Glock Forum banner

Should Body Armor Be Strictly Reculated?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 7.0%
  • No

    Votes: 40 93.0%
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Glockin’ since 1993
Joined
·
50,176 Posts
There’s plenty of videos on YouTube showing how to make your own body armor.
Laws only impact people that follow the law. We’ll still have no shortage of criminals and terrorists committing murderous acts.
If we banned armor and guns tomorrow, they’ll be out there for ages.
 

·
Glockin’ since 1993
Joined
·
50,176 Posts
I agree but I do think that passing a firearms safety and shooting course should be a prerequisite to buying a firearm.
My reasoning is that there are actually two types of firearms problems in the US; the actions of criminals and crazies and the actions of legal but untrained or poorly trained firearm owners.
The actions of the first group haven't been noticeably affected by the plethora of already existing firearms laws and regulations and I doubt that they'll be by addition laws or regulations but the actions of the second group, leaving firearms unattended, poor handling procedures, etc., that result in accidents and deaths can be lessened and improved by proper training.
I and my brothers began shooting when we were around 5 but before we ever touched a firearm my father, a life long hunter and shooter, one time NRA firearms safety and shooting instructor, and Olympic level competition small caliber rifle coach, made sure that we understood and followed the rules of firearms safety and handling. To forget resulted in a quick and usually painful reminder.
When I enlisted in the Corps in 68 they were quite happy to have someone already knowledgeable about firearms and shooting and extended my training even further.
On the other hand the majority of new firearm owners don't grow up with firearms and have little or no training or knowledge of them and are contributing greatly to the already existing problems that are due to this lack.
Do I think this should be a law? Not necessarily but it should be something responsible firearm owners, firearm dealers, shooting ranges and clubs should be addressing.
Personally I think that schools and businesses should offer free and voluntary firearms safety and shooting courses for students, parents, and employees.
How to pay for this? Tax dollars. Why not? Our money already gets spent on far worse things doesn't it?
Would this keep some people, though they're legal citizens, from buying a firearm? Yes but if you can't pass a course I took and passed when I was 10-11 years old then I don't want you around me with a firearm because untrained and poorly trained people with firearms scare me more than criminals and crazies with firearms.
Ride Safe. Dr.Tramp.............
I’m not particularly religious but I believe the seemingly compounding amount of untrained, criminals and crazies are a partial result of not having traditional guidance. Not having a father doing his part in raising children is an irretrievable loss to a child. Disregarding religion leaves corrupters to mislead your moral compass. Educators focusing on CRT, gender and protesting instead of civics and virtue are generating hate and division. Add the isolation a lot of people went through during Covid, media pushing outrages of the week, it’s a recipe for disaster.
 

·
Glockin’ since 1993
Joined
·
50,176 Posts
Ban body armor!
Sounds like Obamacare. If somebody has crappy healthcare then everyone has to have crappy healthcare!
Body armor is to defend against bodily harm. It can’t be used to hurt someone. These proposed bans prove the politicians want the public defenseless!
 

·
Glockin’ since 1993
Joined
·
50,176 Posts
Me too but you have to realize and understand that these people actually believe that their interpretation is "the" only true or correct interpretation and can be downright fanatical about their interpretations.
Fanatics are dangerous because they not only demand that they be allowed to believe what they believe but many times they also demand that everybody else believe as they believe.
Ride Safe. Dr. Tramp............
Looks like we’re going to be dealing with fanatics demanding what they want regardless of our input.
 

·
Glockin’ since 1993
Joined
·
50,176 Posts
Well if the gun culture hadn`t over slept, and ignored everything for decades. Just sayin.
Don’t think the gun culture has been sleeping, anything but. It’s just an unrelenting assault on gun rights at every level. Anything we offer is a non-starter for their side. There’s nothing that will placate them until we are disarmed.
New York which has some of the most severe gun control is clamoring for more after Buffalo. Those of us in free states, are we going to be happy with a national version of the SAFE Act?
 

·
Glockin’ since 1993
Joined
·
50,176 Posts
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.
It’s the mindset. They aren’t thinking about how things can be used to protect innocents it’s always how it can be misused. Also how easy and available is it.
Assembling your own firearm was never an issue till 80% receivers became widely available. The antigunners kept screaming about the criminals access. At that time it wasn’t an issue but the criminal element said hey that’s a good idea. So now it has happened to some degree.
 

·
Glockin’ since 1993
Joined
·
50,176 Posts
Many of the anti-gunners have also called for “psychological screening” before being allowed to purchase a firearm. The problem I see with that is it’s far too subjective. I can see some liberally educated anti-firearm doctors just using their position to impose their views on society by not allowing people they don’t agree with to purchase a firearm. Besides, many sociopaths are also clever enough to beat a system like that. What do the rest of you think about this?
Antigunners are just wanting roadblocks to gun ownership. Make it so onerous that people just give up.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top