Police going back to 9mm?

[Norsesmithy]

It's armor that resists a few specific IIIA threats according to National Institute of Justice testing. Specifically the benchmark threats for IIIA are .44 Mag JHP @ 1400 FPS, and Nato Pressure 9mm Subgun ammo (124 grain FMJ @ 1400 FPS).

IIIA armor is going to comprise most soft unconcealed vests, and a few of the heavier and less comfortable concealed vests. Level III will have some hard armor component, and protect against more penetrative threats, and Level II will be lighter, more comfortable, and less protective.

BulletProofMe.com does a decent job explaining it in their FAQ

[farmerj]

From your link:

Level II is often worn by police officers. A great balance between blunt trauma protection, versus cost, and thickness / concealability / comfort. What we recommend most often..

[Norsesmithy]

Level II is probably the best combination of tolerable to wear and protective. The thicker and stronger the vest, the less comfortable, hotter, and stiffer it is, and the less likely you are to put it on.

[justaguy]

Wow, talk about a thread gone horribly wrong.

I'd hate cops, but I really just about hate everyone that I don't hate. Some are doctors, nurses, firefighters, engineers, I really hate that crazy guy that works early mornings at the gas station by my house. The night shift lead setup guy pisses me off on an almost daily basis, and my Quality Inspector and I have a hate-hate relationship. Not every cop is a gun toting, bullet proof vest wearing, para-military abuser and oppressor of your rights.
Not to say I wouldn't bust a few heads if I were in their shoes. Everyone you know could be a criminal and violate your rights, who knows, maybe your cat is lookin to mug you too.

Pretty much everyone at work is hated, they hate me too, we show it on a daily basis.
Do I **** with the people under me? yep. And they do it to the people under them, etc.
If we didn't abuse each other, we'd wonder why someone hated us.

I like the way you think Warner, I'm going to be watching you.

[justaguy]

Level II is probably the best combination of tolerable to wear and protective. The thicker and stronger the vest, the less comfortable, hotter, and stiffer it is, and the less likely you are to put it on.

You wear a vest a lot, do you?

[Norsesmithy]

Nope. Did for a short while just out of curiosity.

I am thinking about a carrier and a plate, though, for when I am dragged along to a public range instead of being able to shoot at the AR-500 steel targets in my back yard. That, and I figure if the Huns ever decide to get back in the mood for a Sack, I can toss on a plate carrier as I sling my rifle.

Plus, FERFal says it's good stuff to have, and his advice just strikes me as pertinent to the world we live in

[Pinnacle]

Level II is probably the best combination of tolerable to wear and protective. The thicker and stronger the vest, the less comfortable, hotter, and stiffer it is, and the less likely you are to put it on.

Drifted again, but nicely played!

Remember this - when you are putting on 18 or 24 layers of anything under your shirt in a hot climate, you are going to roast FULL STOP.

The ballistic explaination is about close enough a definition of NIJ3A. If anyone would like to know more about Ballistic Vests - start another thread, and we can have an interesting and civil discussion on the matter. There are all sorts of things to know about personal armor.

I only know because personal armor is the business that I have been working in for more than 8 years or so and other ballistic materials for the last 15 years.

[farmerj]

My point and direction for the drift was that a 9mm carbine (hello, 9mm ammo) for LEO's would likely be sufficient firepower in the majority of the situations that an officer would end up in.

It likely would have been as effective in the Hollywood shoot out as an AR15.

Again, it plays into the budget constraints more departments and communities are finding themselves in AND it provides the equipment that an officer would need.

I did not see those performance comments made towards the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP when I researched this before.

[justaguy]

Nope.

It shows.

[Norsesmithy]

My point and direction for the drift was that a 9mm carbine (hello, 9mm ammo) for LEO's would likely be sufficient firepower in the majority of the situations that an officer would end up in.

It likely would have been as effective in the Hollywood shoot out as an AR15.

Again, it plays into the budget constraints more departments and communities are finding themselves in AND it provides the equipment that an officer would need.

I did not see those performance comments made towards the .40 S&W or the .45 ACP when I researched this before.

Perhaps, perhaps not. One Swat officer who had made the dubious choice of selecting frangible ammunition for his rifle reported that when he shot Emil Mătăsăreanu in the areas of his body protected by armor, that he was not penetrating the armor.

The autopsy seems to confirm this.

Now frangible practice ammo is not something that is tested for under the NIJ standard, so we have no way of knowing if frangible .223 is a level II or IIIA threat, but I'd bet it's still on the dangerous side.

And I don't know that the cost savings between an AR-15 and a 9mm carbine are going to be enormous unless you go with something like a Hipoint.

[farmerj]

The cost saving come in support equipment.
one magazine fits rifle AND pistol.
one ammo fits carbine AND pistol.

No separate ammo pouch. They are the same.

Instead 10 magazines for each weapon, each officer gets 15 of one style.

Instead of a dept buying 50k pistol and 50 k rifle, they buy 100k single round. Discount in quantity.

Frangible ammo is by design not intended for penetration. It's supposed to fragment on impact. I'd love to see a shot made on a typical carhart, insulated flannel shirt combo to see what type of penetration it would have.

[Pinnacle]

In 5.56 it aint a pistol threat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NOT WITH ANY BULLET save a paint marker round.... Frangible 223 will kill you so fast in a vest and cause an injury that is nearly impossible to fix..... Devastating on soft targets beyond your wildest nightmares.... Like a sandblaster traveling 3000 fps... And yes it penetrates soft targets... Skin is soft...

[farmerj]

I can believe that.

I see a "frangible" bullet even if it is compressed metal as similar to thin skinned varmint bullets, explosive.

[Snowgun]

So Pinnacle,

I think I"m getting the gist of what you are saying, but I'm still confused as to what you are trying to say via ball vs SD.

Let say we are talking about 9mm. If the choice was between NATO powered Ball and SD ammo, and they were being put in the same places (on or near target), I would argue that it would be better to go for the SD. You yourself said that it will penetrate sufficiently (possibly through), so you are not loosing anything there. I"m saying that what you gain by the SD is that it will be less likely to ricochet or come out the other side with 100% weight (and shape) retention plus most of it's speed. This in my opinion equals possible issues using ball ammo, so my point is why risk it? (Hell, why not use a 9mm frangible round?, though I don't know how that would penetrate...)

[Terry]

Everyone you know could be a criminal and violate your rights, who knows, maybe your cat is lookin to mug you too.

Guess thats why people shoot cats...