Body armor is overrated

[longdayjake]

Coming from personal experience, I was hit by a round from a PKM on a pistol mag on the side of my plate carrier without a plate behind it. It knocked me on my @$$, and felt like I'd just taken a kick in the ribs from a UFC fighter. However, I was back on my feet a second later and back in the fight. The range at which I was hit was from 1600 meters away so I would say that it was comparable to taking a bullet from a pistol at close range. Does it hurt? yes. Can you still fight effectively? yes. I've also seen gunshot wounds to fellow soldiers in the groin area and they were still fighting until either treated or pulled out of fire. The only way to effectively stop a shooter in armor is a headshot. As seen firsthand, wounds to limbs do not always stop a fight. I have seen an iraqi shot twelve times in the grion and legs, while very much on his way to dead, still stay in the fight.

A shooter can still shoot when shot in the legs, but keeping him from chasing down more victims is always a plus.

 

[2DREZQ]

Coming from personal experience, I was hit by a round from a PKM on a pistol mag on the side of my plate carrier without a plate behind it. It knocked me on my @$$, and felt like I'd just taken a kick in the ribs from a UFC fighter. However, I was back on my feet a second later and back in the fight. The range at which I was hit was from 1600 meters away so I would say that it was comparable to taking a bullet from a pistol at close range. Does it hurt? yes. Can you still fight effectively? yes. I've also seen gunshot wounds to fellow soldiers in the groin area and they were still fighting until either treated or pulled out of fire. The only way to effectively stop a shooter in armor is a headshot. As seen firsthand, wounds to limbs do not always stop a fight. I have seen an iraqi shot twelve times in the grion and legs, while very much on his way to dead, still stay in the fight.

Thank you for your service. We're all very glad you're here to tell us about it.

 

[Nuclear]

Body armor does not cover 100% of the person's body, as is evidenced by the number of cops and military personnel being injured and killed by gunfire despite wearing body armor. Also, there is the question of the body armor being of sufficient protection for the velocity of the incoming round. And I have done martial arts for a good portion of my adult life, and let me tell you, certain places on your body are much more sensitive to impacts, such as the groin, knees, eyes, nose, mouth, temple, neck, just to name a few off the top of my head. Even with protective gear on.

So no, a CCW gun would not have been useless against the Colorado shooter, perhaps not as effective or as easy to use as it would otherwise.

 

[WardenWolf]

He had a USGI kevlar helmet on. I've seen ballistics tests on those. They will stop even a .44 magnum round from close range. It leaves one hell of a dent, but doesn't spall or penetrate. It would probably knock the wearer cold, but they would survive.

The point being, though: your CCW weapon has NO chance of penetrating that level of protection. All you are going to do if you hit him there is make him angry, and he will then turn his attention on YOU.

The only place you cannot effectively armor is the face. This means the shooter must be more or less looking in your direction in order for you to hit him. And you must hit him in a very precise area. That said, if you hit him anywhere in the face, it is an almost guaranteed fight stopper.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Warden wolf
it's a fragmentation helmet, the new ones are supposed to be better
BUT a 9mm will penetrate
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot29.htm
and even when it doesn't, 2" of non-penetrating 'intrusion' to the head is lethal

What most seem to miss
in this case, if you were close enough to see him, you were close enough to defeat body armor with well aimed shots, as it was a DARK SMOKY GAS FILLED place.

 

[fatcat4620]

I have seen vests backed by clay stop a bullet but leave a 4 inch dent in the clay.

 

[Skyshot]

Even if there had been CCW holders present and not knowing the skill level of the shooter. I myself would be very reluctant to pick a fight with an AR armed foe unless I had a superior tactical advantage. I myself cannot "Monday morning quarterback" this situation. This is just a bad position to be in regardless of being armed or not.

 

[X-Rap]

So then are we to just lay down and die then if we see a shooter dressed in black tactical gear? I am seeing reports of men shielding their girl friends and children even shielding other children and yet we hear that nothing can stop the man in armor.
I listened to LTC Dave Grossman last night on a radio program and he sees the need for Americans to prepare for the possibilities of the escalation of these types of attacks, I've followed him some but never realized he was as pro 2a as he sounded last night. His Sheep, Wolf and Sheepdog article should be read by everyone who carries a gun.
http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2009/01/12/on-sheep-wolves-and-sheepdogs-by-dave-grossman/

 

[waterhouse]

My degree is in mechanical engineering, but I don't need to do any math on this one to convince myself. I know too many guys who were shot wearing soft armor; all say it felt like getting hit by a sledgehammer or kicked by a horse. I have also been present at sales presentations where companies shoot thier own armor with a clay backing. The crater on the clay is enough to convince me that it would hurt getting shot with my vest on.

That said, I'd rather take the sledgehammer hit than the alternative.

 

[Owen Sparks]

The fact that Holmes surrendered without resistance in the parking lot means that he probably would have backed down in the theater if someone was firing back.

 

[holdencm9]

Even if there had been CCW holders present and not knowing the skill level of the shooter. I myself would be very reluctant to pick a fight with an AR armed foe unless I had a superior tactical advantage. I myself cannot "Monday morning quarterback" this situation. This is just a bad position to be in regardless of being armed or not.

Agreed. That is my whole thought. We all already know that you don't take a knife to a gun fight and you don't take a pistol to a rifle fight. So beyond knowing that, no matter what, a CCW holder would have been out-gunned, caught by surprise, and not wearing body armor, there is not much more to say. But in that instantaneous moment when fight or flight response is initiated, the presence of 2 long guns and a vest might tip the scale toward flight. Of course with no other options desperate times call for desperate measures, of course I'd start shooting back, but I'd definitely alter my POA based on the armor and not think "pfft it is overrated" because I personally only usually have 8 rounds readily available, I'd want to make them count.

I realize body armor won't make the guy like robocop or the terminator, where bullets bounce off of him, and he is unscathed, but I think saying is is overrated and not changing your tactics is a dangerous thing.

 

[wally]

It'll hit hard, but not enough to really do much.

See for yourself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSnOKKOu7rA

There are others of idiots doing the same out there.

 

[LeonCarr]

One round through his nose would have changed his channel quick, but in Colorado you can't carry in a movie theater, correct?

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

[Robert]

This has drifted away from the op and into speculation about the shooting. We don't do speculation.