Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BILL TO REQUIRE THOSE WANTING BODY ARMOR TO GET FBI PERMISSION
guns.com ^ | Aug. 12, 2019 | Chris Eger

Posted on 08/12/2019 10:32:21 AM PDT by PROCON

Under Schumer’s measure, those who aren’t law enforcement would need to get a green light from the FBI to get body armor– and show a reason why they need it. (Photo: Chris Eger/Guns.com)

Legislation promised in the U.S. Senate would make the legal sale of body armor a “may issue” process signed off on by federal law enforcement.

U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, announced his legislation on Sunday to require FBI permission before anyone except law enforcement could buy what he termed “sophisticated body armor,” setting a bar that would require a clear purpose, such as an occupational requirement, for the buyer to seek the safety equipment.

“The bottom line here is that the ease by which one can acquire wares of war demands the FBI sets reasonable regulations on who can get it,” said Schumer, who plans to introduce his bill after the current Senate recess.

Even if Schumer’s proposal does not make it into law, it is already against the law for criminals to add body armor to their toolkit. Since 2002, it has been illegal under federal law for convicted felons to possess body armor of any sort. This has been prosecuted in U.S. courts even in states that do not criminalize the possession of body armor.

According to Schumer’s office, one study found that 5 percent of a group of 110 active shooters between 2000 and 2012 used body armor.

“Shockingly, with the click of a mouse, the scroll of a thumb or the dialing of a phone, just about anyone can order-up the kind of advanced armor or tactical law enforcement gear we see used in wars or all-out law enforcement raids, and that is unacceptable and needs to change,” said Schumer.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Government; Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; bodyarmor; chuckieschumer; guncontrol; schumer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: PROCON

If it makes sense to you that only the police should have guns and body armor, but at the same time the police are all evil in your eyes...you might be a Democrat. :)


21 posted on 08/12/2019 10:50:41 AM PDT by Tell It Right (1st Thessalonians 5:21 -- Put everything to the test, hold fast to that which is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

It’s not about fighting crime. It’s all about maintaining supremacy over the masses when they decide they’ve had enough of corruption.


22 posted on 08/12/2019 10:50:53 AM PDT by semaj (We are the People)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I know your post is tongue in cheek but how does this make anyone besides our elected officials any safer?


23 posted on 08/12/2019 10:52:36 AM PDT by TarasBulbous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

The entire notion is stupid, but an FBI check? Lord knows they’d never do anything contrary to the Constitution... /S


24 posted on 08/12/2019 10:53:04 AM PDT by ManHunter (You can run, but you'll only die tired... Army snipers: Reach out and touch someone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fruser1

“Maybe I don’t want to get shot by the FBI when they find out I’m a republican.”

What, you done want to be a trophy kill when it becomes delorable season?


25 posted on 08/12/2019 10:53:25 AM PDT by wildcard_redneck (Freeper formerly known as WMarshal.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hal ogen
We need laws like this to keep people from going out and beating each other to death with their body armor.../s


26 posted on 08/12/2019 10:54:07 AM PDT by Magnum44 (My comprehensive terrorism plan: Hunt them down and kill them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

“require FBI permission before anyone except law enforcement could buy what he termed “sophisticated body armor,””

Why exempt law enforcement? No problem with them wearing it on the job but why are they allowed special protections?


27 posted on 08/12/2019 10:55:44 AM PDT by Lurkina.n.Learnin (If you want a definition of "bullying" just watch the Democrats in the Senate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

My body amour never hurt anyone. I demand you leave it alone.


28 posted on 08/12/2019 10:58:54 AM PDT by IC Ken (Stop making stupid people famous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

What next, make it illegal to get gas masks so the can more easily put down a peoples rebellion?


29 posted on 08/12/2019 10:59:18 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Ummmm why? Why should body armor be restricted at all? How does restricting its usage protect anybody?


30 posted on 08/12/2019 11:01:36 AM PDT by FLT-bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I have taken body armor off of or found felons weating and possessing body armor multiple times.

In my state (Washington) there is now against felons possessing this gear.

I cannot recall a single time that the feds have picked up a case in my jurisdiction and prosecuted a felon in possession of body armor.


31 posted on 08/12/2019 11:01:52 AM PDT by TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig (We need a consent decree for the FBI like Obama wathis greens slapg on all those police agencies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I was admiring how light my aluminum ladder was recently.


32 posted on 08/12/2019 11:02:56 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Aren’t football uniforms body armor?
They sure do like to use them to inflict injury on the opposing team.


33 posted on 08/12/2019 11:04:35 AM PDT by BuffaloJack (Chivalry is not dead. It is a warriors code and only practiced by warriors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
The only time body armor kills is when it gives the wearer a false sense of security.

34 posted on 08/12/2019 11:06:14 AM PDT by BitWielder1 (I'd rather have Unequal Wealth than Equal Poverty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I can maybe understand the left’s idiotic reasoning for “assault weapon” banning, even though I do not agree with it.

But just what in the hubs of Hell justifies restricting the sale of body armor? This is not an offensive tool, it’s strictly defensive.

I can see new signs up where lefties have gun free zones. There will now be signs that say “Body Armor Free Zones”. We will have to get concealed or open carry body armor permits. We cannot have the ones with pistol grips or magazines that carry more than 10 parts of armor.

What’s next on the list to be banned, home security cameras? Privacy fencing? Safe rooms? Knives? Bow/Arrows? Night vision devices? Why not just cut to the chase and ban the right to privacy and the right to life and just start marching us to the concentration camps with those special ovens that do not bake bread.


35 posted on 08/12/2019 11:07:25 AM PDT by redfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

What level of Kevlar does schmucky get to wear when he makes a public appearance?


36 posted on 08/12/2019 11:09:03 AM PDT by BlackbirdSST (Is it time Claire?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

Almost every person in Chicago should wear body armor.

Anyone know how many people were killed by unlawful gunfire this weekend in Chicago?

What, the major media didn’t tell you?

Trump should tell Obama to go back to Chicago.


37 posted on 08/12/2019 11:09:19 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TarasBulbous
...but how does this make anyone besides our elected officials any safer?

A better question would be, "What percentage of shootings are done with the shooter wearing body armor?"

Less than +/- 1%?

It's only about showing you care to your ignorant electorate and to attempt to take advantage of a crisis in order to incrementally take away citizen's rights. Period.

38 posted on 08/12/2019 11:10:18 AM PDT by PROCON ('Progressive' is a Euphemism for <strike>Totalitarian</strike> COMMUNIST)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: PROCON

I’m not going to ask the corrupt as Hell FIB anything or for permission for anything.

Keep your Corruptocrats to yourself, Schmucky.


39 posted on 08/12/2019 11:11:32 AM PDT by chris37 (Monday, March 25 2019 is Maga Day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PROCON
Let me see if I understand this. Body armor would require federal permission?

So, a Kevlar vest that I can now legally purchase, if I am a security guard, or say a tow truck driver in a sketchy neighborhood, would require the equivalent of a federal background check?

What about if I buy Kevlar cloth on Amazon (they do sell it) and sew my own body armor? Would that be like manufacturing an illegal firearm? Oh, and does body armor have a serial number so it can be traced?

Finally, what is “body armor?” Seriously, I can buy a welding Kevlar neck/chest protector. Is that “body armor?” What about Kevlar gloves? Is that “body armor?” Sounds like a slippery slope to me

Inquiring minds want to know just how stupid our knee jerk Legislators really are.

40 posted on 08/12/2019 11:16:03 AM PDT by Robert357
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson