• ← Back to INVESTOR TIMES
  • Investing Articles
  • Financial Markets News
  • Tech News
  • Cryptocurrencies News
FREEDOM OUTPOST
No Result
View All Result
FREEDOM OUTPOST
No Result
View All Result
FREEDOM OUTPOST

Nationwide Ban On Personal Body Armor Proposed In Congress: “10 Years Imprisonment” For Possession

Freedom Outpost by Freedom Outpost
February 25, 2016
in News
0

In the wake of the Sandy Hook school shooting politicians from coast-to-coast attempted to push through legislation that would ban a host of guns, magazines, and accessories. Though their efforts failed for the most part, those who would take away our ability to defend ourselves always have another tyrannical card up their sleeves.

They latest efforts to attack personal defense as a natural birthright comes from distinguished Congressional representatives Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Robin Kelly (D-IL), and Danny Davis (D-IL) and takes aim not at your ability to possess a firearm, but rather, to protect yourself from criminals who own them.

HR 378, dubbed the Responsible Body Armor Possession Act, would make it illegal for civilians to own “enhanced body armor” such as helmets, shields, or armor plates that meet or exceed Type III protection. The bill would exempt law enforcement officers and other government officials.

The co-sponsors of the bill believe body armor in the hands of private citizens to be so dangerous that they intend to impose a 10 year federal prison sentence on those found to be in possession of the contraband.

The new law would still allow Americans to own Type I and Type II protection, which are designed to stop calibers ranging from .22 caliber to .357 Magnum respectively. Type III body armor is designed to stop higher velocity hand gun rounds like a high-velocity 9mm or .44 magnum and rifle rounds like the AK-47′s 7.62x39mm. Type IV, often reserved for special law enforcement response teams, is capable of stopping even armor piercing rounds from rifles.

Should such a law be passed, Americans would no longer have the ability to determine for themselves which type of body armor is best suited for their needs. Instead, we would be limited to protection from only a handful of calibers. And, as we well know, as soon as criminals with ill intent get wind that their victims probably won’t own body armor that’s able to stop a .44 or high velocity 9mm round, they’ll quickly switch to new weapons capable of ripping through “legal” protection.

Portions of the bill are posted below:

To prohibit the purchase, ownership, or possession of enhanced body armor by civilians, with exceptions.

This Act may be cited as the “Responsible Body Armor Possession Act.”

SEC. 2. BAN ON PURCHASE, OWNERSHIP, OR POSSESSION OF ENHANCED BODY
ARMOR BY CIVILIANS; EXCEPTIONS.

(a) In General.–Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

Sec. 932. Ban on purchase, ownership, or possession of enhanced body armor by civilians

(a) Except as provided in subsection (b), it shall be unlawful for a person to purchase, own, or possess enhanced body armor.

…

(b) Enhanced Body Armor Defined.–Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

(36) The term ‘enhanced body armor’ means body armor, including a helmet or shield, the ballistic resistance of which meets or exceeds the ballistic performance of Type III armor, determined using National Institute of Justice Standard-0101.06.’

(c) Penalties.–Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 932 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.‘

(Full text)

But not to worry, says Dan Cannon of Guns Save Lives, because there’s probably no chance such a bill will make it into law. The audacity of the bill’s co-sponsors, however, is clear:

Fortunately, with the GOP solidly in control of both houses of Congress this bill will likely never see the light of day.

That said, it’s a great insight into how little some members of Congress care about the personal safety of their constituents.

(via The Daily Sheeple)

Though proponents of such legislation say that it protects police officers, the fact of the matter is that there were 126 police officers killed in the line of duty in 2014. This fatality rate is actually quite lower than jobs like being a fisherman or garbage collector.

Though tragic, it is inconceivable that this fatality rate should be used to justify a nationwide ban on body armor for 300 million Americans. Thus, the motivation must be either symbolic, or part of a greater plan to disarm and neuter the rights of the American citizenry.

Source

Don’t forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

Tagged with 

ban on personal body armor congress enhanced body armor guns mac slavo personal body armor Responsible Body Armor Possession Act sandy hook
Previous Post

OBAMA REGIME COVER UP: 113 More Muslim Immigrants To The US Have Been Implicated In Terrorist Plots Against The U.S. Just Since 2014

Next Post

Are UN Helicopters Operating in the Skies Over Washington State as Part of Jade Helm?

Next Post

Are UN Helicopters Operating in the Skies Over Washington State as Part of Jade Helm?

About Freedom Outpost

The content of this site has been restored on a non-profit basis to preserve knowledge and serve as a historical archive. All articles were originally published on freedomoutpost.com and belong to their respective authors.

Freedom Outpost was an independent journal published to cover vital public policy issues and offer a public service.

Search in the archive

No Result
View All Result

Latest posts

  • Taking Sides: The Christian's Responsibility in Civic Affairs II
  • EgyptAir MS804 Flight Attendant posted Picture on Facebook of Plane crashing a year before She Died
  • Blue Angels Marine Pilot Capt. Jeff Kuss Could Have Ejected Once He Knew His Plane Was Going To Crash…But He Didn’t
  • Man Jailed After Claiming to be ‘Transgender’ to Assault Women in Shelter
  • Trump: Democrats Against North Korea Summit Just Like They Defend MS-13 & Attack Tax Cuts

InvestorTimes.com

InvestorTimes.com is a privately funded financial publication particularly created for professional and personal investors and intellectually restless individuals.

Our raison d'être is to provide insightful information to any citizen willing to understand global economical markets and the most relevant current affairs.

Contact us: info@investortimes.com

WE ARE LOOKING FOR TALENT

INVESTOR TIMES is always open to the incorporation of talent in its team of journalists and editors. If you would like to be part of our project as a collaborator, we invite you to submit your application.

Contact us: talent@investortimes.com

INTERNATIONAL EDITIONS

Investor Times en Français

Investor Times in Deutsch

Investor Times in Italiano

Investor Times em Português

Investor Times po Polsku

Investor Times на русском языке

El País Financiero (edición en Español)

DMCA.com Protection Status

  • ← Back to INVESTOR TIMES
  • Investing Articles
  • Financial Markets News
  • Tech News
  • Cryptocurrencies News

© INVESTOR TIMES

No Result
View All Result


About Freedom Outpost

The content of this site has been restored on a non-profit basis to preserve knowledge and serve as a historical archive. All articles were originally published on freedomoutpost.com and belong to their respective authors.

Freedom Outpost was an independent journal published to cover vital public policy issues and offer a public service.

© INVESTOR TIMES