This is a discussion on .45 vs Body Armor within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Main Category category; Originally Posted by xenawarriorcat and you know you been there if the shakes start 30-minutes after it's over. amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...
No one can criticize you even if they have been there. Everyone will face a shooting situation in a diffrent manner some as you do some as I have. I must admit to eating my fair share of dirt over the years with 9 1/2 years in the military and 25 years in the Police Department.
P.S. Be safe out there, your job is to come home to your family each night after shift.
I asked the owner of our range if he could start a class for training against a perp with body armor and shooting at it with tear gas going off?
He told me if I get a list of 50 signatures from people interested he will check into it.
No disrespect Sir.
But there are lots of incidences, where a person with no training acts in self defense or in defense of another. used deadly force and killed the attacker in horrible conditions. In home breakins , armed robberys, rapes and other attacks, Late at night in the dark, just waking up! After a rape, being beaten
and other times when the victim was not prepared. They just act. never under hvy fire no armed forces training. just people. Thats a fact. with training a person should be better at it than the not trained.
Old women and old men have killed their attackers. Young kids have defended themselfs.
humans have had training to stay alive. from apes to us we were fighting to get here.
Every day someone fights back! The only thing I want is our leaders to stop trying to make self defense unlawful. most of the people will not fight back but there are a lot that will. thats why there are sheep, Guarddogs and wolfs. and then there the GOVERMENT.
May? Could? Might? Not good enough answers to the question. Velocity and energy and shape relate more to the penetration, IMHO. Depends of course on what you call body armor. If we are talking the newest and best on our soldiers in war, nothing will penetrate of any calibre that is currently available to you and I. If you are talking "less structured" body armor I can only think of the exotic ammo produced for the FN5.7X28; extreme high rifle-like velocity, high energy and rifle-shaped bullet. There have been recent battles with ATF over this exotic ammo because it is armor piercing. Mexican druggies like it for just that reason. It is not, to my knowledge available to you and I but maybe some LEO personnel can get same.
If its Kevlar it can fail after repeated shots in the same area. Plate armor No! Plate armor can take a mag of 308 to it and not give but it has to be body armor plating not your moms frying pan sewn into your vest! Lol
”Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.”
The Aurora shooter was NOT wearing body armor. He was wearing a tactical vest. Receipts of his purchases confirmed this. The libtards harassed the company that sold these products. And the company apologized, for no reason other than to appease a bunch of trouble makers.
Beware the Fury of a patient man.
In short, that one receipt that's in the public domain is not proof that he was unarmored. It's not even proof that he wore that particular vest in the assault. At this point, it's nothing but a meaningless factoid for which we have no further context to evaluate its significance from.
I pray for peace. Peace and justice. If we can't have both, I choose justice.
6,000 rounds of ammunition; which was more like 3,000 in 5.56mm with pistol and shotgun ammo added in: is no big deal of a purchase. Unless you live in one of the anti-Second Amendment States e.g. NY, IL, CA. Anybody that is a frequent shooter, usually has a few thousand rounds in various calibers, for the firearms that are used most frequently.
The MSM has a pretty poor track record of delivering the facts as provided, or knowing the subject matter.
Eyewitness statements by people in a dark, smoke filled movie theater can be erroneous, due to the insufficient light and viewing conditions, and insufficient knowledge of what a ballistic vest actually is.
To put it succinctly, the police are probably the only ones that know definitively, because they have the evidence (tagged, bagged and logged I hope) of what he was wearing at the time.
Beware the Fury of a patient man.