Jump to content


Photo

Schumer proposes bill to regulate body armor


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 6,773 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 04:04 PM

I wonder if all those back to school bullet proof backpacks/plates will count?

full story at link...

https://thehill.com/...late-body-armor

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Sunday he intends to introduce a bill restricting the sale of body armor when the Senate reconvenes in September, according to the New York Post.

The bill would require the FBI to establish standards for who is allowed to buy body armor such as bullet-resistant vests after a series of mass shootings in which the gunmen wore body armor, most recently the suspect in the killing of nine people last weekend in Dayton, Ohio.

Schumers proposal would include exceptions for police and other public safety officials, according to the AP.

The ease with which those intent on doing evil are able to get advanced body armor is shocking, Schumer tweeted Sunday afternoon. In addition to the House-passed background checks bill, its time to require anyone seeking sophisticated body armor to get sign-off from the FBI.

What we have learned is that a good number of those intent on mass shootings buy body armor, Schumer said, according to the Post. They want to kill as many people as possible.

Anyone without a criminal conviction can currently obtain a bulletproof vest in all 50 states, with only Connecticut requiring that they be bought in person. Wearing one in commission of a crime is a separate offense in most states, including New York, where it is a felony punishable by up to four years in prison.

In the meantime, however, Schumer said he would push for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to allow a House-passed universal background checks measure a full Senate vote, calling it the most import and immediate thing we can do.

It would pass, in my judgment, he added, according to the Post.

https://nypost.com/2...dy-armor-sales/

Edited by InterestedBystander, 11 August 2019 - 04:11 PM.

NRA Life Member
ISRA Member
FFL-IL Supporter
SAF Member
GOA Member
🇺🇸

#2 Flynn

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,854 posts
  • Joined: 20-August 18

Posted 11 August 2019 - 04:23 PM

I wonder if all those back to school bullet proof backpacks/plates will count?

 

Exactly the same question I was about to ask.


Anonymous leakers, leak anonymously about the anonymous leak.
 
—Anonymous

#3 Quiet Observer

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,414 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 15

Posted 11 August 2019 - 04:28 PM

 

What we have learned is that a good number of those intent on mass shootings buy body armor, Schumer said, according to the Post. They want to kill as many people as possible.

 

I bet that all wore shoes or boots.  It is difficult to shoot accurately while hoping on one after you stub your toe.



#4 Scotty425

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 160 posts
  • Joined: 09-July 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 04:31 PM

Once the body armor ban passes, there will be no more school shootings so the kids won't need bullet resistant backpacks.



#5 Bubbacs

    #Fear The Clown

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,062 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 14

Posted 11 August 2019 - 04:32 PM

So these last two guys, ElPaso and Dayton had body armor?
And they took/received fire from first responders in which the rounds were ineffective?

And one has to ask, if these last two guys were to NOT have had body armor, would they have then NOT went through with their plan?

Remember folks, iirc one had fatigues and black tactical gear, and those pesky wool mask head warmers too! lol

Least we forget, were they wearing military style boots/shoes?

Edited by Bubbacs, 11 August 2019 - 04:33 PM.


#6 steveTA84

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 5,007 posts
  • Joined: 14-December 15

Posted 11 August 2019 - 04:40 PM

El Paso shooter didn’t have body armor

#7 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 6,773 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 05:00 PM

El Paso shooter didn’t have body armor

Yet the Dayton shooter was reported to have a bullet proof vest...and was shot and killed by LE within 30 seconds. He obviously needed more armouring. Are face masks next?
NRA Life Member
ISRA Member
FFL-IL Supporter
SAF Member
GOA Member
🇺🇸

#8 Bubbacs

    #Fear The Clown

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,062 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 14

Posted 11 August 2019 - 05:08 PM

El Paso shooter didn’t have body armor

Yet the Dayton shooter was reported to have a bullet proof vest...and was shot and killed by LE within 30 seconds. He obviously needed more armouring. Are face masks next?

Wait....you mean that body armor doesn’t protect you any better than a Levi Jacket?

Wow.

#9 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 6,773 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 05:19 PM

El Paso shooter didn’t have body armor

Yet the Dayton shooter was reported to have a bullet proof vest...and was shot and killed by LE within 30 seconds. He obviously needed more armouring. Are face masks next?

Wait....you mean that body armor doesn’t protect you any better than a Levi Jacket?
Wow.
I am sure it does but not to the degree that Schumer understands the concept. I expect he knows as much about body armour as he does about semi automatics and shooting those uber high powered .223 rounds.
NRA Life Member
ISRA Member
FFL-IL Supporter
SAF Member
GOA Member
🇺🇸

#10 Flynn

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,854 posts
  • Joined: 20-August 18

Posted 11 August 2019 - 05:32 PM

Any bans on body armor should violate the 2nd right to self defense, the Supreme Court has ruled the 2nd covers all bearable arms and based on historical definitions (and even modern definitions) body armor falls into the category of 'arms' that the 2nd protects.

 

"In 1755 Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language was first published. It defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.”"

 

Merriam-Webster has traditionally defined arms as "1. Weapons of offense, or armor for defense and protection of the body." although it appears they no longer include the armor in their current definition.

 

Either way the 2nd should protect body armor in it's original contextual interpretation.


Edited by Flynn, 11 August 2019 - 05:34 PM.

Anonymous leakers, leak anonymously about the anonymous leak.
 
—Anonymous

#11 Mr. Fife

    Nip it

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 5,197 posts
  • Joined: 03-July 10

Posted 11 August 2019 - 05:51 PM

Next you won't be able to build a berm around your property.
Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?
Have all boated who fish?
 
 

#12 FF1984

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 128 posts
  • Joined: 27-October 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 06:51 PM

One of the shootings in California a few years back had the MSM describing the clothing the shooter wore as "assault-type".  As in "he was wearing assault-type pants".  If they keep heading in that way with their narrative I can see people needing background checks for 5.11 shorts.  

 

Body armor is a passive defense.  Someone tried arguing the point with me that it should be banned.  My response was that the only way someone can be a danger having body armor is if they took it off and hit you in the face with it.  What a lot of people think of when they hear body armor is actually someone in a cheapo airsoft vest that wouldn't stop a soft breeze.  But by all means, ban something even an unarmed and untrained person can use to protect themselves.  



#13 ragsbo

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,439 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 05

Posted 11 August 2019 - 08:33 PM

I knew this was coming the way fake news were stressing it



#14 InterestedBystander

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 6,773 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 08:43 PM

I knew this was coming the way fake news were stressing it

So far I've seen media reports and support for banning:

.semi-automatic guns that look scary
.magazines that have a capacity TBD but usually above 10
.pistol braces
.body armor
.accessories or parts that can alter a firearms rate of fire

What else have I missed?

Edited by InterestedBystander, 11 August 2019 - 08:44 PM.

NRA Life Member
ISRA Member
FFL-IL Supporter
SAF Member
GOA Member
🇺🇸

#15 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 9,143 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 08:49 PM

LWW's prove how bloodthirsty they are.  They WANT those people to not have any way to survive a mass murder spree. 

 

Not purple. 


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#16 Str8Shooter

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • Joined: 23-May 19

Posted 11 August 2019 - 09:05 PM

I'm sure honorable law abiding mass murderers will faithfully comply with the law with respect to body armor.

 

 

Once again, the only people who will be left unprotected and defenseless will be law abiding people.

 

 

But this is not a bug, but a feature for Democrats.



#17 Flynn

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,854 posts
  • Joined: 20-August 18

Posted 11 August 2019 - 09:26 PM

If they keep heading in that way with their narrative I can see people needing background checks for 5.11 shorts.

 

And they likely will, they have banned and continue to attempt to ban firearms based on nothing but their own perceived 'scary' appearance, what is to stop them from banning what they deam 'scary' outfits based on just the appearance of the clothing?


Anonymous leakers, leak anonymously about the anonymous leak.
 
—Anonymous

#18 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 9,143 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 11 August 2019 - 09:50 PM

 

 

 

what is to stop them from banning what they deam 'scary' outfits based on just the appearance of the clothing?

 

 

And eventually they will get this law overturned due to first amendment "expression of self" rulings.   


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#19 borgranta

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,936 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 12

Posted 12 August 2019 - 02:09 AM

Banning body armor is in violation of the right to self defense in its purest form since it helps protect the body from lethal projectiles.  People have the right to protect themselves and their children from being shot by terrorists and a ban on body armor is a violation of that right.  What is next?  Will they ban the Quran since it is commonly used by Muslim terrorists?  Will they ban Muslim religion since Muslim terrorists claim to be following the Muslim religion.  


The following referral code will grant provide a new User of Uber a free ride up to $15
donaldd4557ui

#20 TomKoz

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 4,369 posts
  • Joined: 04-February 10

Posted 12 August 2019 - 07:49 AM

But, But my body armor identifies as a bikini !!!
Stay Alert ... Stay Alive !!

#21 GWBH

    Ripcord... This is Alabama - Fire For Effect, Over...

  • Members
  • 6,476 posts
  • Joined: 30-January 08

Posted 12 August 2019 - 08:43 AM

Schumer is just an old relic trying to keep up with the new wave of LWW's.

None of these people have any business deciding policy for the country.

They all concentrate on everything BUT running the government efficiently, exactly like the "leadership" of the Illinois Legislature.


Fire Support Base Ripcord Association - the heroes of the Vietnam War have their names on a wall in Washington, DC
http://www.ripcordassociation.com/

Sgt. Phil Compton (ishmo), "L" Company (RANGER) 75th Infantry - 101st Airborne Division (Vietnam 1968 - 1969 / 1970 - 1971 )
A good man, a brave soldier, a patriot and a true friend.

PFC Patrick J. Bohan, 101 Pathfinder Detachment, 3rd Brigade - 101st Airborne Division, KIA, July 10, 1970, on FSB Ripcord
 


#22 oneshot

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,973 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 07

Posted 29 August 2019 - 06:28 PM

Don't forget naming your child "Rambo".

 

I knew this was coming the way fake news were stressing it

So far I've seen media reports and support for banning:

.semi-automatic guns that look scary
.magazines that have a capacity TBD but usually above 10
.pistol braces
.body armor
.accessories or parts that can alter a firearms rate of fire

What else have I missed?

 


Arms are the only true badge of liberty. The possession of arms is the distinction of a free man from a slave. - Andrew Fletcher 1698





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users