PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 19, 2012
Protect Law Enforcement Armor Act or the PLEA Act - Amends the federal criminal code to: (1) expand the definition of "armor piercing ammunition" to include a projectile that may be used in a handgun and that is determined by the Attorney General to be capable of penetrating body armor; and (2) require the Attorney General to promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against Body Armor Exemplar (body armor that the Attorney General determines meets minimum standards for the protection of law enforcement officers), taking into account variations in performance related to the type of handgun used, the length of the barrel, the amount and kind of powder used to propel the projectile, and the projectile's design.
Prohibits the manufacture, sale, possession, or transfer of the Fabrique Nationale Herstal Five-seveN Pistol, 5.7 x 28mm SS190, SS192, SS195LF, SS196, or SS197 cartridges, or any other handgun that uses armor piercing ammunition, except: (1) where manufactured and sold exclusively to U.S. military, law enforcement, or intelligence agencies; and (2) by a licensed manufacturer or contractor for the purpose of examining and testing to determine whether such prohibition applies.
People & committees
Rep. Engel, Eliot L. [D-NY-17] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.6685 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.6685 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.6685 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.6685 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.