House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton


MeMelYup
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1874
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 3:21 pm

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#16

Post by MeMelYup »

Instead of outlawing type 3 body armour they should provide a penalty for using it while committing a crime.

clarionite
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 889
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 10:09 pm

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#17

Post by clarionite »

MeMelYup wrote:Instead of outlawing type 3 body armour they should provide a penalty for using it while committing a crime.
:headscratch Wasn't there a penalty for the original crime? It apparently didn't stop them from committing that crime. :headscratch

I don't see the logic. It should be mandated that a criminal make it easier for himself to be killed if he fails to obey the law?

To me that makes about as much sense as thinking that a criminal will avoid carrying a firearm into a gun free zone because of the penalty for breaking that law, when they're going to commit a crime that has a penalty of 25 to life... or the death penalty.

MeMelYup
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1874
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 3:21 pm

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#18

Post by MeMelYup »

clarionite wrote:
MeMelYup wrote:Instead of outlawing type 3 body armour they should provide a penalty for using it while committing a crime.
:headscratch Wasn't there a penalty for the original crime? It apparently didn't stop them from committing that crime. :headscratch

I don't see the logic. It should be mandated that a criminal make it easier for himself to be killed if he fails to obey the law?

To me that makes about as much sense as thinking that a criminal will avoid carrying a firearm into a gun free zone because of the penalty for breaking that law, when they're going to commit a crime that has a penalty of 25 to life... or the death penalty.
It won't stop a criminal. Why should I be penalized for something a criminal might wear? If I own such an item why should I be made a criminal without committing a criminal act?

clarionite
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 889
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 10:09 pm

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#19

Post by clarionite »

MeMelYup wrote:
clarionite wrote:
MeMelYup wrote:Instead of outlawing type 3 body armour they should provide a penalty for using it while committing a crime.
:headscratch Wasn't there a penalty for the original crime? It apparently didn't stop them from committing that crime. :headscratch

I don't see the logic. It should be mandated that a criminal make it easier for himself to be killed if he fails to obey the law?

To me that makes about as much sense as thinking that a criminal will avoid carrying a firearm into a gun free zone because of the penalty for breaking that law, when they're going to commit a crime that has a penalty of 25 to life... or the death penalty.
It won't stop a criminal. Why should I be penalized for something a criminal might wear? If I own such an item why should I be made a criminal without committing a criminal act?

I agree with you. I'm saying that either law is ridiculous. Why should law abiding citizens be restricted from protecting themselves in the manner that they choose? Especially in a manner that causes no harm what so ever to any other person.
User avatar

VoiceofReason
Banned
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1748
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:38 pm
Location: South Texas

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#20

Post by VoiceofReason »

However, there is an exception to the bill. The bill reads all body armor will be illegal to possess unless the person in question is a government employee. All personnel who work for the various government agencies, departments, or “political subdivisions” are exempt from this potential new law as the bill is currently written.

If our government is not preparing to go to war with its citizens, it sure is trying to look like it.
God Bless America, and please hurry.
When I was young I knew all the answers. When I got older I started to realize I just hadn’t quite understood the questions.-Me

cb1000rider
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 2505
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:27 pm

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#21

Post by cb1000rider »

Yea, I don't like the different "classes" thing either.
User avatar

sjfcontrol
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 6267
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:14 am
Location: Flint, TX

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#22

Post by sjfcontrol »

98% opposed on popvox.
Range Rule: "The front gate lock is not an acceptable target."
Never Forget. Image
User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 13573
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#23

Post by C-dub »

VoiceofReason wrote:However, there is an exception to the bill. The bill reads all body armor will be illegal to possess unless the person in question is a government employee. All personnel who work for the various government agencies, departments, or “political subdivisions” are exempt from this potential new law as the bill is currently written.

If our government is not preparing to go to war with its citizens, it sure is trying to look like it.
So, if I get a job with the FDA I can legally possess body armor? And I don't have to work for one of the law enforcement agencies?
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider

cb1000rider
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 2505
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:27 pm

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#24

Post by cb1000rider »

C-dub wrote: So, if I get a job with the FDA I can legally possess body armor? And I don't have to work for one of the law enforcement agencies?
I'd say that you could get a job sweeping roads for the City and you're protected.. :-)

Doesn't say "federal' government.
User avatar

C-dub
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 13573
Joined: Sat May 16, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: DFW

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#25

Post by C-dub »

cb1000rider wrote:
C-dub wrote: So, if I get a job with the FDA I can legally possess body armor? And I don't have to work for one of the law enforcement agencies?
I'd say that you could get a job sweeping roads for the City and you're protected.. :-)

Doesn't say "federal' government.
Woohoo, street sweeper here I come. Or maybe even trash collector. Those guys might need it more than a street sweeper.
I am not and have never been a LEO. My avatar is in honor of my friend, Dallas Police Sargent Michael Smith, who was murdered along with four other officers in Dallas on 7.7.2016.
NRA Patriot-Endowment Lifetime Member---------------------------------------------Si vis pacem, para bellum.................................................Patriot Guard Rider
User avatar

Pawpaw
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 6745
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:16 am
Location: Hunt County

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#26

Post by Pawpaw »

clarionite wrote:
MeMelYup wrote:Instead of outlawing type 3 body armour they should provide a penalty for using it while committing a crime.
:headscratch Wasn't there a penalty for the original crime? It apparently didn't stop them from committing that crime. :headscratch

I don't see the logic. It should be mandated that a criminal make it easier for himself to be killed if he fails to obey the law?

To me that makes about as much sense as thinking that a criminal will avoid carrying a firearm into a gun free zone because of the penalty for breaking that law, when they're going to commit a crime that has a penalty of 25 to life... or the death penalty.
It would be an add-on charge that would hopefully increase the criminal's vacation in the greybar hotel.
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams
User avatar

rbwhatever1
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1434
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:16 pm
Location: Paradise Texas

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#27

Post by rbwhatever1 »

C-dub wrote:
VoiceofReason wrote:However, there is an exception to the bill. The bill reads all body armor will be illegal to possess unless the person in question is a government employee. All personnel who work for the various government agencies, departments, or “political subdivisions” are exempt from this potential new law as the bill is currently written.

If our government is not preparing to go to war with its citizens, it sure is trying to look like it.
So, if I get a job with the FDA I can legally possess body armor? And I don't have to work for one of the law enforcement agencies?
Go with the USDA. I heard those folks got some cool 40 Cal submachine guns....
III

cb1000rider
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 2505
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:27 pm

Re: House Bill to Ban Body Armor for us peasants

#28

Post by cb1000rider »

C-dub wrote: Woohoo, street sweeper here I come. Or maybe even trash collector. Those guys might need it more than a street sweeper.
I was in just for the post-retirement health care. Now that there is a body-armor bonus, I'm going to have to start the job search...
Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”