Body Armor Gives Felons Upper Hand

[FeebMaster]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/28/eveningnews/main614601.shtml

<snip>

"I look at the body armor thing as being almost as serious as carrying a gun," says New Orleans Police Superintendent Edwin Paulcompess.

<snip>

There's already a federal law prohibiting felons from buying or even possessing body armor, but few, if any, background checks are ever done, and tracking the vests is nearly impossible.

For example, CBS News purchased a used vest off the Internet for less than $250. The only background check was a credit card number. The only question: "Where do you want it mailed?"

<snip>

The dilemma is how to protect those who serve without protecting those who don't.

[MrSandman]

1. Used vest...

Do they(CBS) know body armor has a rather short shelf life? IIRC, about 5 years if well-cared for.

It sounds like someone looking for a problem.

:The dilemma is how to protect those who serve without protecting those who don't."

How about protecting John Citizen?

[OpSomBlood]

2. I wish the gun crime laws...

...were as strictly enforced as body armor laws.

[FeebMaster]

3. My first thought was

What are those people who suggest defensive measures like wearing body armor as opposed to offensive measures like carrying a gun going to say when they make body armor illegal? :eyes:


My second thought was someone should proofread the CBS webpage:

Body armor protects police, but it's illegal for civilians to own. But Lee Cowan reports, police are seizing many bulletproof vests from felons with better capability in stopping bullets than theirs.

[LibLabUK]

4. Hmm.. some questions

Wouldn't you consider the increase in the posession of body armour by criminals to be the natural response to increasing numbers of people concealed-carrying?

What does this mean for CCW holders, will they have to adapt the loads/type of weapon they carry to take into account the possibility that their attacker will be wearing armour?

[FatSlob]

5. Head shots...

If confronted by attacker, and deadly force becomes necessary, the drill is two to the body. If that doesn't stop the bad guy, then go to one to the head. Or, shoot the pelvic girdle, breaking the pelvis will insure that the bad guy goes down.

[FeebMaster]

6. Some answers.

"Wouldn't you consider the increase in the posession of body armour by criminals to be the natural response to increasing numbers of people concealed-carrying?"

No, I wouldn't. There just aren't that many people carrying concealed. I think criminals, especially the ones mentioned in the article, are more worried about running into the police and each other. Who was mentioned in the article? Bank robbers and gang members. I think a bank robber is far more likely than the average mugger to end up shooting it out with the police. Gangs fight each other all the time. The article even mentions vests with gang symbols on them.


"What does this mean for CCW holders, will they have to adapt the loads/type of weapon they carry to take into account the possibility that their attacker will be wearing armour?"

I don't think it means anything for carry permit holders. It's not like permit holders are going to start carrying a hunting rifle so they can punch through vests. On the off chance they do run into someone with body armor, I would say the best option would be to shoot them in the head.

[slackmaster]

7. Possible answers

Wouldn't you consider the increase in the posession of body armour by criminals to be the natural response to increasing numbers of people concealed-carrying?

Interesting question; does availability of body armor lead to an arms race? It surely might from the perspective of police, who are much more likely to face a dangerous criminal than the rest of us are.

Criminals tend to be impulsive dumbasses, rather weak in strategic planning. Good body armor is expensive. Ordinary criminals don't have their shit together well enough to make large discretionary purchases. Most of them are drug addicts (including alcoholics), preoccupied with short-term problems like where they are going to get their next dose of heroin, crack, meth, or Ripple.

What does this mean for CCW holders, will they have to adapt the loads/type of weapon they carry to take into account the possibility that their attacker will be wearing armour?

Not much. Armor-piercing handgun ammunition is illegal for anyone other than police or military to possess. The other approach to defeating armor - Larger caliber weapons - would be impractical because bigger guns are less suited to concealed carry.