Bullet Proof Vest Penetration

Discussion in 'Politics & Law' started by Grizzled_Bear, Feb 7, 2009.

  1. Grizzled_Bear

    Grizzled_Bear Registered Member

    Sorry, this is another gun thread.

    We are all probably familiar with the phrase Cop Killer Bullets. Are certain cartridges inherently too dangerous for the general public?

    What are the lines that we should draw? Is it okay to have rifles that can penetrate body armor but not pistols? Is there any credence to the argument that deer don't wear bullet proof vests?
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 7, 2009

  2. BigBob

    BigBob Registered Member

    I read Penetration and automatically my mind went to the gutter, lol.

    ..but anyways, no matter what we say here Pro is going to find a way to make them seem as if they're not that bad (nothing against him, but I'm just stating the fact.)

    I believe hand guns (that are normal guns, not these 'autos' and what not) are all that should be allowed to be had by the public (with the exceptions being hunters). It's just my opinion. But do you really think that a law stating you can't have a certain gun is really going to stop the people who want one from getting one? I don't think so.
    pro2A likes this.
  3. Nightsurfer

    Nightsurfer ~Lucky 13 strikes again~

    Bob you totally miss the point of the OP, it's not about the guns this time it's about the ammo.

    Should "Cop Killers" AKA Teflon coated bullets be allowed to be purchased and owned by the general public?

    No I don't think the GP needs these kinds of bullets.

    After talking to pro the other day I found out it really doesn't mater about Teflon coated bullets AKA "Cop Killers". Any high powered rifle or gun can go through the officers armor anyways. At least that is my interpretation of what he said.
  4. Grizzled_Bear

    Grizzled_Bear Registered Member

    The Teflon coated bullets never actually existed. They were coated with molybdenum to reduce friction and fouling in the barrel. Winchester sold them under the name Black Talon and as hollow points were specifically made to not penetrate through things. They got so much bad press from them that they pulled them from the market voluntarily only to bring them back under a different name, SXT. The firearms community always jokes that it stands for Same eXact Thing.
  5. ScottOnly

    ScottOnly Registered Member

    Yes, I truely believe that John Q. Public needs the best ammunition and firearms that money can buy. All I know is that if every good person learned to properly handle a firearm it would take alot of balls to commit a criminal offense. Especially if that person was using ammunition more capable of a one shot kill.

    Sorry, but if someone robs my house I'm not going to wait 5 minutes for the cops to show up.
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2009
  6. pro2A

    pro2A Hell, It's about time!

    Night you are correct in what I said. Basically any common rifle round (yes even from non "assault weapons") can penetrate steel. Do you think a shitty vest that can barely stop a handgun round could stop a .270?

    Look at the ballistics.

    A .270 is designed for traveling long distances, in order to do that you need a larger bullet and more punch to push it strait longer to reach the target.

    A .270 shoots at 3,603 ft/s and hits with 2,595 lbs per sq/ft. Most police vests can withstand a common handgun round and would be torn to shreds by a simple .270

    A .45 caliber handgun round was designed for power at close range. Therefore it packs a punch because of it's size, but needs to not over penetrate due to it's use in close quarters. It only moves at a poky 1,060 ft/s, a third of the speed of the hunting round above. It only hits with 412 lbs per sq/ft. As you can see it has nothing to do with "armor piercing" anything. These are just catch phrases to outlaw regular rifle rounds.

    Most police wear Type IIIA body armor (or lower). Anything above that is used for the military.

    A simple look at ballistics will tell you that unless you have on military grade body armor anything that shoots above 1,500 fps is gonna go thru you. Anything above 1,500 fps as I have covered is any non-handgun round. It would be stupid and impossible to outlaw all rifle rounds as 90% of them would penetrate standard armor.
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2009
  7. Stab-o-Matic5000

    Stab-o-Matic5000 Cutting Edge in Murder

    I agree that rifle rounds shouldn't be outlawed. My question is why are cops not given body armor that can stop a hunting rifle or a shotgun slug? Considering both of those are pretty easy for you to get your hands on, wouldn't it be common sense that criminals would use them, and that a cop should therefore be protected from them?
  8. pro2A

    pro2A Hell, It's about time!

    I think you aren't getting what I am getting at here. Maybe police understand that "Assault weapons" and rifle rounds aren't used in crimes all that much. Most of what they deal with are illegal handguns and knifes. Why kill a fly with a mallet?
  9. MAgnum9987

    MAgnum9987 Do What Thou Wilt

    That's always fun!
    OMG I hate the TEFLON MYTH! Teflon only reduces wear on the barrel, and only a slight increase in velocity. The slight difference in material doesn't change any ballistics.

    No such limits should not be imposed on the public. Their are only a few readily available (and practicle) handguns that are so called cop killers. Such guns include the Five Seven, and the .500 MAgnum
    FN Five-seven - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    YouTube - Watermelon vs. 50 caliber S&W M500 500 magnum
  10. Stab-o-Matic5000

    Stab-o-Matic5000 Cutting Edge in Murder

    I understand that. My argument is that if these bans are sold as being about preventing people from killing cops, then wouldn't the logical thing to do to protect the lives of cops from ammo that can pierce their body armor be to give them better body armor?

Share This Page