Rep. Mike Honda trying to ban body armor sales to public in USA - H.R. 5344 bill - Polidicks

I think the purpose of a anti-body armor law would be against domestic terrorism. I can easily imagine a "sovereign citizen" or a right wing militia group. Why would you need Class 4 and up body armor anyway ? Class 3A would be completely legitimate for security for civilian use( not including LEO )

[QUOTE=Lijitsu;45660650]Did you not read the last part of it? I'm very aware of even lower end kevlar vests typically stopping most handgun rounds from penetrating. I specifically mentioned it not keeping anything above a .22 from at least [b]stunning you and knocking you on your ass[/b]. At worst - well, worst would actually be penetration - it'll knock you out and/or break some ribs. Unless IIIA has some kind of magical kinetic invulnerability, the energy is still going to slam into you.[/QUOTE] If you get shot while wearing a vest, and the vest stops the round, you will still think you were shot. Incapacitated: Absolutely. Broken ribs: Most likely. Like you said, its good for stopping penetration of a round, but all that force is still being exerted on you.

[QUOTE=Lijitsu;45660650]Did you not read the last part of it? I'm very aware of even lower end kevlar vests typically stopping most handgun rounds from penetrating. I specifically mentioned it not keeping anything above a .22 from at least [b]stunning you and knocking you on your ass[/b]. At worst - well, worst would actually be penetration - it'll knock you out and/or break some ribs. Unless IIIA has some kind of magical kinetic invulnerability, the energy is still going to slam into you.[/QUOTE] IIIA is designed specifically to reduce the shock to allow you to not be stunned so you can return fire.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;45651629]i deserve the freedom to wear a kevlar vest for sport?[/QUOTE] Sports sound dangerous in america I think I'll stick to fishing and flotation vests

[QUOTE=Mr. Foster;45660769]IIIA is designed specifically to reduce the shock to allow you to not be stunned so you can return fire.[/QUOTE] I might could see it disperse enough in a 9mm or similar round that you could stay in a fight, but a .44 magnum round or 12g buckshot at close range is going to incapacitate you. There's too much energy coming out of those to just brush off.

[QUOTE=Lijitsu;45660650]Did you not read the last part of it? I'm very aware of even lower end kevlar vests typically stopping most handgun rounds from penetrating. I specifically mentioned it not keeping anything above a .22 from at least [b]stunning you and knocking you on your ass[/b]. At worst - well, worst would actually be penetration - it'll knock you out and/or break some ribs. Unless IIIA has some kind of magical kinetic invulnerability, the energy is still going to slam into you.[/QUOTE] IIIA usually will have a hard plate in it. I've known guys who've been hit with a 7.62x39 and not even know it until after the firefight was over. Those plates do a damn good job at absorbing kenetic energy.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;45660845]IIIA usually will have a hard plate in it. I've known guys who've been hit with a 7.62x39 and not even know it until after the firefight was over. Those plates do a damn good job at absorbing kenetic energy.[/QUOTE] Plates. Yes. Again, I know plates are ridiculously effective. This has all stemmed from talk about just the vest though, purely the kevlar and no plates.

Actually that is something I wish someone would bring up. The Militia Act of 1903(Dick Act), was meant to allow civilians to be armed like the US Military's infantry. Likewise, the National Firearms Act of 1934 had outlawed automatics and short barreled shotguns because they supposedly were not being used by the US Military. This statement was actually a main point in the arguments of United States v. Miller 1939... [quote]-The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of military-type weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia - The "double barrel 12-gauge Stevens shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches in length, bearing identification number 76230" was never used in any militia organization.[/quote] This is one of the reasons why I plan on going to my state legislature to have the National Firearms Act of 1934, Gun Control Act of 1968, and Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, all challenged for going against the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, as well as going against rulings of the US Supreme Court during United States v. Miller I would also like to make the ruling that all firearms are capable of being used for military efforts, as well as being used within the militia as almost all firearms are suited for killing human beings. Countries like Russia actually used [URL="http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sniper-rifles/rus/sv99-e.html"].22LR for sniper rifles[/URL], so any argument that anything above and below isn't possible for use in the military is moot.

oh hey, another senator with no clue what he is going on about. this will never pass.

[QUOTE=Leon;45652114][media]http://w =iJmFEv6BHM0[/media] [img]http://askmarion.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/yee-caguncontroladvocate-guntraffickerpersonally.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] if this is fucking true why is allowed to still be a politician.

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;45662300]if this is fucking true why is allowed to still be a politician.[/QUOTE] yeah he plead not guilty to those charges. welcome to america.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;45651752]Regardless, I'm against it because the reasoning is awful and misinformed. Seriously, "Police bullets"? There's no such thing. At least if you said "Military bullets" I can assume you're talking about the 5.56x45mm NATO and not the .223 Remington.[/QUOTE] By police bullets they might mean hollowpoints which are sort of considered law enforcement bullets Lower penetration + higher stopping power + banned for military use

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;45662300]if this is fucking true why is allowed to still be a politician.[/QUOTE] Because if you have enough money and retarded supporters, you can pretty much get away with anything...

[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. Committing ANY crime with any sort of bulletproof vest on immediately makes it a felony.

When was the last time criminals used some serious body armor for a shoot out with the cops? There might be a few examples, but the only one I can think of was the one LA bank robbery. Also, it would be silly to ban body armor. Anyone who knows a bit about metal and has the right tools could cobble up some decent body armor. Heck, I could go around my house looking for things made out of metal and fabricate body armor with a file and a saw. It wouldn't be military grade, but I could do it. If someone else was more determined, they could go to any junk yard or steel dealership and purchase the metal they need.

Its like they want us all to get shot. They want to ban guns so we cant defend ourselves now they want to stop us from protecting ourselves from being shot.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;45662605]By police bullets they might mean hollowpoints which are sort of considered law enforcement bullets Lower penetration + higher stopping power + banned for military use[/QUOTE] Basically its how we know if a police officer shot someone or if someone else did. Hallowpoints. Depending on where you are too the police may chamber a higher grain round than others too

[QUOTE=Code3Response;45666631]Basically its how we know if a police officer shot someone or if someone else did. Hallowpoints. Depending on where you are too the police may chamber a higher grain round than others too[/QUOTE] Hollowpoints can be owned by civilians. As far as I know, most civilians use them in handguns for home protection. At the very least, everyone I know who owns a handgun does.

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;45662300]if this is fucking true why is allowed to still be a politician.[/QUOTE] because this country is fucked

[QUOTE=Code3Response;45666631]Basically its how we know if a police officer shot someone or if someone else did. Hallowpoints. Depending on where you are too the police may chamber a higher grain round than others too[/QUOTE] False really. Hollowpoints in the US are generally seen as civilian ammo as well. It's safer for home defense in a standard US home scenario. The walls are generally weaker and you don't want something that can fly trough multiple of them. It also has generally better stopping power. It's different in the EU, where hollowpoints are often banned or relegated to hunting ammo.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;45668737]False really. Hollowpoints in the US are generally seen as civilian ammo as well. It's safer for home defense in a standard US home scenario. The walls are generally weaker and you don't want something that can fly trough multiple of them. It also has generally better stopping power. It's different in the EU, where hollowpoints are often banned or relegated to hunting ammo.[/QUOTE] I find it odd that the Czechs allow CCW of handguns but have heavy controls on hollowpoints, which are the best defence rounds.