Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Body Armor Ban

  1. #1
    Regular Member Tucker6900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Posts
    1,249

    Body Armor Ban

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-...bill/5344/text

    Yet another item that (potentially) only police employees will be allowed to own.

    Basically any material deemed ballistic will be prohibited by us civilians...
    The only terrorists I see nowadays are at the Capital.


    The statements made in this post do not necessarily reflect the views of OCDO or its members.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Findlay, Ohio, United States
    Posts
    89
    First off, it is a BS law they are attempting to pass. But, did you bother to actually read it before getting on your soap box? It only extends to "enhanced body armor". The definition of which is "body armor, including a helmet or shield, the ballistic resistance of which meets or exceeds
    the ballistic performance of Type III armor, determined using National Institute of Justice Standard-0101.06.", e.g. Type III or Type IV body armor. Type IIIa, Type II, and Type IIa, and Type I would still be legal. Type III and Type IV stop rifle rounds, the rest stop varying power of handgun rounds. As I said, it's a BS law, and should not pass, but it is not banning "Basically any material deemed ballistic will be prohibited by us civilians".

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JustJack View Post
    First off, it is a BS law they are attempting to pass. But, did you bother to actually read it before getting on your soap box? It only extends to "enhanced body armor". The definition of which is "body armor, including a helmet or shield, the ballistic resistance of which meets or exceeds
    the ballistic performance of Type III armor, determined using National Institute of Justice Standard-0101.06.", e.g. Type III or Type IV body armor. Type IIIa, Type II, and Type IIa, and Type I would still be legal. Type III and Type IV stop rifle rounds, the rest stop varying power of handgun rounds. As I said, it's a BS law, and should not pass, but it is not banning "Basically any material deemed ballistic will be prohibited by us civilians".
    Its a first step to ban armor though ... why cannot we have type II or IV ?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Northglenn, Colorado
    Posts
    243
    This needs to die away in committee. Who the hell are the California commiecrats to tell you how well you should be able to protect yourself. Its a criminal act that they even proposed this.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Raleigh
    Posts
    149
    I'm sure this will die, but just in case...I just received my plate carrier in the mail, yesterday. I think I'll go steel in lieu of ceramic. I might even get a plate for my EDC backpack..

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Saxxon View Post
    This needs to die away in committee. Who the hell are the California commiecrats to tell you how well you should be able to protect yourself. Its a criminal act that they even proposed this.
    or how big your soda should be........or how many rounds you should carry ........or who to vote for.
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •