Do he wants people completely vulnerable?
They are not even trying to hide their agenda anymore.
That’s ridiculous...
Sigh...I guess there’ll be a run on body armor now, driving prices up. Sorry kids. Just when you thought your inheritance was safe...I’m going to the gun store again.
This is really gonna tick off those up and coming manufacturers of body-armored bookbags that just started their new line of “protective” bookbags for the school chilluns...
We’re gonna need a picture of Schumer as “#1 Body Armor Salesman in the USA” like we had with Obama as the “#1 Gun Salesman”.
Something to consider. Just about any firearm can be put in a box for decades and still function flawlessly when removed. Kevlar has an expiration date. Most consider about 5 years IIRC. Less if exposed to the elements.
Knee jerk legislation always infringes on our liberty. Throw the anti Second Amendment politicians out before they eliminate it altogether.
I like Dean’s articles but I think he concedes too much by calling body armor “arms”. Body armor is simply a type of protective clothing. Do we consider football pads “arms”?
Only in Chicago, Chuckie.
Guess I better go order a couple suits so I can ignore any future ban, like I did with bump stocks last year. These politicians are bankrupting me by telling me I can’t own things....
If a woman wants to buy protective armor because she is afraid of threats to kill her made by her transgender erstwhile live-in, why should she be denied the protection?
Even though Rosa Parks was a civilian, why should she have been denied the right to buy the protective device when so many dangerous bullies were out to get her?
Just exactly what is Schumer up to?
Will he be banning bullet proof backpacks for the kids in school?
Think about the children Chuck.
All those little backpacks.
Every weapon owned by our government is protected. If we want fully automatic weapons, like NOAA has, we should be able to.
The bumpstock ban was a dem dream. Now the door is off.
Red flag rules being supported right here on FR.
There is no satisfying the blood thirst. Feeding the monster only makes it hungrier.unreal fo gun control to be unleashed during a Republican pres.
Of course i didn’t think record nunbers of border crossers would happen either.
That is left to the states
If Betts was clad in body armor, where’d they get him?
Watching “Sons of Liberty” on Hulu now. As far as I can tell, it’s an historical accurate portray.
The Colonists were very adept at circumventing the British Intolerable Acts and General Thomas Gage’s tyranny. If body armor is “outlawed”, people will find a way around the prohibition. Just as they did in Colonial times or Prohibition
We will take your guns and make body armor be prohibited to citizens, we are from the democrat party and we are here to protect you.
“Those disgusting Americans can’t be allowed to have metal!”
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Misguided, post-17th Amendment ratification Sen. Schumer is wrongly ignoring Congress's constitutionally limited powers with respect to his politically motivated proposal to exploit low-information voters to win votes for desperate Democrats by unconstitutionally prohibiting and regulating body armor sales.
More specifically, regardless what FDR's state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted people to think about the scope of Congress's Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3) when they wrongly decided Wickard v. Filburn in Congress's favor imo, FDR's justices ignored that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that INTRAstate commerce was constitutionally off-limits to the feds.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." -Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Comparing Schumer's proposal for prohibition of body-armor sales with historical prohibition of alcoholic beverages for example, Schumer is "overlooking" that the states first ratified the 18th Amendment to give Congress the specific power to stick its big nose into intrastate commerce to prohibit sales alcoholic beverages.
18th Amendment:
"Section 1 of 3: After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.Section 2 of 3: The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Section. 3: This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress."
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA! Now KAG! (Keep America Great!)
Schumer has the intelligence of a wet turd. Perhaps the good Senator and his liberal friends should by the same firearm restrictions as they have cast upon their state’s citizens. Why should their bodyguards be allowed assault weapons or high-capacity magazines? They are still citizens and should be treated the same as everyone else..
And Schumer’s long suit is not in the “smarts” dep’t. Both seem to be true statements.