Quote:
Originally Posted by Danth
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Vests aren't all the same and different ones give different levels of protection. The large majority of vests used in daily wear by law enforcement are going to be designed to be proof against commonly-encountered pistol rounds--9mm, .45's, and the like. I never wore one that was proof against more than something like a magnum. A rifle round would've gone right through them. High-power rifles are a different animal entirely, with dramatically greater penetration. They'll shoot through cinderblock walls. Body armor that can resist such rounds exists, but unless things have greatly changed in the past 5-10 years, it's seldom worn on the street due to bulk and discomfort. It's hot and miserable. Even where armor can resist those types of rounds the person wearing it is still likely to be injured from the blunt force of the impact.
Danth
|
Deflect. Waa waa waa, answered the question not. Anywho.
So we had cops complaining they had no gear. Cant go in.
Volunteer law abiding parents trying to use their courage to save their kids hindered and actively stopped from being the good guy with a gun. (Just like you all want and constantly rave about why yas need guns. Agree btw)
As stated before. Off duty, and unarmored, with a borrowed gun was more use. And was not hindered.
You guys be crazy defending these cops. And i know, the cops dont hafta defend you. But did they have to hinder?
Anywho, blah blah body armor is no good. We need guns to protect ourselves fro da gubbament. Libtards suck and NRA wanna protect kids by arming teachers with no body armor... circle begins.