[QUOTE=Code3Response;45651840]Can someone tell me why you would ever need body armor as a civilian? Like honestly. Not that I care if they ban it or not, but if I see someone wearing it my suspicion goes through the roof.[/QUOTE]
Because it's cool as fuck and why not?
It's not like owning a class 3 or 4 body armor is going to make you unstoppable. And a thug isn't going to go out of his way to drop a few hundred dollars on some body armor.
Shit, my TTC can go through Class 3 plates.
Why is it always California?
If I'm going hunting with a friend and don't want to die if he takes the wrong shot (like one special VP did), body armor really wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to have
I think the most important thing he doesn't realize is that even getting hit into the vest is, even if not as deadly, almost always incapacitating so even if mass murders wearing these happened frequently, banning the vest won't make the murderer any more capable to murder, just more likely to die rather than face detention.
[QUOTE=woolio1;45651784]How often do people get into gun battles with law enforcement while wearing body armor? I mean, it can't be that big of a thing, can it?
I can imagine it happening with gang violence, maybe, but just in general? How big a deal is this for them to consider making a law about it?[/QUOTE]
I think it's only happened once during the north hollywood shootout. any other time has been during raids on big drug dealers which tends to have few if any shots fired.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;45651840]Can someone tell me why you would ever need body armor as a civilian? Like honestly. Not that I care if they ban it or not, but if I see someone wearing it my suspicion goes through the roof.[/QUOTE]
I own quite a bit of personal body armor because I used to have a delivery job that put me in some really shitty neighborhoods for a while. I ended up never needing any of it but I got close on more than one occasion
Armor isn't just for bullets, motorcycle gear is pretty much common civilian armor that is extremely effective in preventing your body from being shredded apart from sliding on the road or breaking your bones. Lots of riding jackets and pants are loaded with armor plates and are made out of materials such as kevlar.
Hey look this guy is from my district. I met him when he campaigned at my school. Pretty cool guy but stuff like this is the reason his opponent Ro Khanna is going to win the next election.
This is stupid. Hell even I am a Gun Control advocate (I swear to god do not try to start shit, I don't give a crap) and this is just way to ridiculous.
Well why should it be illegal? What's the issue? Most of you say it shouldn't be banned, and I agree.
[editline]10th August 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;45651723]No, and it shouldn't be.
If anything, make it an accessory to a crime, like committing a crime with a gun adds on gun charges. If you used body armor to your advantage it becomes an accessory charge.[/QUOTE]
It is. If you are wearing a vest while committing a crime, it lengthens you sentence.
It's a law that says that if you are committing a crime, it's illegal to wear a vest.
[URL]http://www.dumblaws.com/law/1175[/URL]
If they ban body armor, I'm just going to develop my own mobile suit. And I'll make the design public. And you'll be able to make it with a 3D printer. And it will have an ammo capacity of over 10 rounds.
[QUOTE=FLIPPY;45652566] It is. If you are wearing a vest while committing a crime, it lengthens you sentence.
It's a law that says that if you are committing a crime, it's illegal to wear a vest.
[URL]http://www.dumblaws.com/law/1175[/URL][/QUOTE]
I'm trying to work out why you linked to "dumblaws.com"? Surely there are better sources for details of the law. Having laws that apply when you break laws isn't particularly dumb, this is one of those cases, it's extra shit to hit you with because you clearly wanted to go big.
I'm not entirely sure what the politicians in the states who want to enact gun control are up to, they all seem to be going about it the wrong way. Banning body armour does seem relatively useless. There's no need for civilians to own it, but it's not like it can actually hurt anybody (easily), it's personal armour after all.
Unless they've had a massive spate of criminals wearing armour or something silly, I dunno why this even crossed their minds.
Just my two cents but all this is going to do is hurt law abiding citizens, if a criminal wants body armor badly enough I'm pretty sure they'll have no problems with getting it illegally.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;45652654]
Unless they've had a massive spate of criminals wearing armour or something silly, I dunno why this even crossed their minds.[/QUOTE]
They became aware of the existence of Payday 2 while assembling a new infantile rant about how violent videogames are corrupting the children.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;45652654]
Unless they've had a massive spate of criminals wearing armour or something silly, [B]I dunno why this even crossed their minds[/B].[/QUOTE]
because like most poorly thought out gun control measures, they are appealing to emotion to make it seem like they are doing something useful, in uneducated peoples eyes
"we are banning [I]SCARY CHILD COP KILLING [B]ASSAULT WEAPONS[/B][/I]" when in reality "assault weapons" are hardly used in crimes at all
"we want to ban body armor that makes criminals [I]INVINCIBLE[/I] to [I]police and military[/I] ammunition" when in reality body armor is almost never used in crimes and criminal penalties for doing so are already in place
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;45652704]"we want to ban body armor that makes criminals [I]INVINCIBLE[/I] to [I]police and military[/I] ammunition" when in reality body armor is almost never used in crimes and criminal penalties for doing so are already in place[/QUOTE]
And the only thing it might make you 'invincible' to is a .22. Which is... not really that big of a threat to begin with.
[QUOTE=Lijitsu;45652740]And the only thing it might make you 'invincible' to is a .22. Which is... not really that big of a threat to begin with.[/QUOTE]
high end body armour will actually stop some serious ammunition
our congressmen are unbelievable
we can't have vests but it's okay for our police force to be militarized while they're pretty much exempt from all these laws
Here in Minnesota any crime committed while wearing body armor automatically gets bumped up to a felony.
As a security guard in a very rough part of town body armor is a necessity for me. Some of us have to deal with people that are willing to kill you over a candy bar, and I like to give myself every chance to not get killed.
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;45652846]high end body armour will actually stop some serious ammunition[/QUOTE]
Yeah true, but that's mostly with plates. For the most part a civilian in body armor is likely wearing just the vest. Which is a shit load better than nothing, but it still won't stop anything above a .22 from at the very least stunning you and knocking you on your ass.
Remember that police tend to fire a bunch of shots too. In the end, that's a lot of fucking energy and momentum you'll be getting shoved up the ass. Even if it's a .22lr or something, you can still get serious bruises and get incapacitated really easily. They seem to think body armor is like power armor from Fallout when really, it's not going to turn you into fucking Hulk or something.
In the end, it might actually be better for people to be wearing vests or something, so when they do get incapacitated, they don't die and there's a whole lot less legal issues there and nobody gets worked up about another police killing. Idk, just a thought.
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;45652846]high end body armour will actually stop some serious ammunition[/QUOTE]
Those vests are also expensive as hell and very heavy. Not something you'd want to go rob a store while wearing, and usually if you can afford one, you don't need to rob a store.
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;45652846]high end body armour will actually stop some serious ammunition[/QUOTE]
That armor is incredibly expensive and weighs a shit ton. The standard kevlar vest will only stop low caliber handgun rounds.
Somehow I don't think the solution to mass shootings is "make the general public easier for the police to kill".
Also, don't most squad cars carry an AR-15 in the trunk or something? The North Hollywood shootout isn't going to happen again.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;45651840]Can someone tell me why you would ever need body armor as a civilian? Like honestly. Not that I care if they ban it or not, but if I see someone wearing it my suspicion goes through the roof.[/QUOTE]
Lots of applications for civilian use...
Just for starters, people who have been threatened could wear it. People who live in bad areas could wear it. People who are not law enforcement but provide some type of security detail. List can go on...
Most vests you're not gonna see anyway, most of the civilian vests are really concealable. Most gangbangers are not going to waste money on a vest anyway. No reason to do a ban of it, body armor isn't used in crimes most of the time anyway.
That being said this bill is as sensational as "assault rifle" bans.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;45653558]Somehow I don't think the solution to mass shootings is "make the general public easier for the police to kill".
Also, don't most squad cars carry an AR-15 in the trunk or something? The North Hollywood shootout isn't going to happen again.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, most cars have shotguns and AR-15's standard. North hollywood was a very unique situation anyway. How many type of shootouts like that have we had? A good vest is gonna cost 1k+ anyway. So i highly doubt a gang members is gonna log on to Galls and order a vest.
[QUOTE=MR-X;45653597]Lots of applications for civilian use...
Just for starters, people who have been threatened could wear it. People who live in bad areas could wear it. People who are not law enforcement but provide some type of security detail. List can go on...
Most vests you're not gonna see anyway, most of the civilian vests are really concealable. Most gangbangers are not going to waste money on a vest anyway. No reason to do a ban of it, body armor isn't used in crimes most of the time anyway.
That being said this bill is as sensational as "assault rifle" bans.[/QUOTE]
Plus bikers that aren't idiots wear armor too, the leather they where does have armor in them.
IIRC, Body Armor possession is illegal for convicted felons, atleast here in the US, and it should stay that way. When someone buys body armor, they typically are responsible enough to know why and what they are using it for (Akin to responsible gun owners)
Plus, it's absolute dicks if I can't go out and buy myself a $5 grand Dragon Skin vest, or atleast some kevlar, to protect my goddamn life.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;45653490]That armor is incredibly expensive and weighs a shit ton. The standard kevlar vest will only stop low caliber handgun rounds.[/QUOTE]
Uhh level II will stop basically all combat calibers for handguns. 9mm,.40, and .45. That is going to cover the overwhelming majority of what will fly your way. Level II is basically the minimum. Almost no vests are manufactured below that level, even for concealment purposes.
I don't know where people are getting the idea that soft armor is useless. Is it good against everything? No. Is it good against the most commonly used handgun calibers? Absolutely.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;45652184]Why is it always California?[/QUOTE]
Because California is one of, if not the most, consistently liberal state in the US and they get to do essentially everything they want. The same reason that New York was able to ban large cups of soda from being sold.
[QUOTE=sgman91;45653809]Because California is one of, if not the most, consistently liberal state in the US and they get to do essentially everything they want. The same reason that New York was able to ban large cups of soda from being sold.[/QUOTE]
Maybe it's history
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_hollywood_shootout[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
