Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]OneTenthofOnePercent
(6,268 posts)87. You can purchase surplus body armor in cash at gun shows.
There would likely be no receipt or paper trail given such a transaction.
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
227 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
i'm sure you're getting a lot of kicks right now. quite amusing during this stress time
samsingh
Jul 2012
#55
Oh man. That's awesome. But what would really 'show me' is proof about the 'bullet proof' vest.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#120
Yeah, that's the one in my OP. It's not a 'bullet proof vest'. It's just a vest.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#144
Seriously? We know what he bought and when and where he bought it. Why would this one item
Edweird
Jul 2012
#202
What's BS? Is that the liimit of your debating abilities? Here's my post, which you didn't read:
freshwest
Jul 2012
#43
Well, thanks for the kick. Right now I'm looking for bullet proof vest info. We can fight later.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#49
for pro-gun people, anything that can be used in favor of gun control does not exist.
samsingh
Jul 2012
#30
I SO agree with you. My first thought reading the orig post: "And this matters how?" /eom
dballance
Jul 2012
#131
well, ok then! I guess I'll just tiptoe out the door...don't get up. Really, I can let myself out...
CTyankee
Jul 2012
#72
he's trying to argue that everyone should have been armed in the theatre and that would prevented
samsingh
Jul 2012
#37
No, I want you to prove that he WAS wearing a bullet proof vest. Not "someone said"
Edweird
Jul 2012
#26
We know everything he bought. When and where. The news articles, like the one in my OP,
Edweird
Jul 2012
#100
We know the brand and model of everything else. I don't see how this is 'unknowable'.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#67
I don't see what you're geting at. Was he wearing a 'bullet proof' vest or not?
Edweird
Jul 2012
#124
You want accurate reporting based upon actual facts? Facts slow things down.
AnotherMcIntosh
Jul 2012
#54
What does it matter? Bulletproof gear or not, are the victims any less dead?
Blue_Tires
Jul 2012
#59
I can't see it but I'm sure it's as witty as it is insulting - but shouldn't you be researching
Edweird
Jul 2012
#70
I'm looking for someone to come forward and show me what kind of bullet proof vest he was wearing.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#114
So this is a continuation of the thread where you called the victims "cowards"?
zappaman
Jul 2012
#77
*I* *I* Mischaracterize all you want. *I* don't care. *I* have to live with my actions
Edweird
Jul 2012
#103
Eh, that's people taking stuff out of context. We all know the theater was 'gun free'.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#184
Do you have ANY proof that he wore a 'bullet proof' vest besides "everyone says"?
Edweird
Jul 2012
#155
It would sting so much more if you could prove he was wearing a 'bullet proof' vest.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#119
I hesitate to even reply, but I could not really care less if he was wrapped in saran or encased in
likesmountains 52
Jul 2012
#125
That's true. I just had a rough fight with some long time members and if I'm wrong I want to know.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#137
Here is what he was wearing, according to earlier DU thread--looks different than
librechik
Jul 2012
#151
Maybe Holmes thought it was bullet proof. Doesn't change anything even if he were naked.
Hoyt
Jul 2012
#167
In this case, I really don't give a dang whether he was wearing armor or not. He did use guns that
Hoyt
Jul 2012
#175
It's ... not really possible for someone to confuse a tactical vest for body armor. (nt)
Posteritatis
Jul 2012
#226
If it didn't already exist, this post could've caused the invention of the word
CreekDog
Jul 2012
#173
No but the only proof I've come along so far leads to a 'tactical vest' or whatever
Edweird
Jul 2012
#189
That's fine. Reports usually are a bit disconnected in the first week or so...
chowder66
Jul 2012
#196
Ed, the FUCK does it matter what he was wearing? you're just trolling with this post.
dionysus
Jul 2012
#181
so you say you have already decided the issue, and now you want us to prove you wrong?
librechik
Jul 2012
#188
ooooh you really showed me didn't you! I will cry myself to sleep for a thousand nights....
Edweird
Jul 2012
#210
I need to start hiding threads until they put gun threads back in the gungeon.
Edweird
Jul 2012
#217