Bulletproof Backpacks And Combat Apparel Sales Soar

Tyler Durden's picture

First gun sales soared, then Wal-Mart ran out of guns, then parents, stunned by the popular response in the aftermath of the Newtown mass murder which saw the White House threaten to curb the Second Amendment and lead to an even more unprecedented scramble for guns and ammo, and seeing nothing but confusion (but lots of bickering meant to extract nothing but political brownie points) out of the government instead of any hope of actual protection, decided it was time for some vigilante protection. The end result: sales of bulletproof backpacks have soared, with sales exploding as much as 500% since Friday. And since the white line from a defensive to an offensive posture is very thin, it is likely only a matter of time before we get the first media report of a 6 year old armed with a 44 caliber during recess.

From Daily News:

Sales of bulletproof backpacks for schoolchildren are through the roof days after a masked gunman's rampage left 20 kids dead at a Connecticut elementary school.

 

Parents began snapping up the high-tech bookbags Friday, the same day of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, Elmar Uy of the Massachusetts-based armor company BulletBlocker told the Daily News

 

In fact, the sudden spike in sales is how Uy, vice president of business operations, found out about the shooting.

 

"Part of my daily activity is to monitor the numbers," he said. "I was seeing numbers I'd never seen before and I thought it was a glitch. Our Web traffic was10 times more than normal.

 

BulletBlocker's child safety backpack is on sale for $199.99.

 

They also sell shields that start at $175 — bulletproof inserts that can slide into backpacks, laptop bags or purses. They add about 20 ounces — it's just like tossing a bottle of water in your bag, Uy said.

 

The company has seen a 300% to 400% increase in sales since the tragedy.

Where did this entrepreneur get the idea for this particular blockbuster business model? Another mass killing - Columbine.

The idea for BulletBlocker was sparked after the 1999 Columbine shootings. Creator Joe Curran wanted something to protect his school-age children.

 

Then he started sharing them with friends who had kids,” Uy said. “Our company is basically built around a single child’s backpack.”

 

Combat apparel company Amendment II, based in Utah, says their sales have also skyrocketed — at least 500% since Friday.

 

"(Bulletproof backpacks) were kind of a niche product before that shooting," co-owner and sales director Derek Williams told the Daily News.

 

"When we're selling a few a week, it doesn't take many to increase your sales," he said. "But yesterday we had over 200 requests for products."

 

Most were for bulletproof backpacks or backpack shields.

 

Amendment II uses a high-tech material called RynoHide, like Kevlar but super-light and flexible. They mostly sell to police and military, but started making products for civilians six months ago when they noticed an interest at trade shows.

 

"Parents were saying, hey I want one of these for my kid, can you get me this?" Williams said.

 

But he never thought interest would grow this big.

It is. And it is only going to get bigger due to two primary trends: i) the ongoing economic collapse of this country, which in spite of the rosy representation in the broad media, is in the 4th year of a raging depression and leading people to a position of sheer desperation and hopelessness, and ii) the absolute failure of the US government to be able to come to any resolution, in no small part driven by the fact that all lawmakers have handed over control of everything to monetary policy, i.e., the Fed; and iii) the rabid unwillingness of Americans to point the finger at the one person that matters - the person whose social responsibility and civic accountability has been evaporating steadily over the past two hundred years. Themselves.

Finally, the government apparently willing to create even more disastrous unexpected consequences with its intervention, is about to set off another avalanche, this time in demand for defensive armor:

Online, reaction to the kiddie armor reflected sadness.

 

"They are now selling bulletproof backpacks for children. What is this world coming to?" wrote Twitter user Courtney C. Jenkins, a pastor in Ohio.

 

Many called the backpacks a "sad sign of the times."

 

But parents eager to protect their kids may be buying into a trend that will soon be banned.

 

Some Miami schools are forbidding students from carrying backpacks as a safety precaution in the wake of the Newtown shooting.

Just brilliant job government: instead of giving people at least a fleeting impression they may be protected with one simple incremental action that hurts nobody, just box them into that one final corner, where Junior is armed by Senior with a 44 caliber or 9 millimeter. And nobody will have been able to anticipate the tragic consequences that will ensue as every child soon is armed.

In other news, we eagerly look forward to an epic surge in TASR stock as "Tazer: every Kindergartener's best friend" (made in China), appears imminently on Wal-Mart shelves everywhere.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
toomanyfakeconservatives's picture

Please stop the madness... let's just have more responsibly armed citizens.

Racer's picture

Duh and if the gun man shot your feet or other bits that were sticking out, you would be still be holding it up in the same position?

Theos's picture

Fuck it i give up.

Wile-E-Coyote's picture

Yeah right while you are standing there behind your back pack the gun man walks up and shoots you in the head. This is like a fucking Monty Python sketch.

The only answer is to ban guns. no guns no mass shootings simples.

WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot's picture

Good luck with that. Will you volunteer to help (try to) enforce that? That should end well.

Wile-E-Coyote's picture

Do you honestly think a few red necks with M16's can take on the US military. Best of luck with that.

It is all Bravado.

I just don't get it who are you lot protecting yourselves from? You have the biggest and best military in the world. Who is the bogey man?

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez's picture

You may be a coyote but wiley you are not!

deeznutz's picture

Surly you are trolling.

Do you really think a few A-Rabs or Afghanis with AK-47s can take on the US military?

The Government is who the 2nd amendment protects us from.  The military will more likely stand down in a situation you infer from this thread.

Colonial Intent's picture

Yeah sure they will, thats why DHS has been doing training exercises for just that 'situation'.

Ther is a resistance movement in america but its not a bunch of whiney assed racist religous zealots posting their impotent rage on a website forum, none of you offer a plan to fix govt you just want an end to govt itself coz law of the jungle will take over and you all think you're rambo.

Sorry to sterotype you all but given the amount of glenn beck worshippers on here recently its pretty accurate.

Citxmech's picture

This ass-hat could've been the author of a "call to action" I was emailed yesterday.  Here's my letter in response:

Dear XXX,

I was extraordinarily disappointed by your recent email action alert regarding a call for increased federal firearm restrictions.  Normally, I both agree with, and actively support your causes, but in this case, I find myself having difficulty just disagreeing with your position – as I found your message offensive as a citizen of these United States.

The first line of the subject email:  “Those who argue that the 2nd Amendment grants unlimited gun ownership rights must also recognize it is a federal constitutional amendment.” left me confused and uncomfortable.  What exactly were you implying?  Is the entire Bill of Rights which includes such important restrictions on government power as our 1st amendment right to free speech, freedom to assemble, and freedom from the establishment of a state-sanctioned religion, the 4th and 5th amendments guaranteeing habeas corpus, protections against unreasonable search and seizure, and due process, as well of those subsequent amendments including the 14th amendment guaranteeing ALL Americans the rights of U.S. citizenship or 19th amendment guaranteeing women the right to vote, of some lessor stature than those rights guaranteed by the original verbiage of the Constitution?  It was my understanding that properly ratified amendments to the Constitution ARE the Constitution and are properly "the law of the land."

As far as your implication that those who actually expect that the Constitution and its amendments, including Bill of Rights, could be invoked by the citizenry to protect us from a zealous over-reaching by the federal government are somehow "illiterate" because of the 2nd amendment’s “well regulated militia” provision, I am again saddened by your apparent lack of historical understanding and misplaced condescension.  Firstly, the United States were never intended to have a standing professional army.  The founders, in their wisdom, understood that standing armies were a path to imperialism and to the potential (if not eventual) subjugation of her citizenry.  Witness what we have become and I think their prescience on that point cannot be denied.

I present to you a few choice words for you to contemplate regarding your espoused belief that forsaking our inherent right to bear arms for individual as well as common defense, in exchange for the promise of increased security, is a wise bargain, that the "militia" was ever contemplated to be anything other than the whole of the common citizenry, or that "changing times" somehow has rendered the portions of the Bill of Rights obsolete:

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves ... and include all men capable of bearing arms."

-- Senator Richard Henry Lee, 1788, on "militia" in the 2nd Amendment

"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."

-- John F. Kennedy  

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

-- Mahatma Gandhi

If you care to do the research, there are literally hundreds of other quotes which have been put forth by men and women world-wide in support of the right to bear arms who preached peace, and who put their lives on the line to preserve both individual, as well as communal liberty.  You do them all a disservice when calling for unilateral disarmament in the face of evil.

Finally, your comment:  “Outside of those with David Koresh fantasies there is no justifiable reason for private citizens to own such things. For those who think they might need such arsenals to fight off our own government, guess what, if the government really wants to get you nowadays they'll just target you with a drone.” leaves me sickened and questioning the entire basis of your mission as well as your level of conviction regarding resistance against institutional oppression.

If we should give up our rights because the federal government already has the ability (and apparently the will) to illegally target citizens exercising rights which should be guaranteed by the same document purported to legitimize that government, perhaps you would be most effective if you directed your efforts at reestablishing the sanctity of such amendments as the 4th and 5th (as well as the tenants of  posse comitatus) rather than actively aiding the statist agenda of neutering the entire population due to fear of the heinous acts of some tiny minority.  As an American I am both sickened and embarrassed at your apparent cowardice and am reminded of these words often attributed to Benjamin Franklin:  "Those who would give up liberty to gain security will deserve neither, and lose both."

Respectfully,

(Citxmech)

Colonial Intent's picture

Are you only now realising that your rights are determined by the state having a monopoly on violence within its own borders?

Do they not teach history in US schools?

The rights of the citizen versus those of the state are an eternal battle not a win or lose do or die struggle, govt is meant to be about order vs chaos and here you are turning it into some good vs evil thing based on impossible absolute philoshophies of anarchy.

no wonder the govts biased in favor of the dems if you repubs dont get involved at the grassroots level and keep using your base as a cash cow for lobbyists and pr media companies.

When did you last go to a town hall or protest anything?

Dont get me wrong my happiness at the dem victory has been tempered by my horror at the fragmenting of the repubs by the tea party, you are putting yourselfs out of politics for a generation, the demographics and social attitudes are against you and yet you still persist in driving the car off the cliff.

States with a powerful single political party tend towards repressive social policies and agressive external ones.

"Each type of govt enacts laws that are in its own interest, a democacy democratic laws, a republic republican laws, a tyranny tyrannical laws and so on and in enacting these laws the rulers make it quite clear that what is 'right' for their subjects is whatever is in the rulers own interest and if anyone deviates from this he is punished as a lawbreaker and 'wrongdoer'"

Pluto.

Citxmech's picture

Actually, the ass-hat I was referring to was Mr. Coyote  sorry for any confusion  my bad.  However, I have no idea why you think I'm some recently born-again patriot.

Just so you know, my activism this year regarding gun rights specifically, in addition to signing-on to numerous petitions, included  successfully encouraging a few family members and friends to purchase their own firearms, and volunteering my time to restore the rights of an individual wrongly denied a CCP license.  Modest to be sure - but I am trying to make a difference.

Oh, and btw, the only time I voted Republican this year was for Ron Paul in our primary.  If Eisenhauer were available to run, I'd probably volunteer for his campaign though, just so you know.

Colonial Intent's picture

I have no issue with gun ownership, my issue is with the owners who think guns are a toy and most on here talk about their gun like its their todger.

A gun is a tool, nothing more, the idea that owning a gun automatically makes you more patriotic than everyone who doesnt is ridiculous.

 

 

 

 

Citxmech's picture

IMHO - whether anyone wants to own a gun is less important than the right that they can own guns if they so choose.  Personally, I do think of it as a civic responsibility - but ymmv.  As I hoped my letter got across, I'm pissed about the govt's current flagrant disregard for the entire Constitution, not just the second amendment.

zerotohero's picture

Culture of fear brought to you by the U.S. Gov't - nothing like having your citizens scared shitless all the time.

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez's picture

"Who is the bogey man?"

The hijacked U. S. government, of course!

Wile-E-Coyote's picture

So what are you waiting for then, you have all the guns and ammo, take your country back....................... oh they have guns too... shit!

If only they were all five year olds.

Tuco Benedicto Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez's picture

Any father who does not have a gun to protect his family is either stupid or a coward and probably both!

Tuco

zerotohero's picture

now there is some logic you just can't argue with - wtf

Abiotic Oil's picture

You're right.  The best course of action to protect your children when confronted with an insane, medicated, violent individual with a gun, is to try to cover them with your own body and hope your meat slows the bullets enough to only kill you, like the pooor woman teacher in CT who sacrficed herself for her students and they all died anyway? - wtf?

akak's picture

Wile-E-Coyote (naively) stated:

The only answer is to ban guns. no guns no mass shootings simples.

Like the typical unthinking, head-in-the-clouds statist sheep, your gullibility and disingenuousity are proudly on parade here.  But in your ignorance and state-worship, you neglect to realize that illegalization is FAR from the same thing as "banning", much less eliminating.  Your faith in legalism and (unjust) law is touching, but woefully misguided.

Just go to Mexico if you believe that illegalizing guns automatically eliminates them from a society.  Sure, the law-abiding will submit --- and the criminals and sociopaths will just laugh as the sheep are now not just corralled, but hobbled as well.

lakecity55's picture

Daily Mail, June, 2012

"The UK has today sub-contracted SAS responsibilities to the USMC.

Due to the disarmament of UK Forces in response to the dangers of firearms, US Marines will now earn bounties when force is needed. Most SAS have now left the UK to join the USMC.

Lord HeeHaw, in response to reporters' questions, stated there would be no problems, as if the UK were ever invaded, they would request firearms from the US, as they did before, during WW2 when the UK was also disarmed."

Monedas's picture

All we are saying .... is give Piers a chance .... count to 5 then blow the muther fucka away and send his ashes back to England !

Wile-E-Coyote's picture

Say what you like sunshine but in the UK there is no guns available, we walk the streets in safety. America is hell.

Abiotic Oil's picture

Your knife crime is through the roof and they have banned all but the smallest blades.

Wile-E-Coyote's picture

No we don't, get your facts right.

Abiotic Oil's picture

Violent crime worse in Britain than in US

Britain has a higher crime rate than any other rich nation except Australia, according to a survey yesterday.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-25671/Violent-crime-worse-Britain-US.html#ixzz2FiDr18PT 

Killtruck's picture

Huh...some facts. Well, shit, I guess that's the end of that discussion.

Central Bankster's picture

Logic and facts are kryptonite against fascist gun grabbers. 

Colonial Intent's picture

Daliy mail is the uk version of fox news dude, it is not reliable.

Abiotic Oil's picture

Article quotes a study, didn't perform it.

Abiotic Oil's picture

http://www.britishblades.com/forums/content.php?12-The-Law-FAQ

Q: Can I carry a lock knife (or a fixed blade knife) in a public place just because I feel like it?

A: No, it is ILLEGAL to carry a lock knife in a public place without a good reason.

 

HelluvaEngineer's picture

Q: Can I carry a knife because I am constantly assaulted by "Droogs"?

Tsar Pointless's picture

Yes. Yes, it is. But it's the "Greatest country in the world"TM, so at least we have that going for us.

Let's blame music, and Hollywood, and video games for our violent society, but by no means should we even consider looking at the man in the mirror and imposing blame upon him.

No. We're Amerikkkans. We never take the blame for everything.

It's the fault of something/somebody else all of the time.

We're nothing but a society run by and filled with four-year-old children.

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

 

in the UK there is no guns available, we walk the streets in safety.

 

This kind of safety, or a different kind?

Temporalist's picture

I was going to share the same HH.  The police were overrun in many cases during the riots too.  People couldn't leave their homes.  There is no way in hell most citizens should be held hostage given the choice to defend themselves (which they don't have as they can only carry cricket bats).

trav777's picture

They didn't show the face of those riots on US TV.  RT did.  It was rather striking, kinda looked just like a riot here.

The causes of crime are the same pretty much the world over.  It's a dark secret hiding in plain sight.

Colonial Intent's picture

Lame, expected more than a cherry picked photo and a Wiki reference, especially from a ZH contributor.

lakecity55's picture

Go suck your Lord and Master, Rothschild.

Temporalist's picture
UK is violent crime capital of Europe


The United Kingdom is the violent crime capital of Europe and has one of the highest rates of violence in the world, worse even than America, according to new research.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/5712573/UK-is-viole...

Wile-E-Coyote's picture

How many mass shootings have we had this year 0.0

How many innocent school children have we had massacred in their classrooms 0.0

Using everyday crime stats to justify your argument is just plain lame.

How many mass shooting have there been in the US this year.......................answers on a abacus.

Killtruck's picture

"Using everyday crime stats to justify your argument is just plain lame."

You sir, are an illogical douchebag. A soppy wet bag, devoid of logic and dripping with used douche spilling over the brim.

akak's picture

Sir, I take outraged umbrage at your characterization of Wile-E-Coyote as a "douchbag"!

A douchbag at least serves a useful purpose.

 

PS:  Why is almost every Brit in this forum an arrogant and statist dickweed?  Really, why?  Is it all the cameras spying on them that drives them into raging madness?

zerotohero's picture

same reason most Amerikans are arrogant statist dickweeds - its human nature these days

Wile-E-Coyote's picture

You don't answer the question though do you?

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Man there is nothing funnier than a stupid English cunt! When I go to England, I love to piss on the English. I just tell them it's raining and then they smile and say, "right, then! Cheerio!"