[LostinTexas]

Nothing will slow down criminals. The kid was 18, and not legally allowed to buy a pistol, so there is that.
Laws don't stop those who don't choose to follow them.
Politicians want to regulate. It isn't about saving lives as they say, it is about control, as in your life. End of story. If any Lib want to help this country, they have has plenty of opportunity, they chose to make things worse at every step.
Stop playing into their agenda, you are better than that.
We have these on the front of or schools. A comfort to those who have children there, or should be.

We are in rural America, and so was Uvaldy. Plan on politicians making the most of it. Beto was removed from a meeting when disrupting an address by Abbott. What a loser. He already thinks people care what he has to say. Just a political move on his run for governator. God help us if he even makes a showing.
Beto being an A$$

 

[LostinTexas]

Thanks for all the replies. 100% no. The people have spoken.

I don't own any body armor and am not looking to get any, but if that's how law-abiding citizens want to spend their money, I support their right to do so. Every infringement on personal freedom is a slippery slope.

The libs know how to protect people. It just does not fit their agenda. What I don't understand is why conservatives are not pushing for smarter school structures and for freeing school staff to double as security, if they so desire.

Well a few things. You either support .gov regulations or you don't. Some things are nesiscary, most aren't.
If gun control works, why has it never worked,,,,,,,,,,ever.
Body armor? I have read where the plate carrier was empty, but read a lot of things that turned out false. No matter a Dallas Yellow Pages book will stop any handgun and most rifles. There is your answer.
I use body armor. I have a level 4 ceramic I wear at the range. I have one lung working, so taking a hit isn't a very good option, and it makes LostWife more comfortable. Lots of reasons to have it.
Tell your "someone" to check out the book of Luke, Chapter 22 IIRC. You'll know it when you see it.
Cheers.

 

[LostinTexas]

How about this; I believe that the 2nd Amendment give all legal US citizens the right to purchase, own, and use any legal firearm that they can afford "but" I also believe that all Rights come with Responsibilities and if you want the one than you must be willing to accept the other.
Ride Safe. Dr.Tramp............

Replace "but" with "and". Yes, the "muh rights" crowd can get rather stale since they never turn that coin over and see it comes with "responsibility, morality, and ownership of such". You don't get one without the other, so the responsibility is inherent.
Conditions on responsibility get sketchy in a hurry. As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for.

 

[LostinTexas]

McConnell has Cornyn as his point man on this. I’ve got no faith in Republican leadership standing firm.

Cornyn needs to go away. The RINO is probably having a hand wringing party with Pelosi and Feinstein.
Seems the Uvaldy PD sat on their thumbs and allowed the carnage to continue, threatening and holding back the lone hero. He went in and finished the job they didn't even start, bunch of cowards.
If I were the conspiracy theorist people claim I am, I'd suggest that was orchestrated to some point. Hmm.

 

[LostinTexas]

The only real argument I can think of in support of restricting and regulating the sale of body armor is that it would increase a criminal's confidence in their ability to perform high risk types of crimes where there is a chance that they would be shot at and thus embolden them to perform more of those types of crimes.
It does seem to have been a contributing factor in several of the latest mass shootings.
Ride Safe. Dr.Tramp............

You funny Dr Tramp. Just like everything else, criminals don't follow rules or channels to get possession of what they want.
It will only affect law abiding folks. You know the ones the Left wants to disarm and place in absolute danger by depending on them. We just saw an example of how that will go.
I really have no idea what they think they will be getting in the end of the chaos, but maybe chaos is the goal, and not a means.

 

[LostinTexas]

I didn't say that my example was logical or made sense I just said it was the only argument that I could think of that could be used to support restricting and regulating sales of body armor and if I can think of it you can bet that some anti firearm politician or lawyer can also.
Ride Safe. Dr.Tramp................

I will give you a lot more benefit of doubt and any politician.

 

[LostinTexas]

I reckon if I'm shooting brass solids in 45-70 relaods, do you trust your body armor?

Yes. The argument has a lot of merit though. 55 grain 5.56 out of a 20+ inch barrel will defeat most Level III and less. I can't say about the 45-70, and although it is a formidable round for just about anything, armor has some quirky qualities.
Believe in it or not, I would really rather not have to put it to the test.

 

[LostinTexas]

Even though I find the arguments brought forth by everyone interesting, this discussion has veered away from the original question. Here is my question/answer in regards to the original post: how do you restrict/regulate something that is completely passive and only good for defensive protection without the possibility of harming another? For all intents and purposes wearing too many articles of heavy clothing coiuld be considered body armor, since wearing a heavy winter coat over a jean jacket and sweatshirt, etc.. might stop a 22 or 38 spl. Would metal buttons on clothing be illegal too or would they only be illegal if they were of a certain gauge and covered a certain percentage of area? And would this ban extend to armored vehicles as well? I know that essentially this is talking things ad absurdum, but I find that to be the best way of thinking about questions posed to me.

You are talking about people who regulated seat belts, alcohol, cigarettes, driving, and the list goes on. You know, for the children. If they get the chance, they will stick it to the people they are elected to represent-----------NOT rule.
Too many forgot this, if they ever knew it at all.

 

[LostinTexas]

The vest may stop the bullet but the impact will still come through.
Ride Safe. Dr.Tramp...............

I can't tell you how many officers I have chased into an ambulance after being hit. They just knew they were about to die. None did. Their vest stop the round, and all suffered nasty bruising. Some had fractured ribs, and one even had a little heart arrhythmia.
It didn't look pleasant at all, and normally getting a police officer into an ambulance is a lesson in futility.
Plates distribute the impact, but the psychology of taking a hit is still there.

 

[LostinTexas]

What were the officers hit with? Handgun, rifle, or shotgun rounds?
I imagine that most were hit with handgun rounds and of those most were 9mm.
Ride Safe. Dr.Tramp..............

Pistol. I don't recall the calibers. Most soft armor will stop pistol and most shotgun, as long as it hits the vest, as velocity is comparable. Speed, in general, defeats armor, not caliber.
Despite the internet wisdom, BG's don't wear plated, or any other armor, very often, and aren't always well heeled. It happens, but fortunately, not a mainstream problem. We read about those folks in the papers, usually because they cause dead police.