The Greatest Body Armor Myth of All

February 10th, 2023

In the past, we've shared important insights regarding common myths about body armor, such as that fragmentation will kill you, that steel has a "spall" problem, and other such issues. This time, we're addressing a much more dangerous myth.

As a point of background, the California State Assembly is considering a body armor ban. Assembly Bill 92 would prohibit the sale or delivery of all types of body armor.

“Simply put, the widespread availability of military-grade body armor helps mass shooters and criminals kill more people,” Democrat Assemblyman Damon Connolly said when he introduced the bill.

With that said, this is the greatest body armor myth: That the widespread (read: legal and affordable) availability of powerful body armor chiefly helps criminals.

The truth of the matter is that the widespread availability of body armor chiefly prepares Free Men, not just to resist criminals, but to resist tyranny.

We're offering a range of loadouts at a wide range of price points to help equip Free Men in California and America as a whole. Check them out here.

Understanding Assembly Bill 92: The Full Picture 

Assembly Bill 92 was first read in the California State Assembly on January 5th of this year. The State Assembly can be seen as California’s House of Representatives, being the lower house of their Congress and having more members than the Senate. 

Since 2018, Democrats have held a veto-proof supermajority in both the State Assembly and the Senate, with the Assembly consisting of 62 Democrats and 18 Republicans while the Senate has 32 Democrats and 8 Republicans. Thus they wield significant power to push through legislation in line with Democrat fever dreams.

On January 26th, AB92 was referred to the Committee on Public Safety- which, as Ben Franklin would tell us, likely means Californians are soon to lose both liberty and safety- and is scheduled for a hearing on February 28th.

The bill's contents give two major changes to existing law. First, it rewords previous law forbidding the usage of body armor while committing a violent felony. Second, it extends the forbidding of body armor purchase and sale to apply to the general populace as opposed to only felons.

Here are two myths assumed by proponents of AB92.

Myth 1: Armor Bans Hinder Criminals

As noted above, the claimed purpose of AB92 is to limit the damage done by criminals by making it easier to disable them in a gunfight. 

In the best construction of this vision, a small number of future mass shooters might be influenced by the new law.

Perhaps some future mass shooters will be uncreative and only go to a local tactical goods store for equipment and then get denied body armor, and then engage in a mass shooting later without said body armor, and then get lethally shot more quickly or easily.

But many will find workarounds. This issue has already been demonstrated in the world of firearms. Per analysis collected by Fox News:

“‘The majority of firearms used in criminal activity are obtained illegally,’ said David Chianese, a correspondent at Law Enforcement Today, published author and former NYPD detective. ‘Stricter or additional gun laws do not reduce gun violence.’

A 2019 survey conducted by the Department of Justice (DOJ) found that some 43 percent of criminals had bought their firearms on the black market, 6 percent acquired them via theft, and 10 percent made a retail purchase – 0.8 percent purchased a weapon from a gun show.”

The practical problem is ontological: Criminals are criminals. It’s already illegal in California, and everywhere else in the U.S., to murder people (unless they are not born yet), as well as to use armor while doing so. 

It stands against reason to claim that a law criminalizing armor usage will affect existing criminals.

Myth 2: Armor Bans Help Civilians

These are the people most gravely affected by AB92: Free Men who have not yet gotten the opportunity to learn about and access the lifesaving benefits of body armor. This well-regulated militia that is the armed men of California will not be as armed as they should be if this law gets passed. They will not be ideally prepared to promote security against tyrant and criminal.

And as noted in our first article on the ban: Body armor is chiefly a Tool of Liberty. 

While criminals may exploit body armor (just as they exploit motor vehicles and many other good things), body armor is even more essential to helping Free Men protect themselves and others. And not just from individual criminals - they need to protect against evil governments as well; an overpowering government is much more dangerous than one shooter. Free Men must be prepared. 

Body armor bans are unjust, not because body armor is a harmless piece of technology, but because strengthening civilians is exactly the purpose of the invention; and civilians have a God-given right to keep and bear arms.

California legislators are afraid of that. They should be. A hesitant government makes for bold liberty.

Well-disciplined use of a firearm can be the difference between a murder scene and a saved life. Body armor empowers a brave Free Man to take hit after hit while protecting his life and those of his loved ones.

It’s About Taking Guns and Taking Power

It’s clear that body armor bans influence innocent civilians far more than criminals. But affecting criminals is not the priority of the left. Interestingly, body armor itself is not the priority with AB92. Here is one insight by Pew, a large policy think tank, about the nature of body armor bans:

"Even among researchers who study gun violence, there’s some doubt that restrictions on body armor sales will make shootings less deadly or less frequent. Instead, Democratic lawmakers have sometimes described the bans as a kind of policy fallback: Given the deadlocked politics of gun control, they’ve said, regulating body armor is one rare area of possible bipartisan consensus." (emphasis ours)

Democrat policymakers push body armor bans to get more concessions from weak-willed & inconsistent Republican lawmakers. They don’t care about body armor that much at all except that they love to weaken citizens. Their ultimate goal is to take guns as well.

Note that “bipartisan consensus” is mentioned in the quote above as if it were a good in itself. Bipartisan consensus just means that one side is conceding something they don’t want. Normally it’s the Republicans.

If you’re from California, go to our first blog for more information on how you can take a stand against AB92.

The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.

At Armored Republic, we make Tools of Liberty for Free Men.

You have the constitutional right to protect yourself with body armor – protected under the Second Amendment and included in your God-given right to self-defense.

Body armor is a powerful tool for Free Men seeking to protect themselves and others. It prepares them to create Bastions of Liberty in a Sea of Tyranny.

Fight for Liberty & Fight for Truth. Stay vigilant. Hold the line.