It's all about risk assessment. I weigh the odds of getting myself into a position where I might actually need it against the discomfort of wearing it. I wouldn't get in my squad car without it when I was working. The odds of me being in a position where I would need it since I retired are extremely low. So low that I don't wear it. I've used it in training in shoot houses since then, but again, the increased risk in that environment makes it a fair trade off for the discomfort.
We make trade offs all the time. I'm not buying the argument that you are less prepared if you carry a gun and don't wear body armor. That strikes me as the rant of a person who isn't comfortable with the decisions he personally made and is looking for some kind of validation. One could make the same argument about carrying a full size pistol over a pocket pistol or carrying a pistol rather then a rifle, or driving a compact car instead of an SUV or driving and SUV when you'd be safer in an MRAP.
I wore body armor daily for 20 years. I also carried a BUG on duty. Today I generally carry just one gun and don't wear body armor and it hasn't gotten me shot yet. The fact is, it's highly unlikely I will ever need the gun.
Personal security doesn't lie in equipment. Personal security starts with your mindset. Equipment is secondary.
You don't believe having body armour in a gunfight is being more prepared?
Well clearly you do, so, I don't understand what you are saying here?
I'm also not sure who you are trying to insult as I don't recall anybody in this thread saying they wore body armour daily outside of a job requirement