Best pistol caliber vs body armor, NO Colorado posts!

[5.56RifleGuy]

Correct. It is stupid that they have additional regulations and paper work attached to them also.

[5.56RifleGuy]

I see you added more to your post.

Irrational fear is often the basis for banning or restricting things, and your case seems to be similar.

There aren't many incidents where body armor is a factor. Wearing body armor certainly doesn't make you invincible ether. It still hurts like hell to get shot. Most of the time there is a good portion of the wearers body unarmored also.

If you are worried about people wearing armor so much then train to shoot low center of mass in the pelvic area or the head.

If you are so worried about it go buy your own armor and wear it all the time.

Then you will be even.

[scrubcedar]

DLiller, I'm a bank rep for a sub prime auto lender, in other words I persuade dealerships to use my bank to finance their customers. Full body armor at work=the ultimate persuader?
You missed my point by a little, it all depended on IF this becomes more common.
You are right about my fear though. This wasn't a robbery his goal was mass murder. I've been close enough to death enough times to get a good understanding of the fact that I'm mortal and be OK with what comes after. Not bragging, not like it's been combat, just an old asthmatic who's lucky to still be here. A similar attack in public that puts my family in danger scares the holy heck out of me.
I really think this thread has pretty much proven that there IS NOT an effective answer to the situation.
I ended up intrigued by the thought that the 7.62 round might give me an advantage against an opponent behind cover, not that it would pierce armor.

[Double Naught Spy]

It tips the balance away from lawful CCW holders who only have a pistol at their disposal to neutralize a threat.

I'd like it to remain legal to own, because I wouldn't want to deprive someone if that's what they want. On the other hand, when paired with a weapon and taken into a public space, where no one else is likely to have it, that's an issue for me. I'm trying to balance the two without advocating an outright ban.

Sorry, but that is ludacris. So you are saying that because a CCW person might not have body armor because they obvious don't want to be bothered with it, that you want to make it a registered item that comes at a high expense to purchase, complete with paperwork and such and that is your solution for laziness.

Yeah, suppressors require special paperwork. Nobody here is really sure why that is a good idea either since they don't hurt anyone. Just because one stupid mistake is being made isn't good justification for making another.

I have a better idea. If you want to keep criminals from having weapons to use in crimes, then why not make it illegal to use guns in criminal activities? That will make it safe for the CCW people because the the criminals won't use guns in the crimes, right?

[5.56RifleGuy]

I apologize. I should have been more clear. My responses were meant to go to testuser in regards to these previous posts.

"If you haven't done so, surf over to Amazon and check out Level IIIa and Level IV armor w/ceramic inserts for sale.

I've been tracking this trend for a few years now. This issue isn't going away and although more advance bullet designs exist, they certainly will not be made available to civilians. Body armor is only going to get more effective and less expensive, even now, a good level IIIa vest isn't much more than a Glock.

I'd like to see body armor become an NFA item, just like machine guns, descrtutive devices, short barreled rifles, suppressors, etc. Tax stamp, LEO sign off, fingerprints, and a very involved background check for each plate and vest.

I went through the process myself, frustrating, but doable and probably not something a would-be-criminal, even with a clean record would attempt."

and


Quote:
Me:

"So let me get this straight.

You want body armor to become an NFA item, even though there is no possible way that body armor can hurt someone.
Suppressors can't hurt anyone, either. They have to be paired with a weapon to do that.

Why?"

Testuser:
"It tips the balance away from lawful CCW holders who only have a pistol at their disposal to neutralize a threat.

I'd like it to remain legal to own, because I wouldn't want to deprive someone if that's what they want. On the other hand, when paired with a weapon and taken into a public space, where no one else is likely to have it, that's an issue for me. I'm trying to balance the two without advocating an outright ban.

How many CCW owners that have armor will be wearing it in July in public, unless they're LEO?"

OP, if you want to carry a full size handgun you feel is capable of taking out someone in body armor, by all means, do so. That is fine with me, and it wouldn't matter even if it wasn't.

I think most LE agents wear vests, but still manage to be killed in gun fights.

Vests leave many areas unprotected. Use your imagination.

[FredKenpo]

As to which rounds would penetrate a person in Level III or lower body armor? Heh. We all saw that armored bank robber get back up after being knocked down by a conventional round. But knocking someone down means you can then kick his liver, stomp on his kidneys, chop his knards. He's not getting up. G. Gordon Liddy, when rogue cops were a worry, said always aim for the head of the SWAT team breaks into your house. Same thing goes for if a crazy person breaks into your school, the modern threat.

I will stick with my .357 Magnum; the experts I've talked to say "Yes, no, maybe" as to its effectiveness against conventional body armor, and yes, I will aim high.

Accuracy is always important.

[bt380]

Would be interesting to hear some ER types chime in here on pelvic girtle hits for a bad guy or chick in commercial body armor. How crippling is a bladder hit? How long before hypotension sets in so they can't stand if a femoral artery/vein is hit??!!?? Figuring the likelyhood of a BG standing still while you take aim for a above the chest hit is low.

[Moby]

I carry a Glock 30 SF .45 ACP with Hornady Crtical Defense Rounds.

Obviously carrying armor defeating rounds is a bad idea. Hit a un amored bad guy and two poeple behind them would fall.

Get hit with a .45 ACP Hornady Hollow Point round and even wearing armor it would be like getting hit with a mallet. A BIG MALLET.

Ribs would break, organs could rupture, and the BG would indeed go down.
You might have to pop him 4-5 times but at that point he's disarmable and out of the fight.

[JohnKSa]

Ribs would break, organs could rupture, and the BG would indeed go down.
You might have to pop him 4-5 times but at that point he's disarmable and out of the fight.

That may sound good, but it is not consistent with reality.

Mark Wilson shot Arroyo with a .45ACP pistol during the Tyler Courthouse shooting--some reports say he scored multiple hits. Arroyo did not go down and was not impaired. When Wilson's gun ran dry, Arroyo walked over and killed him.

But knocking someone down means you can then kick his liver, stomp on his kidneys, chop his knards. He's not getting up.

Even if we assume (with plenty of evidence to the contrary available) that a pistol round will consistently knock down a person equipped with body armor, the idea that a defender will be able to approach close enough to attack the downed attacker physically is optimistic, at best. An armed person on the ground is still capable of killing anyone who approaches him.

[jason_iowa]

17hmr. The guy in CO was not wearing body armor he had a ballistic vest big diff. 500smith will knock the chocolate out of ya and break some ribs but so will a 44 mag 357 mag 45 acp many others. If you want to penetrate body armor you need 223/556nato and up. Many pistol versions out there for home defense. You can still pick up an SKS for a fairly good price. They are cheap and fun to shoot and will defeat most body armor.

The hips are extremely vascular as well as debilitating if struck. Its not a cns shot they are going to be able to shoot at you but they wont be able to chase you. It would be my 4th choice head/spine/heart&lungs/Hips/liver/femur/ etc e tc.

[colbad]

Most people do not armor the head or groin areas. Obviously a head shot is a show stopper. However don't forget about the groin. Breaking the pelvis girdle or severing the femoral artery will put him down pretty quick as well. Shot placement is the key.....or you can keep moving up from a .500 to RPG to a Stinger. I vote for shot placement.

Although you will probably not be walking around with a shotgun, but if available that would be my choice. If you can hit a clay target on the move you most likely could hit a head size target w/ 00 if given the shot. Also a slug to the chest will leave a mark even w/ body armor. Same point as above for a pelvis shot w/ 00.