Share This Page

Bulletproof blanket's ad boast barred

| Monday, June 16, 2014, 11:06 p.m.

The Department of Justice told Oklahoma-based ProTecht, maker of the Bodyguard Blanket, a bulletproof pad schoolchildren can wear like a backpack that retails for $1,000 to $1,200, to stop claiming that the product went through a ballistic projectile test from the National Institute of Justice.

“It may be that the company had these blankets tested by a third-party company and it meets similar standards, but the NIJ doesn't test on its own,” said Chuck Wagner, the department's deputy director of public affairs. “The NIJ only certifies the results of ballistic tests, and these blankets never went through that process.”

Co-creator Jay Hanan tested the blankets in his lab at Oklahoma State University, said his business partner, Stan Schone of Edmond, Okla.

“Jay ran exactly the same test the NIJ certifies, but no, it's not their test,” he said.

Schone said last week the quarter-inch thick-blankets hold up against 9 mm and .22-caliber bullets in tests designed for law enforcement armor. ProTecht's website cites the National Institute of Justice Class 3A test, which indicates protection from most handgun threats.

Schone, a longtime inventor, said the blankets contain Dyneema, a high-density plastic lighter than Kevlar and stronger than steel.

The Justice Department's general counsel contacted ProTecht this week, Wagner said, to clarify the company's claims.

“It would be like a food company who says they're organic, versus one who is certified organic,” Wagner said. “You can't compare a blanket to body armor, and potential buyers need to know the difference.”

Megan Harris is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach her at 412-388-5815 or mharris@tribweb.com.

Related Content
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.