expires, I want to get into more beat enforcement stuff, get away from the highways for a while and come back to it when I'm cooling down for retire.

Working in Alberta, I face a lot less of the hate parade during standard contacts. Most of the hate is on the highways for moving and non-moving violations, especially the teens that think that their tints and headlights are legal.

Agreed on the RCMP business.

Here too, at the South Alberta Forensic Psychiatry Centre, body armour is not permitted inside the facility, can't wear any gear, belts... nothing but a stripped down basic uniform as if it was the first day of Staff College again. Some say it's because you can get beat to death with the vest (hard to believe, it's internal), some say it's because too, the patients feel threatened. We had a PO get stabbed with a concealed needle... still won't allow BA in the facility. It's strange.


« Last Edit: March 10, 2013, 23:51:30 by PrairieThunder »

Online Kat Stevens

    Quando omni flunkus moritati.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 211,120
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,517
  • that's how we roll in redneck land
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #11 on: March 11, 2013, 07:07:07 »
My immediate visceral reaction to a guy armoured up is that he is anticipating trouble.  I know it's not true, but when first confronted by a guy who looks like he expects me to shoot him, I get a little gut twist of defensiveness and apprehension, a "why the hell do you need that?" kind of thing.  Again I know that's not the intent of the vest, but there it is.
Apparently, a "USUAL SUSPECT"

“In peace there's nothing so becomes a man as modest stillness and humility; but when the blast of war blows in our ears, then imitate the action of the tiger; stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, disguise fair nature with hard-favor'd rage.”

 Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and start slitting throats

Offline yakherder

  • Guest
  • *
  • 810
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17
    • Facebook profile
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #12 on: March 11, 2013, 07:21:34 »
Most research seems to show that it's the helmet or mask which is of greatest detriment in regards to one's ability to communicate with the populace.  Without being able to see your face, it greatly hinders their ability empathize with you.  Everything else varies from person to person.

In regards to effectiveness, I'd personally rather go external.  Then again, I'm not law enforcement or an MP who has to worry about physical altercations.  In most stereotypical combat, if it comes down to a hand to hand fight, you screwed up and if their buddies show up before yours, you're just as dead whether you have the body armor or not.  The only place firefights regularly end up going hand to hand is in video games.

Also, if you do receive an injury, I would theorize that it's probably much easier to get someone's body armor off and then cut their clothing as is necessary to treat a wound than it would be to have to remove everything covering the body armor first.
"Character is not made of sunshine and roses. Like steel, it is forged in fire, between the hammer and the anvil." -Zhu Jing Ning

Offline NinerSix

    is getting the itch to deploy.

  • Has been
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 316,211
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,043
  • Retired!
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2013, 05:37:57 »
In regards to effectiveness, I'd personally rather go external.  Then again, I'm not law enforcement or an MP who has to worry about physical altercations.  In most stereotypical combat, if it comes down to a hand to hand fight, you screwed up and if their buddies show up before yours, you're just as dead whether you have the body armor or not.  The only place firefights regularly end up going hand to hand is in video games.

I don't even know where to beging with your post. How much combat have you been in? Have you seen a little bit of it on TV?


Also, if you do receive an injury, I would theorize that it's probably much easier to get someone's body armor off and then cut their clothing as is necessary to treat a wound than it would be to have to remove everything covering the body armor first.

Non issue. If the vest needs to come off due to injury, EMS is on site and the snips come out.

ETA: I just took a look at your profile. You are going to have to give me some details on your experiences cause right now I am rather unimpressed with your post.
The process is not the mission.

Offline amancalledhawk

  • Guest
  • *
  • 50
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2016, 03:34:05 »
Am I reading this post correctly? People responding to the question about requirements are more concerned with perception instead of what some pencil pusher could impose on someone who will be required to use it? Excuse me when I say get your heads screwed on straight.

Now, I don't care what someone thinks about my vest. What I am concerned with is "will it stop that one bullet aimed at center of mass?" Personal preference should count. I for one am an outtie. It has served me well. Ceramic plates certainly have made my vest lighter over the years. I would be interested to hear what the final decision is.

Offline Inspir

  • Member
  • ****
  • 9,406
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 223
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2016, 09:06:25 »
We have the option of internal or external. Most choose external for comfort and ease. I have received some comments from the public but mostly just curiosity.

Now if we can just get load bearing vests like the Brits to save my aching back...

Offline Inspir

  • Member
  • ****
  • 9,406
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 223
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2016, 09:21:53 »
Thanks for pointing out the obvious. But since amancalledhawk reactivated the conversation I choose to contribute.

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 471,945
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,353
    • The job.
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #17 on: January 04, 2016, 10:26:03 »
You guys do know that this post has been dormant for almost 3 years, right?

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. But since amancalledhawk reactivated the conversation I choose to contribute.

amancalledhawk is a new member, 

Necroposting - Not always a bad idea 
http://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=87278.0
"A new member posts a question in a dormant thread in order to gather more information on the topic in particular and is immediately jumped-upon by more experienced members for the inappropriateness of necroposting."

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 251,351
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,910
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #18 on: January 04, 2016, 10:29:26 »
amancalledhawk is a new member, 

Necroposting - Not always a bad idea 
http://army.ca/forums/index.php?topic=87278.0
"A new member posts a question in a dormant thread in order to gather more information on the topic in particular and is immediately jumped-upon by more experienced members for the inappropriateness of necroposting."
He's 3 for 3 now.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 471,945
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,353
    • The job.
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #19 on: January 04, 2016, 10:31:37 »

Offline NinerSix

    is getting the itch to deploy.

  • Has been
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 316,211
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,043
  • Retired!
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #20 on: January 04, 2016, 11:44:44 »
While s/he didn't contribute much to this conversation, if amancalledhawk had started a new thread, he would have been told to do a search before posting. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Since this was brought up again:

After this thread was originally posted I sent an email/memo up the chain regarding the specs for the next SBA. I wasn't expecting much from it, but I never even heard if it made it past Coy level. Considering I had some pretty solid sources and used some good research (that you again Dr. Roberts), I am a bit disappointed that I never got any sort of response. 
The process is not the mission.

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 471,945
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,353
    • The job.
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #21 on: January 04, 2016, 11:54:04 »
While s/he didn't contribute much to this conversation, if amancalledhawk had started a new thread, he would have been told to do a search before posting.

I have seen the single word "bump" occasionally posted in necro-threads. It may not contribute much to the conversation, but maybe they figure it is better than starting a new thread on an old topic?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

True. Sometimes new threads, on old topics, have to be merged into mega-threads for future reference.


« Last Edit: January 04, 2016, 13:03:18 by mariomike »

Offline Schindler's Lift

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 799
  • http://goo.gl/1E5Ez0
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #22 on: January 04, 2016, 17:00:08 »
We have the option of internal or external. Most choose external for comfort and ease. I have received some comments from the public but mostly just curiosity.

Now if we can just get load bearing vests like the Brits to save my aching back...

I had the displeasure of wearing internal for almost 3 years back when I was on patrol last and I hated every day of it.  When you had to be back in the office for a while it was hot and uncomfortable.  If I had an interview to do then I'd have to withdraw and strip it off before starting the interview.  I was also present one time when one of the others on patrol jumped into the river in the Shilo training area after a young child and we almost had two casualties.  Had he or any one of us been wearing external it would have been much safer.

Offline Schindler's Lift

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 799
  • http://goo.gl/1E5Ez0
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #23 on: January 04, 2016, 17:09:30 »
While s/he didn't contribute much to this conversation, if amancalledhawk had started a new thread, he would have been told to do a search before posting. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Since this was brought up again:

After this thread was originally posted I sent an email/memo up the chain regarding the specs for the next SBA. I wasn't expecting much from it, but I never even heard if it made it past Coy level. Considering I had some pretty solid sources and used some good research (that you again Dr. Roberts), I am a bit disappointed that I never got any sort of response.

There is a Captain downstairs in HQ who is looking into this issue as well as a few other procurement projects.  Much of it depends upon when we can secure funding, when the supply system is ready to move on the project and what product is being purchased.  Many look around on their own base and do some reading before weighing in on the issue, and that's fine.  At the same time though they fail to realize that whatever we purchase must be suitable for warm climates, cold climates, extremely hot climates, storage on the shelves in supply.  It must be suitable for the threats we feel we may face, fit all different body types, match any uniform requirements (if external).  If someone wants load bearing then we need to ensure it is suitable for use which means, if it hasn't been tested by some reputable lab, it must be tested for any and all conditions.  We all wish up here that it could be as simple as saying..."that is the need so let's buy this and then buying it" but that is not the way it works.  We are really no different in that regard than any other police agency.  Having worked on national procurement issues I know first hand that the RCMP takes just as much time as we do, and sometimes more, to get new kit in the system. 

If you didn't get any feedback from your CoC, which I feel you should have, then make a further inquiry to ensure your comments were sent up the chain.  I wouldn't expect any personalized feedback though.  Things just don't work that way.  If your comments were received they would have been considered along with any other feedback and all other criteria then factored into what will be purchased. 

Offline Habs

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 3,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 87
Re: CF MP Soft Body Armour New Requirements
« Reply #24 on: January 04, 2016, 17:44:33 »
We have the option of internal or external. Most choose external for comfort and ease. I have received some comments from the public but mostly just curiosity.

Now if we can just get load bearing vests like the Brits to save my aching back...

The most recent photo the Kingston Military Police Detachment Facebook group uploaded has two officers with Santa hats on with what appears to be a load bearing vest... it has the word "POLICE" on the front which I have never seen on non-load bearing vests.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2016, 17:59:46 by Habs »