Around the world people utilise body armor systems in different occupations. Wearing body armor as a very bare minimum level of protection is essential in some sectors. Here are some adaptions to your basic body armor design based on the occupation it will be used in:
Military Style Armor
Originally this is where it all started, body armor systems for the military are more like full body suits nowadays. Most military style carriers include additional pockets and webbing tape. Additional protective attachments for the groin, neck and upper arms are usually available, making the armor a fully modular based system. This means the core of the armor is soft offering upto level 3A protection. Then if and when needed hard armor plates are added inside pockets attached to the carrier. Other protective attachments can then be added or taken away dependant on the wearer’s requirement at that current time. Also most types of military body armor use different camouflage systems dependant on terrain and other military gear used.
Police Body Armor
One of the most dangerous occupations in the world is working the streets as (Read More....)
The endless debate surrounding driving under the influence (DUI), also known as drinking and driving or driving while intoxicated, has been raging for years across several jurisdictions. All states seem to have settled on using blood alcohol content (BAC) measurements to establish evidence of DUI in judicial proceedings. To this end, statutory BAC limits can be classified under three categories: Per se, zero tolerance and enhanced penalty BAC levels.
In the United States, DUI is a matter of public health, a judicial issue that features prominently in several court systems, a going concern for law enforcement, and a matter that supports a vast legal defense industry.
In the 21st century, state laws have been reaching some level of uniformity with regard to the per se BAC level, which now stands at 0.08 percent. The zero tolerance level usually applies to underage drivers who should not be drinking alcohol in the first place, but some jurisdictions use zero tolerance more than just a deterrent against juvenile DUI in the sense that drivers can be cited as driving (Read More....)
In the past decade, there have been a number of shootings across the United States from schools to grocery stores. At times, the world seems more like a Quentin Tarantino film more than actual reality. It is because of these circumstances that many view carrying firearms in the workplace could help keep everyone safer. However, this line of thinking could become a double-edged sword.
1. Providing Security - While most criminals will victimize an easy target over one that will shoot back, carrying a gun could instill violence rather than quell it. In the hands of the wrong person, flaring tempers could easily lead to firing bullets. Just because there is a gun in your pocket doesn't mean you know how to use it properly and respectfully.
2. Immaturity Can Kill - A gun is a tool to cause injury and death. It can't be related to any other purpose without it sounding asinine. The first time a person feels threatened, they can pull out the gun to "earn respect." A gun doesn't earn respect from anyone. Respect is earned through not using the gun in the first place. If the situation becomes life threatening, then gun usage could mean the difference (Read More....)
Authored By J. Vanne
"Quemadmoeum gladuis neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."
(A sword is never a killer, it is a tool in the killer's hands.) - Lucius Annaeus Seneca, circa 4 BC – 65 AD
“Americans [have] the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust their people with arms” -James Madison, considered the father of the US Constitution
"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them."- Zacharia Johnson, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788
“During World War II, six million Swiss had guns and six million Jews did not.”
“…sort of like the people who repeat foolish slogans like "guns kill" – as though guns sprout little feet when no one is looking and run around shooting people all by themselves.”- Doug Casey, financial columnist
“The horrifying truth is this: we live now in a culture that not only does not respect life, but discards it (Read More....)
“No one expects the American Inquisition” (apologies to Monty Python). The Spanish Inquisition was said to be the worst time in the history of humanity, culminating in the Dark Ages, a time when man's forward evolution was stifled by fear. When all is said and done, it may be viewed as a “cakewalk” compared to today. There are striking similarities between that era of ignorance, pain and bloodshed and cause for hiding one's true beliefs, and now.
During the Spanish Inquisition, anyone who did not accept the authority of Pope Gregory IX was labeled a “heretic” and tortured until they renounced their own beliefs, or died. This was legitimized under a Papal Bull given to Isabella and Ferdinand of Spain. Today, the NDAA gives the same authority to various agencies of the United States government, against those who believe that they still live in a free country.
During the (Read More....)
-Law Officer Behavior
Law enforcement officers are trained to present an image of authority. Called “officer presence,” this image allows the officer to make demands and requests during a car stop. These must not violate civil rights but otherwise the officer can make any demand he or she pleases. The officer’s goal is to gain information and to make arrests. They are also seeking to ensure successful prosecution of violators in court. Law enforcement officers are allowed to pull any vehicle over for “reasonable suspicion” of the driver or a passenger having committed a crime.
US v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411 (1981)
This can include anything from the vehicle having a crooked license plate to the driver matching the description of an escaped convict. Officers can use any legal stop as a reason to approach the vehicle. These are called “pretext stops.”
Whren v. U.S. 1996 WL 305735 (1996)
- Vehicle Occupant Rights
Once a vehicle is stopped, the (Read More....)
Guest Author- Jimmie Parr
“For the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life” (II Corinthians 3:6).
What in the world does that mean? Which letter kills? Is it the letter, “A?” Maybe it's “Z.” Or maybe it's a letter of another alphabet. Maybe it's “
Я.” Or could it be “Θ,” the first letter of the Greek word, θάνατος (Read More....)
Depending on one’s ideological preferences, there are many ways to interpret the United States Constitution. Originally adopted on September 17, 1787, the Constitution is specific enough to outline the governance of a country while remaining vague enough to encourage different forms of interpretation. What the Constitution means – its scope, its limits, and what is implied – can vary depending on how it is interpreted. Some forms of Constitutional interpretation include:
1. Originalism, also known as Original Intent – This form of interpretation places heavy emphasis on the intent and purpose of the Founding Fathers. Some political scientists consider this the “best” form of interpretation, as it adheres to the original principles for which the document was first drafted. The largest problem with original intent is simply unintended circumstances. For example, no one can guess what the Founding Fathers’ opinions were on private electronic surveillance.
2. Modernism – This is in direct opposition to Original Intent. Modernists, instead of looking at the opinions (Read More....)