Topic: How much body armor is too much?

Locke · March 28th, 2006

yup that comment was made in ignorance, ill admit that.
i didn't even think about heat stroke and you made some damn good points PJ.

i retract what i said. (but will keep it there so people reading the thread can follow)

so let me get this straight:
the main type of body armour given to soldiers in iraq is guaranteed to stop a round from a pistol, but not one from an AK, which (from what iv heard) is the most common gun overthere. is it worth having bodyarmour that wont stop most rounds and impedes mobility or are they used mainly to stop the soldier being injured by shrapnel and to give the soldier a sense of personal safety (which may be a false one)?? and why, with all out technological advances, haven't we been able to make something which is bulletproof against higher calibre rounds, and breathable and able to be mass produced.
(id just like to point out a bit of aussie history, the bushranger Ned Kelly covered himself in iron plates when he went out and did his business. i understand this made him essentially bulletproof and scared the shite out of the cops who couldn't kill him. eventually he was hit in an unprotected area in the end and captured. But yeah, slow and bulletproof actually worked for a whlie for him!)

re bullet tumbling, is it a myth or reality, i would have thought at the speeds they were travelling once a bullet hit a body it would have gone straight through. it would take something pretty dense to be able to deflect a bullet through human flesh, right? im asking this with no knowledge of the subject, please inform me!

March 28th, 2006
Locke Tribuni Angusticlavii	yup that comment was made in ignorance, ill admit that. i didn't even think about heat stroke and you made some damn good points PJ. i retract what i said. (but will keep it there so people reading the thread can follow) so let me get this straight: the main type of body armour given to soldiers in iraq is guaranteed to stop a round from a pistol, but not one from an AK, which (from what iv heard) is the most common gun overthere. is it worth having bodyarmour that wont stop most rounds and impedes mobility or are they used mainly to stop the soldier being injured by shrapnel and to give the soldier a sense of personal safety (which may be a false one)?? and why, with all out technological advances, haven't we been able to make something which is bulletproof against higher calibre rounds, and breathable and able to be mass produced. (id just like to point out a bit of aussie history, the bushranger Ned Kelly covered himself in iron plates when he went out and did his business. i understand this made him essentially bulletproof and scared the shite out of the cops who couldn't kill him. eventually he was hit in an unprotected area in the end and captured. But yeah, slow and bulletproof actually worked for a whlie for him!) re bullet tumbling, is it a myth or reality, i would have thought at the speeds they were travelling once a bullet hit a body it would have gone straight through. it would take something pretty dense to be able to deflect a bullet through human flesh, right? im asking this with no knowledge of the subject, please inform me! __________________ If I am asked what we are fighting for, I can reply in two sentences. In the first place, to fulfil a solemn international obligation . . . an obligation of honor which no self-respecting man could possibly have repudiated. I say, secondly, we are fighting to vindicate the principle that small nationalities are not to be crushed in defiance of international good faith at the arbitrary will of a strong and overmastering Power. Author: Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry Asquith Source: Statement, to House of Commons, Declaration of War with Germany, Aug. 4, 1914