Fathers Create Bulletproof Backpacks

Status
Not open for further replies.
What in the world...

You guys are busting this guys chops for developing something that might save a kids life. And yet, all I hear is this is paranoid, blah blah.

And yet, you all conceivably carry guns. Is that also paranoid? Since kids are not allowed to carry firearms, what do you suggest they use on the next round of whackos? Harsh Language?

Yes, it might not work. They might not have it, the bad guy could shoot em in the head, etc.... Isn't that the same arguments the Antis use against Concealed Carry?

I have seen articles where some people on this board have a bulletproof vest next to the bed in case of trouble. How is this different?

So, get off the dude's back. If this saves a kid's life someday, I will applaud like heck.
 
Hope it deosn't get stolen

:uhoh:
Sorry dad the school bully (or dealer, or gang) stole my bullet proof backpack.

@ $300 each that would be a problem. :uhoh: not to mention the usefulness of these backpacks to gang members.

I wonder if these are legal in NJ I thought it was illegal for non-LEOs to wear body armor here?
 
I wouldn't have needed one of those last year with all the welding projects I kept in my backpack :eek: my math teacher decided to weigh it one day for a problem and it was 58lbs :D
 
Its coming to this now?? or are these guys trying to make a buck by installing fear.

I actually applaud these guys. By gun grabbers keeping schools gun free they prevent student and teachers from being able to defend themselves. These fathers are demonstrating just how unfair the deck is stacked in favor of the criminals.

Their marketing is also actually rather intelligent. Gun grabbers use events like Columbine and VT to drum up their own fear saying their is a problem with guns in schools. The only way gun grabbers can claim that these guys are marketing fear is to admit their isn't a problem.
 
Let's say you wanted the equivalent protection, and didn't care if it was a built-in slick store job: what would you do, and how much would it cost?

I have no kids, but I do go to classes, and sometimes carry a backpack :) (Usually a messenger-style bag, though.) I sure wouldn't mind a bit of bulletproof material roughly the size (in length and width) of my large textbooks -- but not a half-inch plate of steel.

timothy
 
I see no problem with the idea on principle. The people marketing this are simply filling a need. The sad state of affairs is the this need exists. Even if this guy is spectacularly successful and sells a million of these the odds that even one of them will save a life are minimal at best. But if it gives someone peace of mind than more power to them. The money spent on these could almost certainly be used in better more effective ways but the politics of the moment often prevent that.
 
Like the members on this forum that Carry almost 24/7 even inside their own home. It's a 2 way street. The paranoid parents who are thinking of Bullet Proof Backpacks are just as psycho as the paranoid High Road member who carrys inside his own home.


I see 2 big differences.

One, a gun on the hip causes no harm, the user must choose to use it in a moral or immoral manner. Regular backpacks overloaded with books are harming our children, adding more weight on the off side maybe it will help is doing more harm.

Two, a gun on the hip gives you the ability to decisively deal with the situation in a corrective manner. The bulletproof packpack still leaves you at the mercy of the attacker.
 
I think I saw this here before...

Aren't Bullet Proof Backpacks from the guy who's defensive plan involved taking several rounds of .308 in the back...

All kidding aside, if the backpacks are kept lightweight I don't see how this could hurt.
 
Last edited:
Like the members on this forum that Carry almost 24/7 even inside their own home. It's a 2 way street. The paranoid parents who are thinking of Bullet Proof Backpacks are just as psycho as the paranoid High Road member who carrys inside his own home.

But at least those of us that carry in our own home are realistic. Bulletproof plates in backpacks are worthless. Home invasions can happen in a heartbeat, and you might not have time to think of where the nearest gun is, remove it from the drawer/wherever, remember how to work that specific gun. Does it have a safety? Is it ready to fire? All that stuff is hard to think of when you are being invaded. Carrying your carry pistol with you is the easiest, and safest way.

Oh, and this could be relevant: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot31.htm
 
"Policital Correctness and conformity has taken the fight out of far too many Americans (and their kids). "Now shut up and eat your salsbury steak! Is that a G.I. Joe? You are going to jail for that young man!"

I can't blame the guy for wanting to protect his kids to the best of his ability. It's just a shame that they take away people's claws but give them a claw-resistant coat to protect them from the first swipe or two while they are curled up in the fetal position."

+1

We ALL know the best weapon is inside your head. We need to teach our children to use it. Teachers with guns? Fine. Bulletproof backpacks? Fine. In the end though, it will be your child's survival instinct that allows them to live. We in America have openly flaunted Darwin's rules (the strong survive) and have developed workarounds that let the weak survive. "Now everybody gets to survive."

Until they don't.

We have been assailed by too many feel-good things in our lives. No one looks at reality anymore. A gun is not a magic wand. One shot will not always kill. That's Hollywood, not reality. You have just as much of a chance to live by fighting back any way you can, even if you don't have a gun. Guns are simply tools we use to fight back. But if you don't have one handy, you'd better be able to use something else. Guns can make people stupid when they rely on the gun instead of the grey matter.

Our children don't know how to fight back. It is our job to teach them.
 
I see 2 big differences.

One, a gun on the hip causes no harm, the user must choose to use it in a moral or immoral manner. Regular backpacks overloaded with books are harming our children, adding more weight on the off side maybe it will help is doing more harm.

Two, a gun on the hip gives you the ability to decisively deal with the situation in a corrective manner. The bulletproof packpack still leaves you at the mercy of the attacker.

But at least those of us that carry in our own home are realistic. Bulletproof plates in backpacks are worthless. Home invasions can happen in a heartbeat, and you might not have time to think of where the nearest gun is, remove it from the drawer/wherever, remember how to work that specific gun. Does it have a safety? Is it ready to fire? All that stuff is hard to think of when you are being invaded. Carrying your carry pistol with you is the easiest, and safest way.

Oh, and this could be relevant: http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot31.htm


Guys, I wasn't arguing the difference between the two tactic wise. I'm just making a point that both sides are paranoid :)

The fathers may be paranoid so they want bullet proof backpacks. But so are those that carry inside their home which should be safe. Why would one need to carry inside his house? Do they not keep doors and windows locked? etc. In fact, it makes more sense to defense your kids at school than to be at home with a gun on your hip all the time. In fact the latter is more crazy imo :)
 
A a retired school administrator, I find this all interesting. This story has two parts:

PART ONE - Above story and a country-wide discussion concerning the merits of the device (as we are having on this site).

PART TWO (coming in September) - Thousands and thousands of angry parents who purchased these backpacks only to find out that most middle and high schools (probably almost all) no longer allow packpacks in the classroom (some allow mesh ones) and will not change their policies. These policies were mostly initiated after Columbine and, like it or not, they have prevented all kinds of unwanted items (some dangerous stuff, but mostly distracting stuff) from entering the classroom.

I sure hope parents (and the media) would research their own school's policies before making any purchase decisions. Part Two ought to be really interesting. I am glad I am retired.
 
Heh, anyone remember that video where the kid "hides" like 12 or so guns on his person including a MAC-10 and a shotgun? It was a terrible and slanted "demonstration" but my point is that anyone can get a pistol into class with them if they want to.

http://www.usshootingacademy.com/training/specialcustom/512/

I'm not sure how I feel about this one. On one hand it seems a little paranoid (this place sounds like mall ninja heaven when you read about the various courses) but on the other hand, a lot of the stuff covered in this particular course is useful in and out of school.
 
Seems like a dumb idea. First, backpacks (at least in my school) were always stored in lockers with your books, except for the books you need for that particular class. So, most of the time the kid is separated from the bookbag. Second, fleeing kids are more mobile and hence faster if they just leave their bags behind. If the kids think they need to all get their bags in an emergency, it will dramatically slow their escape... think of it like a fire drill. You're told to leave everything behind.

I haven't researched the shootings, but I would guess that not a single kid would have been saved by these bookbags. Kids are shot in classrooms, lunchrooms, hallways, etc and I bet most of them didn't have bookbags anywhere nearby. Kids bookbags also are subjected to harsh conditions that will degrade kevlar rapidly; water and sunlight. The cost is also rather high and I doubt many families can afford something that silly and preys on the fears of gun violence.

As I've said before, the best alternative is either armed guards or, better yet, concealed carry for adults/teachers in schools. The best defense is a good offense in these gun free zones.
 
I love the guys who trumpet "arm the teacher" as the perfect solution for school shootings.

What if the teacher doesn't want to be armed? What if they don't practice? And, hell, even if they're hardcore gunnies, what happens if they get shot? Everybody's too busy deluding themselves with good-guy-always-wins movie fantasy to consider that pesky reality thing. :rolleyes:

I am frankly flabbergasted at the amount of teeth-gnashing that goes on here every time a shooting in a no-guns zone happens - "victim disarmament zone" and all that BS - yet someone comes up with something unobtrusive (and legal) and it's ridiculed? Why?

It's not like these things are twenty-pound ballistic-plate monstrosities. If something a student is required to carry around anyway can give a little bit of unobtrusive protection, where's the downside? Harris and Klebold roamed the halls shooting people - kids will have their backpacks there at least. No, it's not ideal protection (especially if you're going to make the average psychopath into an uber-gunnie in your mind as usual and theorize about all the tactics he'll use) but I think a full-Kevlar bomb-squad suit might be a little more conspicuous.

Yeah, what a bunch of paranoid wackos. I bet they take loaded guns to the grocery store, just in case.

Dear God, do you even think about what you're saying?
 
I see nothing wrong with it, but I don't think it is needed. However, most of the time most of us don't really need to carry, or have our home defense gun loaded and ready. Being prepared (even just partially prepared) for something that will probably never happen to us is not a negative thing.

Is it ideal? No. Might it buy a kid a few extra seconds, seconds that either let him/her get away, or stop the attack? Of course.

I do think sending your kid for Judo or Tai Kwan Do training would be more useful though. Teach a self-defense mindset, teach skills that can be used if the opportunity arrises (of course, in a shooting situation, I'd rather my unarmed future kid just gets out of there), and it will also protect against more likely scenarios (the local bully trying to beat your kid up, some local toughs trying to hurt him/her, some guy trying to assault your daughter, etc.).

Every teacher should be issued a Glock 19 and taught how to use it.

No way, I hope you are joking. Seriously, I'm a teacher and if they tried to issue Glock 19s to me and other teachers, I'd go on strike! I'm holding out for a nice 1911 or SIG ;)

On a more serious note, I'd prefer allowing CCW by teachers and administrators, even encouraging it, but I don't think it should be required. Either way, we aren't cops who would go on coordinated offensive operations, we would simply be acting in defense of ourselves and our students. I very much doubt we'd need to have standardized equipment. We wouldn't need to be able to exchange mags, and make the teachers responsible for maintenance of their own guns, no need for standardization to make life easier for some armorer out there. Give us vouchers good for $600 or $700 (it would cover most service and CCW pistols out there), if we want something more expensive we can pay the difference, and let us choose what we want. Schools can set minimum standards if they want (i.e. minimum number of rounds, DAO, DA/SA only, any action allowed, minimum barrel lengths, only guns on a pre-approved list to avoid low quality guns, etc.).
 
They really need to stop using the words "Bullet Proof"

I think a more realistic term should be "Ballistic Velocity Reduction Gear"
 
Ceramic inserts for schoolbooks! If the students hugged a book to their chest as well as had one in their backpack, then they'd have front & back protection! During lunchtime & recess, kids can make little forts out of their books!

Could this "Father" be Gecko45?
 
If I am to believe what I have read in this thread, apparently having a gun (somehow) makes you bulletproof and is just prudent. A child having a backpack with a bullet-resistant panel in it, OTOH, is stupid, paranoid, useless, anti-2A, COMMUNIST!, and makes the Baby Jesus cry.
I've been teaching since 1985. Kids carry backpacks. Having books in said backpack makes for an even higher level of protection while the kid tries to unass the area.
This is the same board, isn't it, where we had so much chest-thumping and territory-marking all about "MY KID ISN'T GOING TO DIE IN A SCHOOL MASSACRE BECAUSE I TAUGHT HIM TO RUN...NO MATTER WHAT ACTION PLAN THE SCHOOL HAS IN PLACE BECAUSE I KNOW BETTER!" Hell, you'd think a loving parent would want his child to have some kevlar on hir back whilst fleeing the scene.
Crimoney. Jeebus Krishna protect me from my allies. If it doesn't involve the "good guy" having a gun, it can't possibly have any value...right?
 
I know I'm certainly not the first one to have the idea, but I did have similar idea. I even posted about it on a thread where someone was asking for other ideas on what would you do if you were in a VT type situation...

http://thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=3314131&postcount=34

Hmmm, if I had the resources... I see a morbid but possibly real opportunity, at least sales to the more affluent parent...

A Kevlar style backpack, possibly reinforced on one side (the flat side) w/ a plate of some type. Then, the zippers unzip all the way around and when you do this, additional material is let loose so you can slip it on as a vest (if you've ever seen any convertible/portable clothing that can be zipped up to be their own carry bag, or temp rain suit for golfers, you'll know what I mean) velcro straps to secure it around the body.

I admit it's kind of out there, but it could be done, so it doent' help the guy getting 'sucker shot' but if you hear gun fire you could drop your bag, unzip it and slip it on if you were in a place where you didn't have a free getaway (otherwise you would have already gotten away) while it wouldn't help at point blank range, it might help if you had to try a counter attack, or had a chance to get away but knew you might still get shot at in the process.

Just thinking out loud.
As for practical things you'd already have at your disposal, I can't think of too many things that would help a sitting duck except to not be a sitting duck, move, run, or if your stuck somewhere barricade yourself in the room and/or have a plan to attack the gunman once he enters, grab a flagpole (do they still have those in class rooms?), break a chair leg off, a broom handle, find some glass that's not safety glass (if that's possible) and break it, tie it w/ some clothing around a stick, find a bottle of something flamable in a janitor's closet or lab, and throw a molitaf (spelling?) cocktail at him, find some other chemical and throw it in his eyes when he comes in the room, wet down the floor w/ soapy water and some how encourage him to run into it fall on his ass and jump him or hit him w/ one of the above, fire extinguisher to the face, or if strong enough hit him over the head w/ it as he enters the room, i don't know, still thinking out loud...

Basically think "home alone" w/ higher stakes, since it's not a movie you're in.

Karz

So, I was thinking a little further down the road w/ it, like not just make a backpack that has some bullet resistance, but actually make it convertible to be more effective to protect front, not just on your back, and have an option to slip a plate in it for more protection. Again, not for the sitting duck as much as for someone trying to do something, defend, get away, might provide some protection, or at least help get the nerve up to try something smart, like defend or flee...

I don't know what these guys' product looks like, but I think you could make something like this be cool, and not everyone has to know what it is, just don't put a 5.11 tactical tag on it.

I don't fault these guys for trying this, hey if there's a market for it, go for it. It's just like a dude on Rush the other week, he sells something w/ his company that helps other companies save big money on their power bills, paying for their equipment many times over. He was stuggling w/ the idea that he doesn't want to play on people's fear that their product will stop global warming, and wants to sell based on the cost savings to the companies, because he doesn't agree politically or scientifically with global warming. But the reality is, he doesn't have to be over the top about it, but if someone wants to buy it for environmental reasons or fiscal reasons, I say let em buy it, if it's a good thing, and they see value in it.

Same w/ this, if people want it, let em buy it. I don't encourage them to play on people's fears out of proportion, and would encourage to fight for more rights to self defense in these 'safe zones' but in the mean time, I see this as another layer of survival security.

Hey, if I hear shooting down the hall of any building, even if I was armed, but especially if I wasn't, and I had something nearby that had bullet resistant qualities, I'm gonna grab it, and then do whatever I need to do, wouldn't you?

Karz
 
You know what's funny?

All the arguments against the backpacks-- Heavy, imperfect protection, won't work for head shots, doesn't fit with the dress code, would slow someone down while fleeing, hurt their back, millions will be sold but few will save lives, and so on-- I've heard them before.

People said all the same stuff about "bulletproof" vests when they were first being marketed to police departments. but that turned out okay, didn't it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top