Wrightsville man could get prison for...

Wrightsville man could get prison for owning body armor, officials say

There are 34 comments on the The York Daily Record story from Nov 18, 2010, titled Wrightsville man could get prison for owning body armor, officials say. In it, The York Daily Record reports that:

A York County man was charged Wednesday with illegally possessing body armor, according to the United States Attorney's Office.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The York Daily Record.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#21 Nov 18, 2010
Local Citizen wrote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Chip, chip, chip..........
Here is Pennsylvania's take on the right to bear arms under section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Right to Bear Arms
Section 21.

The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
Leeds

Export, PA

#22 Nov 18, 2010
Can I assume that it's illegal to wear a bicycle helmet if you've ever been caught jaywalking?

// Sense- this makes none.
careaboutpa

Hershey, PA

#23 Nov 18, 2010
DFBHD wrote:
<quoted text>
The article states he purchased a "ballistic vest" not a flak jacket. There is a BIG difference between the two. A flak jacket is design to stop shrapnel only not a bullets.
The majority of companies that make bullet proof vest will not sell them to anyone unless the can prove the are in law enforcement, military or security and are required to have them.
Does anyone else remember the guys in L.A that robbed the bank and had body armor wrapped around them and the number of police killed and wounded?
This guy is not the first convicted felon in PA to be arrested for possession of body armor. There was a guy in Philly a couple of years ago now he is back in jail.
That was 13 years ago and Hundreds of rounds were fired during the 45-minute gunbattle, 11 officers and six civilians were injured. Only the two bank robbers were killed.
just another observer

United States

#24 Nov 18, 2010
DFBHD wrote:
<quoted text>
Does anyone else remember the guys in L.A that robbed the bank and had body armor wrapped around them and the number of police killed and wounded?
This guy is not the first convicted felon in PA to be arrested for possession of body armor. There was a guy in Philly a couple of years ago now he is back in jail.
If you go back and look into the L.A. Bank Robbery, you will find the the people that were responsible MADE their body armor and didn't purchase it off the shelf. One of them bought rolls of kevlar and made body armor that covered most of their body, not just the upper torso like the normal body armor that the police typically use.
Painful Truth

Rockville, MD

#25 Nov 18, 2010
What about the rights of the state? Shouldn't the state have the right to be free of convicted felons?? He decided to defer being a law abiding citizen to others. And for that he was rewarded with a new set of rules to follow. And not surprisingly, he failed to do that as well. Do I understand why he isn’t allowed to buy body armor? Not really. Wouldn’t cause me much concern if he owned a whole warehouse full of body armor. The problem is, it is illegal for him to own it. The state doesn’t need to explain why to him. It’s was a law before he committed a crime, so there should be no surprise that it’s still a law after. He made a choice. So from me to him….tough sh_t!!!
backround checks

York, PA

#26 Nov 18, 2010
Do they do backround checks for a vest like this? If not, I can't see how this can be a crime.
Army Veteran

United States

#27 Nov 19, 2010
karasu wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, I see: anyone who worries that they may be shot and wants to protect themselves in a passive, private way, is suspect — no, wait, not just suspect ... GUILTY! What's next? Arresting people for locking their doors, on the pretext that a LEO may be inconvenienced or delayed in entering?
But of course we have to have "special rules" for "white supremacists" and "whackos" don't we, Army Veteran?
Nope, only special rules for "convicted felons." He broke them, end of story.
Pablo

Gap, PA

#28 Nov 19, 2010
Leeds wrote:
Can I assume that it's illegal to wear a bicycle helmet if you've ever been caught jaywalking?
// Sense- this makes none.
So you have no problem with a gang member getting out of jail on parole after he served 10 years for armed robbery going out and buying body armor?
Rob

United States

#29 Nov 19, 2010
If he's found guilty, I hope he gets the full 5 years AND the $250,000 fine. He's no better than the gang bangers running around robbing and killing innocent people. Hate is hate, and it comes in all colors. Put him away.
Nasty Perv

York, PA

#30 Nov 19, 2010
Wow after just seeing his pic in the paper this morning I hope he gets MORE than five years. I used to work with him several years ago. Very strange character. Always bragged about getting verrrrry young girls and was down right filthy talking inappropriately at the work place about porn, drugs etc. Not to mention the racial slurs, this explains it all. Mike you are rotten person, now I have the chance to tell you that and I hope you are reading this!
gmuny2002

Norristown, PA

#31 Nov 19, 2010
What a piece of shit! Too bad we couldn't string him up in Continnetal Square!
Local Citizen

Lancaster, PA

#32 Dec 27, 2010
Pablo wrote:
<quoted text>
So you have no problem with a gang member getting out of jail on parole after he served 10 years for armed robbery going out and buying body armor?
It's not THEIR body armor I'm worried about. It's MY RIGHT to keep and bear arms, and defend myself against others AND THE STATE. Lest we forget, this country,(and commonwealth) were founded because of the abuses of government. And Every one of our founding fathers became treasonous felons the day they signed the declaration of Independence. Should they have been prohibited from buying a protective vest,(had they been available,) even though they chose to take up arms against the state?
Local Citizen

Lancaster, PA

#33 Dec 27, 2010
DFBHD wrote:
<quoted text>
Here is Pennsylvania's take on the right to bear arms under section 21 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
Right to Bear Arms
Section 21.
The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.
In this, I feel the Pennsylvania version is more restrictive than the federal version, and I choose to claim my constitutional rights, as opposed to my PA rights.

But at the end of the day, they mean much the same thing.
Just saying

York, PA

#34 Dec 27, 2010
Geez, even the Romans used body armor! Big deal! But most of all, that law 'allowing bears to arm' scares me! Even that prick 'Smokey' gets out of hand at times in 'Jelly Stone' National Park! As 'Rome burns' about us, we're worried about some nutcase who wears armor.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wrightsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Many men are happy to stay unmarried, though th... (Jan '08) Jan '17 Just saying 46
News Montenegro seeks man in photo with Russian fore... Dec '16 AntemuraleChristi... 1
News Wrightsville Forming Own Police Department (Nov '06) Dec '16 Jon 17
Searching for Dr. James L. Jamison of Wrightsvi... Nov '16 Michael Angelo 1
Wrightsville, Pa house fire ends in total loss ... (Aug '16) Aug '16 Onelittlesoul 1
Stacy Holliday-White (Jun '16) Jun '16 sum1 1
News Timely reminder: Don't touch! Video shows museu... (Jun '16) Jun '16 greymouser 5

Wrightsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Wrightsville Mortgages