Join BayouShooter For Free
CS

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Got body armor?

  1. #1
    Donít troll me bro!

    User Info Menu

    Got body armor?

    This has come up a time or two in the past and yes, they’d love to ban it for certain, but is this gonna happen anytime soon? I just know when the lefties start asking ‘why would anyone need a ————‘, we have to fight to keep it or kiss it goodbye. For years armor was simply touted as being for law enforcement/military use only and then it wasn’t really made available to the public. All that changed over the past 30+ years and now you can get most anything if you have the cash or Bitcoin.
    So what now? Psych criminal shooters are wearing it now so they’re gonna take it from everyone? So you can’t protect yourself or your family? And what about the armored school bag inserts? Can’t send my children to school with any form of protection?
    Some politicians need to go, from top to bottom if that’s the case.

    https://youtu.be/9dmWOmySvWM

    Little long but great points throughout the vid.
    Last edited by Magdump; September 6th, 2019 at 09:02 AM.
    Doesnít play well with TROLLS...

  2. #2
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    Just another in the long line of absurd reactions from the anti-gun side. You mean to tell me Schumer, et al believe they can tell us what we can and canít WEAR?! Unbelievable. Completely believable.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    This will never pass. States are currently ADDIGN laws allowinf for body armor.

  4. #4
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    I would have to be pretty dang worried about my safety to put on a vest. Being built like the Jolly Green Giant I have to consider the massive amount of torso still exposed which only decreases the appeal. All that before I consider humidity, and my natural tendency to sweat even when itís cold. Throw in rifle plates and we are talking mobility reduction.

    My lifestyle the potential need doesnít come close to the drawbacks, but there is no justification for banning or limiting access that I will accept as valid.
    Last edited by Bangswitch; September 6th, 2019 at 12:04 PM.

  5. #5
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Bangswitch View Post
    I would have to be pretty dang worried about my safety to put on a vest. Being built like the Jolly Green Giant I have to consider the massive amount of torso still exposed which only decreases the appeal. All that before I consider humidity, and my natural tendency to sweat even when it’s cold. Throw in rifle plates and we are talking mobility reduction.

    My lifestyle the potential need doesn’t come close to the drawbacks, but there is no justification for banning or limiting access that I will accept as valid.
    Good points.

    For large dudes, remember, we are not trying to cover the whole body (I mean that would be great iun a perfect world), but the intent of protection is the vitals. Everything else is expected to get medical aide in plenty of time.

  6. #6
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    If the bubment believes we are all in danger because the evil guns keep killing people innocent people then they should issue every law abiding citizen body armor. Actually guns and armor to protect themselves. It’s not a privilege, it’s a right.
    Those who live by the sword, get shot by those who don't.

    Tim

  7. #7
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Bangswitch View Post
    I would have to be pretty dang worried about my safety to put on a vest. Being built like the Jolly Green Giant I have to consider the massive amount of torso still exposed which only decreases the appeal. All that before I consider humidity, and my natural tendency to sweat even when itís cold. Throw in rifle plates and we are talking mobility reduction.

    My lifestyle the potential need doesnít come close to the drawbacks, but there is no justification for banning or limiting access that I will accept as valid.
    The military considers armor acceptable if it reduces mobility approximately 30% per layer (VA math). So basic soft vest reduces the troop to 70%. The plates reduce it 30% of that, 21%, to 49%. Add in side plates, DAPS, and the cowboy collar / codpiece and youíve got a troop whoís barely more maneuverable than an upturned turtle.

    Thatís why a bunch of SOF units got exceptions to wear only plate carriers, and why most of us donít wear one bigger than a medium. I used to wear a large COTS Paraclete vest with a medium front and side plates and a small back plate.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    Marksman

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by El Pozzinator View Post
    The military considers armor acceptable if it reduces mobility approximately 30% per layer (VA math). So basic soft vest reduces the troop to 70%. The plates reduce it 30% of that, 21%, to 49%. Add in side plates, DAPS, and the cowboy collar / codpiece and you’ve got a troop who’s barely more maneuverable than an upturned turtle.

    That’s why a bunch of SOF units got exceptions to wear only plate carriers, and why most of us don’t wear one bigger than a medium. I used to wear a large COTS Paraclete vest with a medium front and side plates and a small back plate.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yeah ain’t that ironic?

  9. #9
    ESSAYONS

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by El Pozzinator View Post
    The military considers armor acceptable if it reduces mobility approximately 30% per layer (VA math). So basic soft vest reduces the troop to 70%. The plates reduce it 30% of that, 21%, to 49%. Add in side plates, DAPS, and the cowboy collar / codpiece and you’ve got a troop who’s barely more maneuverable than an upturned turtle.
    I'd like to see that study. We wore the IBA with DAPS. We didn't have the side armor and most didn't wear the cod piece. While our maneuverability was reduced, it was not even remotely close to to the decrease you're talking about.

  10. #10
    Seriously Misunderstood!

    Premium Member

    User Info Menu

    The only legitimate reason that I can see for civilian body armor is an armed insurrection. Now whether that is from the outside or the inside doesn't matter. But even then, if you are not fully committed to actually take up arms against another person, why bother?

    Am I missing something?
    Remember; The 2nd Amendment Protects the 1st!
    Lyndon Johnson (Democrat & Father of US Welfare System) we'll give them stuff........."and have them ni&&ers voting democratic for the next 200 years!"
    "I'm a self reliant, self supported American trapped in a "Free Shit" society!"
    Be Warned! Amazon.com is Skynet!
    PLEASE STOP USING GOOGLE!
    I don't believe in a supreme deity; but have to believe Trump's win was Divine Intervention!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •