It is really rather simple....If you are a violent felon ( one of the bad guys) you may not own body armor...doesn't matter where you live. I suggest that you take a deep breath and relax just a little bit. The hysteria that is prevalent about this is right up there with a Michael Moore rant...
The point is that such a law, if if affects felons who have served their time, including any probationary time, and most especially if the prohibition was not an explicit part the sentence, is a minimum a violation of due process, and arguably of the second amendment as well. But that aside, what is the point? Some former felons, even violent ones (and that can cover way more territory than one might think), may have enemies who want to kill them. If they are going to go back to their old ways, lack of a vest wouldn't stop them. Furthermore the law wouldn't stop them from getting a vest any more than it would stop them from getting a gun if they were so inclined. After all if armed robbery, murder or rape is on ones agenda, and the penalties for second (or additional) offenses of those doesn't deter, the additional penalty for having a gun or a vest are not likely to figure into the calculations much at all.
It is really rather simple....If you are a violent felon ( one of the bad guys) you may not own body armor...
If they're serious about preventing deaths in areas like East PA, they ought to issue body armour while handing out the free federal cheese.
AMEN
Do you have a reference to the law --( Title and section ) ?