bullet proof vests

Status
Not open for further replies.
You know, the one place where I have had guns pointed at me on multiple occasions is the gun range. As a result, I built my own. Prior to that, I wore a vest to the range.

I find it interesting what all folks think "I" don't need and how their attitude changes over time. 30 years ago, "I" didn't need eye and ear protection. Sure enough, there are a bunch of folks who think "I" don't need a gun either.
 
I suppose that wearing body armour would be pretty paranoid in todays world. But by that reasoning, carrying a gun, or a weapon of any kind would be too. Just having a gun in your home would be too paraniod..... We can argue until everyone is blue in the face, point is, it should be a personal RIGHT, its not as though a law abididing citizen is going to go out and beat someone to death with their body armor, so what should it matter to anyone if somebody felt the need to own it and/or wear it?
 
You are more likely to die by poisoning than a gun shot.

Do you have a food taster on hand?
When the doc orders x-rays do you have him calculate all the rads you've received in your life?
Do you watch the cook at your favorite hash joint to make sure he doesn't add any special ingredients?
How about wearing a respirator every time you drive past industrial sites?
Do you have your water independently tested every year to make sure it is safe?
Do you wash your meat and use a thermometer to test internal temperature every time you cook?

We all make trade offs based on the most likely scenario. We usually prepare for the scenario that we are most familiar with. That means when the paper covers every shooting and trial like it is O.J 2.0 it drives up paranoia. Maybe you should step back and look at why you feel so threatened. Is it because of a real threat or a perceived threat?

If you still feel you need a bullet proof vest, go for it.
 
TownParkRadio said:
Oh and... http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/02/22/ballistic-vest-designer-shoots-employees-point-blank/

Why is there no bullet hole until after the camera cuts away and then it magically appeara?
Click to expand...
Are you blind TownParkRadio?

Anyways...if someone feels more comfortable with a vest, whats wrong with that. When I lived in the dorms on campus in a major US city I always had to vests ready to go. One for me and one for a friend or girlfriend. If it improves chances/odds of survivability, which you can in no way deny that it does, then why would it be a bad decision to own one if you can think of a situation you might need/want it.
 
Be sure and check local laws before wearing a vest while armed. Some jurisdictions could have restrictions in place to thwart criminals that would wear the armor while engaged in robbery. Be careful !
 
Do you have a food taster on hand?
When the doc orders x-rays do you have him calculate all the rads you've received in your life?
Do you watch the cook at your favorite hash joint to make sure he doesn't add any special ingredients?
How about wearing a respirator every time you drive past industrial sites?
Do you have your water independently tested every year to make sure it is safe?
Do you wash your meat and use a thermometer to test internal temperature every time you cook?
Click to expand...

No taster but I keep tabs on where the food is coming from and its quality
I avoid the doctor's office and the x-ray machine, and yes you should keep tabs on the dosage if you're in there a lot.
If the industrial site is spewing out nasty stuff I'll hold my breath Just like standing behind a car's exhaust.
Most water in the US is independently tested to make sure it's safe. I also use a filter.
Of course I wash the meat before I cook it. Esp. chicken. And I cook it until it's done. For large roasts I do use a digital thermometer.

With tens of thousands of people getting shot every year, a vest isn't completely paranoid. Depending on your circumstances and lifestyle it could be a very wise investment.

That means when the paper covers every shooting and trial like it is O.J 2.0 it drives up paranoia.
Click to expand...

They actually don't. I'm the last one to defend the MSM, but the vast majority of shootings barely get any coverage. If there's a death the coverage increases, but again unless it was a blond woman or someone famous it's strictly for the back pages. Happens all the time.
 
I was wearing Class IIA just carrying an empty bag into a bank, got a few shots of 9mm, and got fractured ribs with one flatout broken.
Click to expand...
Does it occur to you that with no vest on, you'd be dead right now, instead of ranting on a message forum about how the equipment that saved your life "sucks?"

I guess not.

I really don't care who approves or not of me owning (not one, but 2- i usually give one to my partner when we're working a really bad area) body armor. :)
 
Last edited:
I am somewhat astounded by the anti-vest sentiment. Paranoid to wear a vest? I don't wear one, I don't own one. And, yes, the chances that the average person would need one are very small. But then, the chances the average person will need a gun are also small. The chances I'll need to be wearing my seat belt, or have insurance are small. But it is not paranoid to take these precautions. If someone can afford the cost and discomfort of wearing a vest, then more power to them.

Is it that they think someone wearing a vest is up to no good? That's what a lot of people think about gun owners.
 
Quote:
I was wearing Class IIA just carrying an empty bag into a bank, got a few shots of 9mm, and got fractured ribs with one flatout broken.
Click to expand...

Does it occur to you that with no vest on, you'd be dead right now, instead of ranting on a message forum about how the equipment that saved your life "sucks?"

I guess not.

I really don't care who approves or not of me owning (not one, but 2- i usually give one to my partner when we're working a really bad area) body armor.
Click to expand...

For that matter, did 100% of the would be robber's shots hit you? If there were stray rounds, were any of them near any of the bank's customers? There's plenty of situations where you'd be better served by having spent $300 on a used soft armor vest and wearing it then by spending $500 on a pistol and carrying it. Or you might luck out and go your whole life without needing either like the vast majority of society does.

Yeah, I don't get this anti vest sentiment either. A LOT of people out there seem to think only the military/LE should own guns at all, or only military/LE should own "military style assault weapons", and if you do own any then you must be bent on committing violent crimes or you're a delusional paranoid gun nut who's a danger to society.

By the way, just how hot and uncomfortable are those soft armor police style vests? My only experience is with Level IV ceramic plate armor [I think it's Level IV, it's the armor that's rated up to 7.62 NATO]. The worst thing I've had to do while wearing it was ruck 6 or 7 miles over rolling hills in 90s degree weather.
 
Expensive, hot, bulky who needs a vest. But you carry a gun?? You want to feel protected, makes sense. Now, you carry a gun, why, because the other guy might have one. makes sense. Lets go out on a limb here, what do you think the bad guy, with the gun, is planning to do with it?? Shoot you maybe? Will your gun, stop his bullets, um, no. We all know there is a grey time area, even if you hit him. The first VC i did battle with,absorbed a full mag from my CAR-16, got off half a mag from his AK, at a distance of less than 5 feet and more like 3. the whole encounter lasted 5 seconds, tops. He missed. You've heard the joke about bringing a knife to a gunfight. But i don't think it's too funny to bring a vest to a gunfight. There are some slimline vests that fit under most everyday clothes, they are pricey, but then, how much is your life worth to you? They will stop most common "street rounds" from a handgun. I have one (mainly because i got it for free), know right were it is, in the closet on a hanger. Actually a couple times i have had to get up at night, to check out the dog barkin, I have slipped it on. It can't hurt. If you carry large sums of money often, or other valuables that makes you more of a target, it's not a bad idea. Unless you are superman, and bullets bounce off your chest, you need a vest if you plan to get in a gunfight. It's as simple as that.
NOTE: Vests are akin to motorcycle helmets, you don't need them, till you need them. And like motorcycle helmets, they actually have an expiration date. 5 years, and toss it (thats what the book says, that's how i got mine for free). Now if you see a bargin deal on a vest, that's why. If it's been stored well and cared for, it should still work, maybe. If its been in the field alot. It might not meet its' rated protection level..food for thought.
 
Last edited:
i have 3 PASGT vests, i did tests on one, it was quite impressive- not what i expected so i upgraded one of them and stuck some extra inserts in between one vest (took shoulder pads off etc) and stuffed up one vest for SHTF.

yes Body Armor can be quite heavy depending on how many layers you have inside the vest, for example you can buy a large vest and stuff inserts from a small vest in the large one Bingo you have a decent protective vest if USA was ever invaded by commies!
 
Ok I wear a vest at work, the best part of my day is when I take it off. :p

I know the idea of wearing one sounds really tacti-cool, BUT they aren't cool at all.

In fact they are hot, itchy and uncomfortable, and most of them are very obvious under clothing.

But whatever, if you want to deal with that it’s your choice. (BTW Is it legal in all states?)

However I think the reality of any civilian putting a vest on regularly is about the same odds of them regularly CC-ing a 4 pound revolver with an 8 inch barrel. :rolleyes:

It will get old REAL quick.
 
Last edited:
By the way, just how hot and uncomfortable are those soft armor police style vests? My only experience is with Level IV ceramic plate armor [I think it's Level IV, it's the armor that's rated up to 7.62 NATO]. The worst thing I've had to do while wearing it was ruck 6 or 7 miles over rolling hills in 90s degree weather.
Click to expand...
If you can handle interceptor or PASGT hard plate armor, you will feel like you're wearing a mercedes benz of comfort when you slip on a Class IIIA soft kevlar vest with Class IV ceramic inserts.

The steel Class IV inserts are very heavy, but the ceramic ones are nice and light.

I have two Class IIIAs. One is a US Armor, the other is a Safariland.

They are hot and uncomfortable, sure, but way better than hard plate armor in that regard. I can't imagine wearing a vest for typical CCW, but when you're working in a place that's statistically more dangerous than Iraq was at the height of the insurgency, hey....
 
Unless you are a cop, a solder, or a drug dealer, you don't need a bullet resistant vest.

Period.
Click to expand...

So, would you back a law that outlawed vests for anyone who was not police or military? If so, why?

Ranb
 
valorius said...
Most bullets lack the energy to break bones through a vest.
Click to expand...
This all depends on the caliber, load, and vest. Here is an officer that apparently got a broken rib and bruised lung from a .38 revolver round.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...-20100603_1_suspect-patrol-car-thin-black-man

More ribs here...
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/11/21/nyregion/vest-saves-officer-in-newark-shooting.html
http://m.gosanangelo.com/news/2010/may/29/officer-is-grateful-to-be-alive/ (9mm)

TomParkRadio gave his example...
I was wearing Class IIA just carrying an empty bag into a bank, got a few shots of 9mm, and got fractured ribs with one flatout broken.
Click to expand...

This isn't a surprise. IIA is the thinnest and least protective ballistic vest (Level I being fragmentation vests). As such, it is going to offer the least protection against blunt force trauma from gunshots.

So sure, there are a lot of calibers smaller than 9mm and .38 that might not have enough punch to break ribs through a vest, but some of the common calibers most certainly can.

valorius said...
The owner of second chance has famously voluntarily taken 12ga slug and .308 rifle shots at point blank range -on video- and suffered no injury at all. None. I can find the videos and post them, if you'd like.
Click to expand...

I have not seen the 12 ga. slug video, but have seen him shoot another person with a .308, but that person was wearing hard armor, not soft, so blunt force trauma is going to be very little as the impact will be spread out over the whole area of the plate.

valorius said
Here's a link to just one of many videos of a man being shot at point blank range with a vest and suffering zero injury.
Click to expand...
In the Second Chance clip of Davis you provided (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIhyETXW1u0), you can see that he is wearing a telephone book or stack of magazines under his vest and you can see part of it/them fall out of his shirt after his shot and as he turns. That is why his chest looks abnormally larger and you can see the added padding hanging below his vest under his shirt. The vest may have stopped the pistol rounds and dissipated some of the energy, but the phone book acted like a trauma plate to prevent blunt force trauma injuries below the point of impact. So he didn't suffer zero injury just because of the vest. Plus, the phone book helps assure that even if a round does penetrate the vest, it won't have enough energy to pass through the phone book. So the phone book is a safety measure in case the vest fails...as at least 2 Second Chance vests have done that resulted in officer injury and death.

Take a look at this video. Davis specifically states that he is packing magazines under his vest to "take the shock out of it" because if he didn't, his chest would look like "raw hamburger."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaS_2l8nGdg

So even Richard Davis doesn't even trust his own soft armor vests to be sufficient to stop all blunt force trauma.

Zoogster said
They ended up shooting the second guy in the legs underneath the car, and he took at least 29 rounds in the legs and shins.
Click to expand...

That would have been Matasareau. He was NOT shot 29 times in the legs, though a thigh wound did cause his death. He had wounds to his legs, buttocks, arms, and fingers. In other words, the cops managed to shoot him just about everywhere that wasn't sufficiently protected except they one place they needed to shoot him - the head.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/DYING...O+POLICE:+:+`SHOOT+ME+IN+THE+HEAD'-a083864135

The main thing a ballistic vest does well that a gun cannot do is to provide you with a large area of passive protection from threats known and unknown. For a gun to provide protection beyond simply being a small hard object that might stop incoming bullets, for a gun to be effective, it must be actively used against the threat. This aspect is demonstrated very well in friendly fire incidents where officers manage to shoot other officers in the vest during gun battles. Obviously the shootee officers in these events had no success with their guns in preventing them from being shot.
 
Last edited:
Double Naught Spy,

Have you read anything about why those second chance vests failed, in the two incidents you mentioned?

Were they old, or abused or something along those lines?
 
I am issued a vest by my employing PD, though it is actually paid-for by donated money. I also bought an as-new vest from a guy resigning from a neighboring agency, so I have a spare. I don't normally wear a vest during my time out of uniform, but there are a few times that I do indeed do so. It is armor. If there is time to put it on, and a perceived need, wear it. That is not paranoia, but preparedness.

If I lived in a cooler climate, I might be "prepared" more often. As it is, I fight a heat-related rash on my torso for about half the year, from wearing the vest about 50 hours a week.
 
Last edited:
Double Naught Spy,

Have you read anything about why those second chance vests failed, in the two incidents you mentioned?

Were they old, or abused or something along those lines?
Click to expand...

To start, see...
http://www.bodyarmornews.com/body-armor-news/zylon-bulletproof-vests-not-up-to-task.htm

You can google it yourself and check to see if my recollection is correct, but the vests that failed were less than 2 years of age and had NOT been abused. Turns out that zylon was not a stable polymer when subjected to moisture. This allowed the polymer to break down and lose its strength and as such, its ballistic protection. Both vests failed when hit by calibers for which they were rated to stop. The problem, apparently, was that Second Chance knew of this problem and did not recall the vests. I guess they assumed the Ford Pinto strategy that it would be less expensive to pay off a limited number of injuries than replacing the vests, but that is speculation. They did offer to send owners/officers/departments additional inserts to use in conjunction with the vests or selling their customers new vests at a discount, but were not willing to replace the defective vests. Of course, such inserts would completely defeat the advantage for which people purchased the vests, the thin and lightweight aspect. Zylon was something of a miracle fiber that allowed greater protection with fewer layers, hence more protection with less discomfort.

A class action suit from Texas followed several smaller suits. The class action suit was enough to drive Second Chance into bankruptcy.
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/consumer/second_chance.shtml

There is a lot on THR including this thread...
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=158062&highlight=zylon

and there are several threads on THR related to the matter if you do a search such as
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=203058&highlight=zylon+vest+failure
 
rcmodel
For most of the rest of us normal civilians going about our normal business, it borders on paranoid
Click to expand...
Does carrying a handgun border on paranoid? It is usually during the course of "going about [their] normal business" that alot of people get seriously injured or killed. That is certainly the reason why many people carry a handgun with them.

If you ask someone why they carry a very small handgun in an "inadequate" chambering they might respond, "because a larger one is very uncomfortable to carry ..... " etc. To which another might reply, "If you really think there is a tangible risk and your life is worth protecting ... " and so forth.

Is spending money on a very good or better quality service class handgun, training and practice, developing skills, researching techniques, pursuing a degree of excellence in those regards paranoid? No, I do not think so.

So why should wearing something that increases your chances of survival be viewed as paranoid?

Risks and consequences, comfort and convenience. Personally, in a very hot climate, I would be hardpressed to don a vest for a trip to town or the grocery store. In cooler or cold weather? Much more likely, and it would depend on where I lived, and exactly where I was going etc. But wearing an undergarment layer of clothing that offers ballistic protection makes good sense to me if it is not going to make you overheat.

As for cost, you can get a decent level II or II-A vest for around $400, maybe substantially less.

---------------------------------------------

http://gtr5.com
 
rcmodel said:
For most of the rest of us normal civilians going about our normal business, it borders on paranoid.
Click to expand...
Paranoid? Many of the anti-gun crowd would argue that it is paranoid for a civilian to carry a gun because the probability of needing it is so low. The problem I have with your logic is that if I am in a situation that requires me to use my gun, it would surely be desirable to have a vest too. The gun is active protection and the vest is passive protection. The probability of needing the vest is the same as the probability of needing the gun.

I can see the logic of saying that I will carry a gun because it is comfortable to carry but skip the vest because it is not comfortable to wear. But I would not call someone paranoid if they can manage both the gun and the vest comfortably. I would call them logical.
 
I mentioned earlier in the thread that I wear a vest regularly... It's hot, but tolerable most of the time.

It's nice to see that some people agree with me, and duns said it well, the vest is passive protection where the gun is active protection. I guess a lot of you guys seem to think that you won't be shot in a "situation".

I hope you won't as well. I'll keep wearing my vest to make sure nothing pokes any holes in me that I don't already have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
bullet proof vests
Replies
19
Views
780
Robert Hairless
R
Rockrivr1
  • Locked
Bullet Proof Vest Question
Replies
11
Views
1K
Rockrivr1
Rockrivr1
D
  • Locked
"Bullet Proof Vest For Armed Security" ???
Replies
2
Views
760
JShirley
JShirley
P
  • Locked
Justice Dept. to investigate bullet-proof vests
Replies
9
Views
886
Bartholomew Roberts
B
F
  • Locked
More armor, tougher crooks
Replies
16
Views
847
Jeff White
J
Back
Top