Exploring the Controversy: The Body Armor Ban Debate
Body armor is a life-saver, on that all agree. Except it can legally be gotten by criminals. Precisely why some are pushing to ban body armor among the American public.
As it happens, the debate over whether to veto body armor has raged for years. With the frightening uptick in gun violence throughout the U.S. though, the issue is more controversial than ever.
So, whether for or against a ban, we wanted to get a feel for public opinion - - at the same time as surveying the community, we sounded out a cross-section of trusted experts in the field.
With everyone from ordinary folk and first responders to law-makers and academics weighing in, we’re here with global perspectives on banning body armor plus a breakdown of the findings.
RECAPPING CURRENT U.S. BODY ARMOR LAWS
Federal law spells out that if you’re 18 or over and haven’t been convicted of a violent felony, it’s completely legal to buy, own, and wear body armor. [13] On top of which, several states have carved out their own body armor legislation. As an update to our state by state rundown:
-
NEW YORK - - NY is still the only one of the 50 states and capital to have signed off on banning body armor.
-
CALIFORNIA - - In January this year, CA filed Assembly Bills AB92 and AB301 to bar civilian body armor outright. Both, however, now appear to have been scaled back to align with congressional law. [14] [15]
-
ILLINOIS - - Not weeks later, IL drafted HB3238 to make it unlawful to ‘knowingly possess an armor plate, body armor, or military helmet’. The House Bill is presently up for review by the state’s Rules Committee. [16]
-
CONNECTICUT - - After being the first state to impose restrictions on body armor sales, CT’s latest bill (HB6816) aims to criminalize body armor altogether. [17]
With the body armor ‘banned’ wagon picking up speed, back to your take on the burning question...
SHOULD BODY ARMOR BE BANNED? YOUR VIEWS
FOR a body armor ban
Overall percentage from the Bulletproof Zone survey: 1.55%
REASON #1: To keep IT out of the hands of criminals
EXPLANATION: With open access to body armor, wrong-doers can gain an extra layer of protection. This gives them more of an advantage in a face-off with law enforcement.
D. Feder, Civilian: ‘I think body armor should be banned for civilians because too many unethical people use them while committing illegal activities.’
Joseph Cryan, New Jersey State Senator & former County Sheriff: ‘The shooter in Uvalde had it, in Buffalo, in Aurora, in Boulder, in Sutherland Springs. Why do we have to wait for another one?’ [1]
Adam Skaggs, Chief Counsel & Policy Director at Giffords Law Center: ‘When you give people all this tactical gear made for offensive tactical assaults, it’s not a surprise when some percentage of people use it for the purpose it was designed for.’ [1]
REASON #2: Body armor empowers criminals
EXPLANATION: Wearing body armor makes law-breakers more fearless. Feeling they can continue their crimes for longer or worse, enabling more violent behaviour.
C. Isbell, Civilian: ‘Makes mass killers bolder.’
Damon Connolly, California State Representative: ‘It is clear that the sale of body armor has empowered violent criminals, including mass shooters, to harm, kill, and prolong their rampages.’ [2]
REASON #3: Body armor gives law enforcement the edge over criminals
EXPLANATION: Since a headshot is far trickier, armed police are trained to target the torso first. Making unarmored criminals easier, quicker, and less risky to take down.
D. Haefner, Civilian: ‘To protect those who serve.’
Tim Briggs, Pennsylvania State Representative: ‘Since the House majority is unwilling to move any reasonable firearm reform legislation, maybe we can move legislation to outlaw body armor possession and give our law enforcement a fighting chance.’ [3]
REASON #4: Most civilians do not need body armor
EXPLANATION: Anyone not in a job which puts them in the line of fire shouldn’t require the use of body armor.
H. Steeley, Civilian: ‘Cops and military can use it; no one else.’
K. Carpenter, Civilian: ‘I think it should be [banned] for the general public.’
Joseph Gramaglia, Buffalo Police Commissioner: ‘Unless you're in a profession that requires the use of it. But why does the average citizen need to have body armor?’ [4]
John Cohen, former Counterterrorism Coordinator at the Department of Homeland Security: ‘I see very little reason why a member of the public should be allowed to go out and buy a bulletproof vest.’ [4]
AGAINST a body armor ban
Overall percentage from the Bulletproof Zone poll: 97.75%
REASON #1: Violation of natural & constitutional rights
EXPLANATION: Every American has a right, either God-given or per the Founding Fathers [20], to protect self and loved ones.
G. Frazier, Civilian: ‘We the people have the right to the opportunity to have the same thing as the government and military as well as the police.’
G. Anderson, Civilian: ‘It’s unconstitutional. The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Arms back in the day meant all weapons and armor. Having had body armor save my life from a 7.62x39 with my name on it, it’s something I greatly appreciate.’
B. Sullivan, Civilian: ‘"Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" are three examples of inalienable rights from our Declaration of Independence.’
G. Cuthbertson, Civilian: ‘We should not be bullied into giving our freedoms away because of a few that do not value life.’
B. Janssen, Civilian: ‘We have a human right to protect ourselves. Whether you believe in the Second Amendment or not.’
A. Cress, Civilian: ‘Many civilians who are veterans of our Armed Forces would be our front line defenders if such a scenario took place on our soil...but NOT if they all were prohibited or restricted from keeping, maintaining and prepping their gear that would be needed at a moment's notice.’
Matt Holland, Operations Manager at Wonder Hoodie: ‘We can’t comment on how this law [CA bill] will affect the number of mass shootings in the future but can say it will negatively impact the access to wearable body armor that our company sought to democratize, especially for non-violent civilians seeking self-defense equipment or peace of mind.’ [5]
REASON #2: For the sake of protection
EXPLANATION: Body armor helps to keep people from all walks of life out of harm’s way. And not just as an insurance against being on the receiving end of a bullet.
N. Sarmiento, Civilian: ‘I may need one or two to use for my overseas travels.’
J. Clark, Civilian: ‘In a disaster it may become necessary to defend yourself and others from the kind that would take advantage of the situation.’
S. Cornelius, Civilian: ‘It could be pivotal in case of emergency such as active shooter scenarios.’
J. Bauerle, Civilian: ‘Good for many positive uses like hikes.’
W. Maskiell, Civilian: ‘It's unfortunate but in today's environment you cannot tell if one will run into a serious case of road rage, a spur of the moment protest or someone with a dangerous mental problem.’
M. Foster, Civilian: ‘Evil exists in this world and we need to protect ourself, family, and country. I am grateful to companies like yours that help keep others safe.’
N. Estes, Emergency Medical Technician: ‘I have a soft vest while on the ambulance because other paramedics have been stabbed and shot at with small arms. And on deployment in a disaster, there is always an issue with falling debris (along w/ other hazards) where a helmet is needed.’
D. Hutchinson, Civilian: ‘Body Armor can save numerous lives in situations out of our control such as home invasions, school shootings or worst yet, tyranny from the government.’
R. Jones, Civilian: ‘Negligence with firearms happens especially at public ranges.’
A. Fox, Civilian: ‘I need to wear body armor when hunting with my idiotic friends who may accidentally shoot me.’
T. Denisewicz, Civilian: ‘If I want to protest or walk safely in the streets, I want to know that I can get that protection I need.’
Colin DeVries, past President at Deadline Club (the NYC chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists): ‘It could seriously hamper news gathering at active crime scenes and sites of civil unrest, as well as for journalists headed to conflict zones abroad.’ [6]
Mike Faw, former Law Enforcement Officer: ‘The vests with plates provide great protection when riding a motorcycle, snowmobile, jet ski or when in a boat. If there's a crash, the survival rate goes up dramatically for vest wearers. That impact with mirrors, handlebars, etc., is less traumatic when a vest is worn.’ [7]
George Borrello, New York State Senator: ‘I spoke to a group of doctors that actually show up in situations in questionable neighborhoods that want body armor. What about the taxi driver? What about a guy that works at a convenience store overnight?’ [8]
REASON #3: Body armor is a Personal Protective Equipment
EXPLANATION: Body armor is strictly designed to safeguard the wearer from injury/death, and poses no threat to anyone.
M. Hendricks, Civilian: ‘It's like saying we should ban hard hats and steel-toed safety shoes, and it makes about as much sense.’
S. Dome, Civilian: ‘It's just a tool, it's up to the individual to use it responsibly. You could kill someone with a pencil, does that mean all pencils should be banned?’
D. Neal, Civilian: ‘Body armor is also not a weapon or offensive use item in any way shape or form.’
Tom Nardone, founder & former President of BulletSafe: ‘Would you restrict the sale of motorcycle helmets? Fire extinguishers?’ [8]
Keith Barrett, ex-Army & retired State Trooper: ‘It's a piece of defensive equipment that somebody can buy just in case. Now, if you're talking about people who are active sports shooters, go to the range, handle weapons on a regular basis - that would be no different than ear protection or eye protection.’ [9]
REASON #4: Prohibiting body armor won’t deter criminals
EXPLANATION: Criminals, by their very nature, will still be able to get hold of body armor, whether illegally or by fashioning their own. Leaving otherwise law-abiding citizens at their mercy, and doing little if anything to prevent the likes of mass killings or make them less devastating.
E. Baseler, Civilian: ‘Banning body armor, just like banning weapons, does little to curb threats and impact threat groups. It leaves targeted individuals such as private security personnel and children who may have backpack inserts in schools as well as ordinary citizens totally vulnerable to random firearms violence.’
C. Crum, Civilian: ‘Crime rates will continue to increase regardless.’
Jacki Billings, Editor-In-Chief at Pew Pew Tactical: ‘Civilian-owned body armor hasn’t increased criminal activity in any significant way, so regulating body armor would only impact Americans who already follow the law.’
David Reece, CEO of Armored Republic: ‘It is very easy for people with evil intent to bypass laws or bypass intentions of manufacturers and sellers and to find black market resources.’ [10]
Aaron Westrick, Professor of Criminal Justice at Lake Superior State University & former Peace Officer: ‘Body armor is so widely available, and in such large quantities, that local bans will simply push buyers into neighboring states.’ [1]
REASON #5: Body armor use by criminals is uncommon
EXPLANATION: Statistically, criminals who wear a plate carrier or a ballistic vest when carrying out felonies is very much the exception, rather than the rule.
A. Blinzler, Civilian: ‘The safety provided in many applications greatly outweighs the very few instances when it is worn by criminals.’
Warren Eller, Professor of Public Policy at John Jay College of Criminal Justice: “The probability of having an armed offender wearing a body vest get into a firefight with law enforcement is really, remarkably insignificant.’ [1]
James Alan Fox, Criminologist at Northeastern University: ‘Body armor hasn’t been worn in the majority of mass shootings.’ [12]
Aaron Westrick: ‘Body armor is expensive, and it's rarely used by typical criminals.’ [11] R. Luna, Civilian, adding ‘drugs seem to be a more effective confidence booster in such scenarios.’
What’s more, donning body armor doesn’t make anyone, criminals included, invincible.
B. Phelps, Police Officer: ‘Most law enforcement agencies have the money to buy things that can defeat body armor. It offers no threat to me, the only thing armor does is make me take more accurate shots.’
B. Comston, Civilian: ‘Even if a bad guy gets body armor, it only covers a small portion of their body.’
SHOULD BODY ARMOR BE BETTER REGULATED INSTEAD? - - YOUR THOUGHTS
Unlike some other nations, body armor in the United States is subject to hardly any government/state rules. Versus a blanket ban then, some civilian survey-goers urged tougher measures when selling and buying body armor.
J. Heizman: ‘Basic level protection should be available to everyone. Some limits like a background check for high end armor would be acceptable.’
C. McDougall: ‘As long as there are proper regulations on it in to make it harder for the wrong people to have access to it.’
D. Johnson: ‘It should be regulated so the government knows who has it and what it is being used for.’
On the matter of punishment, other respondents called for stiffer penalties if guilty of a felony whilst wearing body armor.
J. Lapointe: ‘If they use body armor to commit a crime the punishment should be doubled.’
A. Clymer: ‘It should be a life sentence if you commit a crime using [body armor].’
KEY TAKEAWAYS
All told, the Bulletproof Zone poll received over 1300 responses. Accounting for a fifth of all votes, the most vocal states were Texas, California, then Florida. Small wonder since, amongst other things, both TX and CA have been rocked by 3 of the 5 deadliest mass shootings/murders since 1949.
Just a tiny fraction (0.70%) of survey participants were unsure if body armor should be banned. Astonishingly, only twice as many actually supported making body armor illegal. Arguing, mostly, it was a way of ensuring body armor was off-limits to mass shooters/murderers and disputing why regular folks would ever need it.
Moves for a ban largely coming from appointed/elected officials. Presumably, given the political stalemate in relation to firearms reform, those in office need to be seen doing something to tackle escalating gun violence.
And yet, an unexpectedly high show of hands in our poll disagreed with a ban on body armor. A consensus shared online by many leading authorities, and echoed throughout popular internet discussion forums such as Reddit and Quora.
Critics of a ban have reeled off a whole host of reasons why, not to mention rebuffing the claims made by advocates of a ban. Representing more than half the total count of those who objected to a ban, that outlawing body armor would be flat out unAmerican; and that body armor is used mainly as a defense against gunshot but alternatively for protection against hard knocks.
A couple of individuals felt that body armor shouldn’t be regulated at all. Most, though, reacted in favor of seeing the sale and purchase of which more tightly and consistently controlled. As well as harsher prison terms for those who wear body armor during the commission of a crime.
A LANDSLIDE OF OPINION BUT THE CONVERSATION’S NOT DONE YET
Despite more and more states looking to outlaw bullet-resistant wear, the results from our worldwide poll suggest that the better part of people are in fact opposed to a ban.
Though our giveaway survey may have ended, the discussion on banning body armor is far from over. So we’re renewing a call for your contributions on the issue - - whichever side you take and why, leave your thoughts on this debate below.
SOURCES
[2] https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article271292827.html
[4] https://sanfordlegends.com/buffalo-shooting-renews-calls-for-body-armor-regulation/
[7] https://money.cnn.com/2016/02/10/news/companies/bulletproof-vests/index.html
[9] https://abcnews.go.com/US/buffalo-shooting-renews-calls-body-armor-regulation/story?id=85437343
[10] https://www.npr.org/2022/06/14/1103935711/body-armor-sales-increase-rise-mass-shootings-bans
[11] https://www.npr.org/2022/05/20/1100263364/buffalo-shooter-body-armor-fewer-regulations-than-guns
[12] https://apnews.com/article/mass-shootings-buffalo-body-armor-f7789ba97dee4d786ac24ec5c642b7ca
[13] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/931
[14] https://trackbill.com/bill/california-assembly-bill-92-body-armor-prohibition/2296283/
[15] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB301