Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California Dem moves to outlaw some civilian body armor
Hot Air ^ | August 30, 2014 | Jazz Shaw

Posted on 08/30/2014 2:39:58 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

Bob Owens at Bearing Arms talks about a new piece of Democrat legislation which, rather than trying to ban various types of weapons, seeks to restrict civilians from using certain classes of body armor.

These anti-gun Democrats keep failing to stop us from having guns… and so they seem intent on making sure that we cannot defend ourselves against theirs.

HR 5344, the laughably titled “Responsible Body Armor Possession Act,” is nothing more or less than attempt ban Level III and higher body armor that can defeat most common rifle ammunition, such as the steel plate armor sold by AR500 Armor* and other vendors…

This is nothing more or less than an attempt by another petty tyrant (Rep. Mike Honda, of California) to strip rights away from the citizenry in order to give the government more power and control.

Honda is California’s congressman from the 7th District, and his new legislation is Voxsplained in a rather curious fashion. He probably doesn’t want the police to be very “militarized” either, but he darned sure doesn’t want you to be.

Honda, speaking at a news conference in San Jose Wednesday morning with police chiefs and the district attorneys and sheriffs from Santa Clara and Alameda counties, said his proposal would discourage criminals from wearing enhanced body armor to commit mass shootings.

“This bill will keep military body armor out of the wrong hands,” Honda said. “It would ensure that only law enforcement, firefighters and other first responders would be able to access enhanced body armor.”

“We’re not talking about just a standard bullet-proof vest,” he said. “We’re talking about body armor that is designed for warfare, designed to protect against law enforcement ammunitions.”

Just to clarify, the legislation would not prohibit the more common, flexible body armor you see most often, but rather level III and above. There’s a pretty good breakdown of the various classes of body armor here. Level II armor is the normal standard which protects against rounds from handguns up to the .357 magnum. Level IIIa soft body armor is the same, but will also purportedly stop a .44 magnum or an Uzi. Level III – which this legislation would cover – is “hard” armor, designed to stop standard rifle rounds. (Level IV is supposed to protect against armor piercing rounds.)

This entire argument is pretty much the opposite of the usual Second Amendment fight. Rather than the right to keep and bear arms, it’s involves your ability to protect yourself against an armed enemy. Honda’s legislation leads to two rather obvious questions.

First, the only case in which one could argue that society benefits from this sort of restriction is when the body armor is being employed by a heavily armed criminal who is determined to fight the authorities. Fair enough. But this leaves open the same argument which comes up so often over gun control legislation: the people it seeks to target are precisely the sorts who don’t give a lot of thought to breaking lesser laws while cooking up their plans for breaking much more severe ones such as murder or robbery. In the end, the only people you wind up restricting are the ones who tend to obey laws and aren’t likely to be out there shooting up some cop’s patrol car.

The second, broader question has to do with whether or not the government can ban defensive – as opposed to offensive – equipment in the first place. Even if you happen to support gun rights restrictions, the vast majority of your argument is surely based on the concept that guns are dangerous to others. You’d be hard pressed to injure anyone else with a protective vest unless they were willing to stand still while you beat them over the head with it. Armor which keeps you safe from projectile weapons seems like it should be a no-brainer in terms of reasonable expectations among civilians. It would be interesting to see this one challenged in the courts, assuming Honda can even get it to a vote.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: banglist; bodyarmor; california; hr5344; kevlar; mikehonda; t

Last conservative out, please turn off the lights.

1 posted on 08/30/2014 2:39:58 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Look. It’s time. Mexico wants California. Let them have it.


2 posted on 08/30/2014 2:42:36 PM PDT by Lazamataz (First we beat the Soviet Union. Then we became them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Don’t they already have it?


3 posted on 08/30/2014 2:44:17 PM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I can not think of any reason why law enforcement should be allowed to have any equipment that is forbidden to a regular citizen.


4 posted on 08/30/2014 2:50:26 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I said this on a related thread, but bears repeating:

When a Government becomes concerned that it’s civilians are becoming too hard to kill, the people should take acute notice...

5 posted on 08/30/2014 2:52:27 PM PDT by 5thGenTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Level IIIa soft body armor is the same, but will also purportedly stop a .44 magnum or an Uzi.

Unless I'm confused, Uzis use (most of them) rather anemic cartridges. Certainly a LOT less powerful than a .44.

6 posted on 08/30/2014 3:03:01 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (Perception wins most of the battles. Reality wins ALL the wars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Don’t they usually use 9mm Luger like a pistol?


7 posted on 08/30/2014 3:10:08 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“This bill will keep military body armor out of the wrong hands,” Honda said. “It would ensure that only select officially sanctioned and politically vetted law enforcement praetorian guard, and criminals survive to prey on the helpless population in a faceoff!”

Fixed it.


8 posted on 08/30/2014 3:12:22 PM PDT by Darksheare (Try my coffee! First one's free..... Even robots will kill for it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 5thGenTexan

We’ve had a couple of bank robberies where the perps are wearing heavy body armor and have much higher fire power in their gns.

A local gn store just handed guns over the counter to help the police. The police should be able to protect themselves from criminals.


9 posted on 08/30/2014 3:12:50 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

“...assuming Honda can even get it to a vote.”

In Bizarro World every absurd concept comes to the floor for a vote. Eventually it passes and is signed into law by the Governor. You can’t fix stupid.


10 posted on 08/30/2014 3:14:23 PM PDT by chulaivn66 (Meine antwort ist nein. Ende der Debatte.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I think so, though they’re chambered for several other rounds like .45 ACP.


11 posted on 08/30/2014 3:17:00 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (Perception wins most of the battles. Reality wins ALL the wars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

You are absolutely correct. But to the douche bags sucking the junk of gun control an UZI is tantamount to using a Nuke.


12 posted on 08/30/2014 3:18:15 PM PDT by Ajnin (Wolves don't lose sleep over the opinion of sheep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Don’t they usually use 9mm Luger like a pistol?

9mm Parabellum, yes. The Uzi is also available in .45 ACP. The .44 magnum revolver cartridge is considerably more powerful than either.

My question to the the sponsor of this is, is there a problem needing legislation? When was the last time this sort of body armor was used in a crime? The North Hollywood shootout was more than 15 years ago.

13 posted on 08/30/2014 3:19:34 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; Sherman Logan
Are you guys seriously taking an article written by "Jazz Shaw" as gospel?

Of course the 9mm Uzi has nowhere near the penetration of a .44 magnum or similar round. You know it, I know it, but idiots like "Jazz" don't even know which direction to load a round into a magazine.

14 posted on 08/30/2014 3:21:50 PM PDT by Henchster (Free Republic - the BEST site on the web!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

These guys are IDIOTS, and INSANE, and TYRANOUS CONTROL FREAKS!!


15 posted on 08/30/2014 3:27:18 PM PDT by JSDude1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

Jazz has been a writer there for some time.


16 posted on 08/30/2014 3:27:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
When ya see it...

How'd dat happen? Jazz!
17 posted on 08/30/2014 3:29:48 PM PDT by W. (Government: Moving at the speed of paper pushers pushing actual paper, until it benefits them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

We must ban assault body-armor NOW!


18 posted on 08/30/2014 3:31:59 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("The man who damns money obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it earned it." --Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
“We’re talking about body armor that is designed for warfare, designed
to protect against law enforcement ammunitions.”

And when the SHTF that's probably who we'll need to protect ourselves from.
To many gung-ho punks in uniforms as it is. Give them stress and they'll be
committing mass murder and getting away with it by just saying "I felt threatened".

No problem, the 500 armor is good and it's affordable. Israel sells great armor also
that can be installed in vehicles.

19 posted on 08/30/2014 3:43:17 PM PDT by MaxMax (Pay Attention and you'll be pissed off too! FIRE BOEHNER, NOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

but idiots like “Jazz” don’t even know which direction to load a round into a magazine. ==

For Jazz, that would be a clip.


20 posted on 08/30/2014 3:51:09 PM PDT by Scrambler Bob (/s /s /s /s /s, my replies are "liberally" sprinkled with them behind every word and letter.!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Does he want us to tattoo little targets on the best places to hit us.

It's like Mason said to Dixon, "You gotta' draw the line somewhere".

21 posted on 08/30/2014 3:53:46 PM PDT by capt. norm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

“Look. It’s time. Mexico wants California. Let them have it.”

Why? Look at our history. We can dust off the 1867 Reconstruction Act. Reconstruction allows us to send in a military governor to take over California. The military governor has the congressional power to fire the governor, the California state legislature and ban the California congressional delegation from taking their seats in Congress.

We gotta think outa the box and use legal tools that have proven effective in the past.


22 posted on 08/30/2014 3:55:26 PM PDT by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

***“We’re talking about body armor that is designed for warfare, designed to protect against law enforcement ammunitions.” ***

Time to dig up my stash of black tipped ammo.


23 posted on 08/30/2014 4:04:45 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (SOUL BROTHER! This house is not armed! (Signs people thought would protect them in the 1960s))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

YOU CAN HAVE MY ARMOUR WHEN YOU STRIP IT FROM MY COLD DEAD BODY!!!

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/71415062/pdf-poster-—Bullet-dents-and-%E2%80%9Cproof-marks%E2%80%9D-in-armour


24 posted on 08/30/2014 4:10:05 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (SOUL BROTHER! This house is not armed! (Signs people thought would protect them in the 1960s))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Maybe we can get some of this!

Ned Kelly’s armor

http://www.ironoutlaw.com/html/armour.html


25 posted on 08/30/2014 4:14:27 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (SOUL BROTHER! This house is not armed! (Signs people thought would protect them in the 1960s))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

That was 30 years ago or so. LAPD has been “up gunned” since that mess.


26 posted on 08/30/2014 4:19:13 PM PDT by TaMoDee (Go Pack Go! The Pack will be back in 2014!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ajnin

After Newtown, the ahole sheriff of poverty-stricken Washington County, Maine, equated the citizen ownership of semi-automatic rifles to citizens owning nukes.


27 posted on 08/30/2014 4:27:13 PM PDT by july4thfreedomfoundation (Politicians and diapers must be changed often for the same reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

I would like a law that prohibited politicians from having locks on their doors.


28 posted on 08/30/2014 4:43:54 PM PDT by MtnClimber (Just doing laps around the sun and shaking my head that progressives can believe what they do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaMoDee

It wasn’t thirty years ago.


29 posted on 08/30/2014 4:45:45 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: TaMoDee

Not true.

First, it was February 1997, 17 years ago ... not close to 30.

And we just recently had another incident.


30 posted on 08/30/2014 4:48:31 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
The police should be able to protect themselves from criminals.

I won't argue that point.

But the topic is whether law-abiding citizens should be able to protect themselves.

Do you have a problem with that? Do you want to take body armor away? I mean, if protection is such an important concept ...

31 posted on 08/30/2014 4:50:16 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy ("Harvey Dent, can we trust him?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBsdV--kLoQ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

If body armor are outlawed, only outlaws will have body armor.


32 posted on 08/30/2014 4:52:48 PM PDT by ExCTCitizen (I'm ExCTCitizen and I approve this reply. If it does offend Libs, I'm NOT sorry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

No, I do not want to take body armor away.


33 posted on 08/30/2014 4:52:58 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MtnClimber

Why do politicians have doors to begin with? What are they hiding? Besides, cops can always be called if someone walks through the archway.


34 posted on 08/30/2014 5:12:23 PM PDT by Lazamataz (First we beat the Soviet Union. Then we became them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
COME AND TAKE IT!


35 posted on 08/30/2014 5:27:42 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (SOUL BROTHER! This house is not armed! (Signs people thought would protect them in the 1960s))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chulaivn66
'assuming Honda can even get it to a vote"

California allows AUTOMOBILES to vote? :-)

36 posted on 08/30/2014 6:04:43 PM PDT by ExCTCitizen (I'm ExCTCitizen and I approve this reply. If it does offend Libs, I'm NOT sorry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

Time goes by too fast! (I watched it on TV!)


37 posted on 08/30/2014 6:17:08 PM PDT by TaMoDee (Go Pack Go! The Pack will be back in 2014!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

I don’t have a problem with the police protecting them selves from the bad guys, but don’t I have the same right to protect myself?


38 posted on 08/30/2014 6:17:45 PM PDT by 5th MEB (Progressives in the open; --- FIRE FOR EFFECT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers

Oh; just to remind you of the facts, California has had only one incident of this type of fire fight in it’s history, the Hollywood shoot out.


39 posted on 08/30/2014 6:20:20 PM PDT by 5th MEB (Progressives in the open; --- FIRE FOR EFFECT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th
I can not think of any reason why law enforcement should be allowed to have any equipment that is forbidden to a regular citizen.

So they don't have any trouble murdering you when they want to?

40 posted on 08/30/2014 6:22:29 PM PDT by kiryandil (making the jests that some FReepers aren't allowed to...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Yeah, that was my first reaction as well. Sub-guns aren’t known for firing really hot rounds. Who could control the thing?


41 posted on 08/30/2014 6:24:55 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

only govt thugs can have body armor.

not you lowly targe- i mean unprivileged citizens.


42 posted on 08/30/2014 6:31:06 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man ( Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

They are banning body armor for the wrong people. If the police had to walk around without armor and had to same weapon restrictions as the average law-abiding citizen, they might act with a little more respect for people’s rights and they might be more supportive law-abiding people carrying firearms outside the home.


43 posted on 08/30/2014 6:34:56 PM PDT by 3Fingas (Sons and Daughters for Freedom and Rededication to the Principles of the U.S. Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Wake up Laz, Honda is a Congressman!
.


44 posted on 08/30/2014 6:41:19 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 5th MEB

Yes, you have a problem with that?


45 posted on 08/30/2014 7:41:10 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: 5th MEB

We just recently had another.

I don’t think you know LA at all. It was in the Valley, not Hollywood.


46 posted on 08/30/2014 7:42:48 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
A local gn store just handed guns over the counter to help the police.

Doing so for ordinary citizens threatened by a rampaging mob is a felony. I'd have made them wait 7 days.

The police should be able to protect themselves from criminals.

We should be able to protect ourselves from criminals and police.

As another poster upthread mentioned, we should be able to get anything the police can.

47 posted on 08/31/2014 10:33:23 AM PDT by zeugma (The act of observing disturbs the observed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BunnySlippers
First, it was February 1997, 17 years ago ... not close to 30.

And we just recently had another incident.

Wow. Two whole incidents in 17 years. Sounds like a crisis of epic proportions.

48 posted on 08/31/2014 10:35:55 AM PDT by zeugma (The act of observing disturbs the observed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Henchster

Sorry, but I never heard of the guy before. Since he was writing about guns, and apparently as some sort of 2A defender, I not unreasonably assumed he was some sort of an expert, and the notion that Uzis fire some kind of particularly high-powered round like .44 Magnum struck me as odd.

I am not even close to being an expert on firearms, and don’t make any claim to be. Certainly not like many on FR. But some things jump out at me.


49 posted on 08/31/2014 12:00:33 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (Perception wins most of the battles. Reality wins ALL the wars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

There is clearly no end of weenies in the US.

Pity.


50 posted on 08/31/2014 4:20:48 PM PDT by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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