There is a proposal in New York State to ban body armor including bulletproof vests.
I'm sorry, did I say "ban?" Not ban. That was too extreme.
The government still gets to have it.
So just to review the position the Democratic Party takes on personal safety:
- You must wear seat belts to protect you from vehicular collisions.
- You must don a bike helmet to protect you from falling off your bicycle.
- Your stylist must be licensed by the state to protect you from a bad haircut.
Man up you big sissy! Shake it off. The world is a risky place, stay home if you can't handle taking a few to the chest.
This latest attempt, yes latest (I'll get to that in a bit) is in many ways worse than the ones that came before.
Section 1. The penal law is amended by adding a new section 270.21 to read as follows: § 270.21 UNLAWFUL PURCHASE OR POSSESSION OF A BODY VEST. A PERSON IS GUILTY OF THE UNLAWFUL PURCHASE OR POSSESSION OF A BODY VEST WHEN HE OR SHE KNOWINGLY AND UNLAWFULLY PURCHASES OR POSSESSES A BODY VEST,..
Purchase OR possession.
No grandfathering. You're sitting in your home, a law-abiding citizen, and suddenly you are not.
You become a criminal by doing nothing.
AS SUCH TERM IS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION TWO OF SECTION 270.20 OF THIS ARTICLE.
Let's take a quick detour to look up Section 270.20.
2. For the purposes of this section a "body vest" means a bullet-resistant soft body armor providing, as a minimum standard, the level of protection known as threat level I which shall mean at least seven layers of bullet-resistant material providing protection from three shots of one hundred fifty-eight grain lead ammunition fired from a .38 caliber handgun at a velocity of eight hundred fifty feet per second.
They are referring to "Level 1" body armor. This is basically one step up from a heavy winter jacket and a prayer. It won't stop a 9mm which is an important consideration as that is the most popular handgun round in existence.
And they want to ban even that, something that would at best protect you if you were suddenly attacked by a gang of Charlie's Angels cosplayers, or got on the wrong side of a Cub Scout den.
Back to the bill.
THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO ACTIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OR THOSE WHOSE OCCUPATIONS REQUIRE THE USE OF BODY VESTS AS DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE.
Of course. The state and the people the state favors can afford themselves of potentially life-saving equipment. You? You're on your own.
UNLAWFUL PURCHASE OR POSSESSION OF A BODY VEST IS A CLASS A MISDEMEANOR FOR A FIRST OFFENSE AND A CLASS E FELONY FOR ANY SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE.
A felony for the second "offense."
Lest you think it's just loony old New York and you don't need to worry about it, there are federal versions of this bill because of course there are.
This one, introduced early last fall by New York (of course) Congresswoman Grace Meng is called "The Responsible Body Armor Possession Act," which is how you know you're in trouble right away.
To prohibit the purchase, ownership, or possession of enhanced body armor by civilians, with exceptions.
According to this bill, the only way you responsibly possess body armor is to not possess it.
The bill includes all the typical exceptions (state operators) but does at least grandfather current ownership (keep those receipts!) and limits it to Level III or above, which is better.
Whoever knowingly violates section 932 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.
It's just Congresswoman Meng, right? Hardly a well-known mover and shaker in Washington.
Then again, there's this nobody, too.
These haven't gone anywhere, right? Why, Schumer made that proposal nearly two years ago. I'm sure it won't...