Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Is there a legitimate purpose for civillians to purchase and wear body-armor?

Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by JimmyS1985, May 8, 2011.

  1. JimmyS1985

    JimmyS1985 St.Louis Active Member

    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    142
    I understand there are some great forms of body-armour on the civilian market that may be even better than what the military uses (dragon-skin, which I've heard is better than interceptor armor despite failing a high profile military test)

    I just can not fathom why a civilian would need the stuff, unless intent on some kind of shooting spree that winds up in a face-off with police, a civilian militia unit in case the government gets overthrown or some other oddball situation that may or may not happen. I think its pretty well known that a certain famous hollywood shootout, the perpetrators were dressed from head to toe in body armour.

    Can someone please elaborate for those of us that don't know why there is a need for body armor? Since the assault weapons ban expired, civilians have access to some high-firepower weaponry but who in the heck would need body armor? Couldn't the ability for US Citizenry to purchase body-armor be abused and smuggled to Mexican drug cartels, criminals or other enemies of the state? There is nothing in the 2A that states that the public needs to be protected from firearms, on top of bearing them.
     
  2. One-Eyed Ross

    One-Eyed Ross Winlock, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,367
    Likes Received:
    752
    well, I don't live in a place where it might be required, and don't work in a profession that would need body armor, but some people might....

    Other than that, because some people just plain might WANT to buy some for what ever reason they choose.

    "I'm the enemy because I like to think. I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy that could sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs or the side order of gravy fries? I want high cholesterol. I would eat bacon and butter and buckets of cheese. Okay? I want to smoke Cuban cigars the size of Cincinnati in the nonsmoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-O all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I might suddenly feel the need to. Okay, pal?" (Denis Leary's character in "The Demolition Man"
    (By the way, cops are civilians, too. They work for civil authority, impose civil laws and under international law are non-combatants).
     
    Stomper and (deleted member) like this.
  3. simpleguy

    simpleguy Clackamas Active Member

    Messages:
    627
    Likes Received:
    95
    Have you been hunting during the general hunting season? - I rest my case.
     
    bnsaibum, sandman1212, 9p0607 and 3 others like this.
  4. JimmyS1985

    JimmyS1985 St.Louis Active Member

    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    142
    Perhaps, but the 2A constitutional amendment argument doesn't work quite as effectively when discussing the legality of body-armour since it wasnt around in 1791.

    I guess I was just curious why some people require it, I didn't think hunters could shoot until they identified their target was not a female, let alone another human being.
     
  5. PhysicsGuy

    PhysicsGuy Corvallis, OR Resident Science Nut

    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    155
    Trolling again? :/
     
    Uberdillo, judicator, moose and 13 others like this.
  6. simpleguy

    simpleguy Clackamas Active Member

    Messages:
    627
    Likes Received:
    95
    Really?? Since the AWB expired civilians have access to "high-firepower" weaponry??? Take my .30-06 hunting rifle round and stack it up next to an AR-15 round.....or better yet, stack it up to a .300Win Mag. or .338Lapua if you want to talk about firepower. Just because the package looks scary, it doesn't necessarily mean that the projectile is effective. I submit the "Tech-9" wonder jamming hunk of sheet metal as my first exhibit.
     
  7. JimmyS1985

    JimmyS1985 St.Louis Active Member

    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    142
    I had a question that needed answering, I fail to see how I am trolling, other than I can't see a plausible reason to own it and some people on here do.
     
  8. simpleguy

    simpleguy Clackamas Active Member

    Messages:
    627
    Likes Received:
    95
    That's a wonderful "proposal" my friend, but using that logic people wouldn't drive if they had too much to drink either.
     
  9. JimmyS1985

    JimmyS1985 St.Louis Active Member

    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    142
    ^On that topic I do question the constitutionality of random searches at random DWI check points. I figured I'd ask here because gun owners talk a big game on knowing their constitutional rights, especially on body-armour. As for the point you mentioned no one has a right to drive in any state, even though drunks could ride their horse and buggies in 1791 without legal consequences, since the invention of the horseless buggy it seems that driving is not a right but a privelege. The only time you can transport yourself from place to place, under the influence and not face a DWI is if your mode of transportation doesn't have wheels or an internal combustion engine (I wonder if it applies to roller-blades as well since they're modified shoes) Public intoxication is a different story.
     
  10. PhysicsGuy

    PhysicsGuy Corvallis, OR Resident Science Nut

    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    155
    It sounds like you watch too many movies, and don't spend a lot of time out in the real world.

    Body armor does not make you "invincible", but it does serve its purpose.

    Why do most officers wear armor? Why do they carry a gun?
    - Because they live in a high risk environment where it can save their life.

    Some people "feel" like they have the same need, or are actually high risk targets. Here's my question for you;

    Why would you deny someone the right to protect themselves when what they are doing has no harmful consequences to anyone around them?
     
    darkminstrel, SPU, USMC1911 and 27 others like this.
  11. ZigZagZeke

    ZigZagZeke Eugene Silver Supporter Silver Supporter 2015 Volunteer

    Messages:
    2,709
    Likes Received:
    3,559
    For the same reason the 2nd Amendment guarantees us the right to own and bear firearms. So that the average citizen can be on a par with government troops and discourage said government from summarily enslaving the population.
     
    Will_Power, Stomper, saabin and 5 others like this.
  12. PhysicsGuy

    PhysicsGuy Corvallis, OR Resident Science Nut

    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    155
    You can still get a DUI on a horse.

    Anyways driving is a privilege, not a right, this is a well known fact.
     
  13. JimmyS1985

    JimmyS1985 St.Louis Active Member

    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    142
    Well Ive never been in a "high-risk" environment that required body-armour for starters. I prefer to live in "low-risk" areas and in such areas I don't see why I, or anyone else besides law-enforcement, would need to purchase body-armour.

    It seems that I have offended a great many of you for simply asking the question.

    This man was not cited for DWI for intoxicated horse ridership

    http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/more-on-horseriding-while-intoxicated/
     
  14. fromotoc

    fromotoc Downtown Portland, OR Member

    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    14
    All nanny laws do is restrict those who would benefit most from whatever is banned.

    /thread.
     
    simpleguy, CAL30M1, Redcap and 7 others like this.
  15. JimmyS1985

    JimmyS1985 St.Louis Active Member

    Messages:
    433
    Likes Received:
    142
    I can feel you on that point, but still there is no constitutional amendment regarding the legality of body-armor. The ability for law-makers to make it illegal is definitely there and I read up on the topic at hand and it seems that NY is trying to pass a law that makes it illegal for felons to possess body-armour
     
  16. gunnails

    gunnails Hillsboro Active Member

    Messages:
    752
    Likes Received:
    210
    Roller blades are fine for drunks, legally, coincidently that is why I bought my body armor, softens the blow when I fall off my blades.

    That and the neighbor said he would shoot me the next time I drunkenly ran into his car while on roller blades, body armor is a win win.
     
  17. fromotoc

    fromotoc Downtown Portland, OR Member

    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    14
    I thought you lived in a place where you are harassed about your bumper sticker? Doesn't sound low risk to me. Stats don't mean anything, you can catch a bullet anywhere, anytime. Some people think like this and prepare accordingy. To me this is a legitimate reason for owning body armor. It might not be for you. Troll or not, you ask very troll like questions.
     
  18. fromotoc

    fromotoc Downtown Portland, OR Member

    Messages:
    611
    Likes Received:
    14
    Everything is banned in NY.
     
  19. salmonriverjohn

    salmonriverjohn N.W Oregon coast, Gods country Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,157
    Likes Received:
    4,298
    Why a Lamborghini diablo, or a HEMI CUDA,, or a 200MPH motorcycle when a vesper or smart car could get you there? Why base jump off a 2500 foot cliff, or skydive at all? Why you ask?? Because they/you can. Simple enough?
     
  20. simpleguy

    simpleguy Clackamas Active Member

    Messages:
    627
    Likes Received:
    95
    I think the question is kind of silly, who cares why someone wants body armor as long as they are doing no harm to others. If someone is doing harm to others, there are laws that apply. Apply those laws, don't try to legislate body armor. That's the very libertarian side of me.