Could someone please help me out....

M

Miss Demeanors

New member
I have been doing some research about the cop killer bullets that Judy has described. I am trying to finish an email to her. I found these 2 websites that contradict eachother. To be honest, I dont know a thing about bullets and was wondering if you could explain what these sites are saying. If you have any more sites that I could include in my email to her please post them!
<A HREF="http://www.ca-rkba.org/ncrkba/nccda-ullet.htm]http://www.ca-rkba.org/ncrkba/nccda_bullet.htm[/URL" TARGET=_blank>

www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/apammo_hearings.txt</A>


I hope I typed these right!!!!!

[This message has been edited by Miss Demeanors (edited July 11, 1999).]
 
Sorry Miss D, the links didn't work.

Ok, about "Cop Killer bullets", Several years ago a company was marketing teflon coated brass bullets which could penatrate the common body armor worn by police. These bullets were resticted to law enforcement only and not avalible to the general public. The antis got wind of them and went completely nuts. All the usual anti BS about them being avalible to anybody, designed just to kill LEOs etc. They invented the term "Cop killer" just to add to the hype. Basicly they lied their butts off and created a new "evil" that didn't exist.
The truth is that many magnum handgun rounds and almost any centerfire rifle cartridge is poweful enough to penatrate body armor. Body armor is not the magic sheild many think it is.

I'm sure that others in this forum can give you much more detailed info. Truthfully, I really don't remember all the specifics of the matter.

Somebody help me out here and give Miss D the hard facts.
 
The second one works but I have no clue as to why that first one wont go through. I am trying to provide Judy with some links that will back up what I am stating to her. But if the link doesnt work it cant help now can it! :)
 
For what it's worth,

I tend to believe the first link and what they have to say more that the second link. Partly based on other things I have read when deciding what to carry for self defense. The the second link reads more like someone who is emotionally repeating something they heard, than someone who researched the facts.

Jon...
 
Some interesting things I noticed in the
transcript of the hearing.

Armor piercing ammunition (APA) was A-OKAY
when it first came out because most LEOs
didn't wear body armor in the 60s-early 70s.
Then soft body armor became prevalent, but it
was inadequate for stopping APA, so those
bullets needed to be banned. That's like
issuing LEOs Polo shirts, and saying "Now
that cops are wearing more Polo shirts, there
is an urgent need to ban all bullets that can
penetrate Polo shirts." How about making more
effective bullet-proof vests?

Both sides presenting their case in the
hearing stated that the POLICE should have
APA because more and more CRIMINALS are
using body armor in the commision of crimes.
Well, exactly who do they think those
crminals are commiting crimes against? What,
are they charging into police headquarters to
bust out their buddies? Are they walking up
to uniformed LEOs and saying "This is a
stick-up"?

As Congressman Biaggi pointed out, there had
already been two LEOs killed by the deadly
"cop-killer" bulllets. As I recall,
neither of those cops were wearing body
armor.

The moral of the story is: Train for head
shots.

-boing

PS- Nice to hear from you Miss D. "Keep
fighting the good fight!"

[This message has been edited by boing (edited July 11, 1999).]
 
The "cop killer" bullets that started the entire excitement were made by KTW, from the initials of the inventors, all were connected with law enforcement. The wanted to manufacture a product that would allow police officers a means of "reaching" a criminal behind some object that would stop normal ammunition. The product was never sold on the open market, even though I would suspect that officers may have sold rounds to friends outside the business.

There never has been a proven case where the ammunition in question was ever used to murder a police officer. There were reports of a New jersey officer being murdered by felons using the ammo, but the reports had him being shot in the head. In that case any ammunition would be a "cop killer" round.

The anti gun people were screaming that the stuff was invented and sold so that people could kill cops. The press was some of the biggest offenders, much like the "news casts" that had a semi-automatic rifle being fired with full auto fire dubbed in or where they had a police officer shoot a watermelon with his service pistol round (a hollowpoint) which caused the melon to explode but they showed a military lookalkie rifle being fired. The imprerssion was the rifle round caused the melon to blow up.

Hope this helps, Miss D. Keep us posted.



------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"
 
The term "cop killer bullets" was assigned by the media to any bullet that can penetrate an officer's bullet-resistant vest. Note I said resistant and not proof. There is no such thing as a bullet-proof vest.

A bullet resistant vest gets its properties from tightly woven synthetic fibers that have a very high tensile strength when layered several times in a typical bullet resistant vest. What happens is the vest fabric causes the bullet to deform and spread its energy over a wide area and thus not penetrate the vest. The wearer of the vest will often sustain bruises and in rare cases injury to the bones, but it is much better than the alternative were the recipient totally unprotected.

The media whipped hysteria rose to a frenzy when it was revealed that a "typical" cop killer bullet was coated in teflon. The belief being that the teflon acted like a lubricant and allowed the bullet to "slice" through the vest like a hot knife through butter. In truth, the teflon coating was designed to protect the rifling of a pistol barrel from excessive wear caused by the bullet's extremely tough design.

The characteristic of all pistol bullets designed to penetrate a resistant vest is a very hard steel or tungsten core, most often pointed. Such material will resist being deformed when striking the vest and the pointed nose, concentrating all of the energy in a small area, succeeds in overcoming the tensile strength of the combined layers of the vest fabric. The same steel or tungsten core causes excessive barrel wear, hence the teflon lubricant coating.

Any bullet resistant vest can be penetrated by a bullet of sufficient mass and velocity. Most vests worn by police officers will stop commonly encountered handgun rounds. They do not do well with rifle rounds because rifle bullets travel at a much higher velocity and the energy at impact exceeds the tensile strength of the vest.

Oh, it is possible to manufacture a vest to stop rifle rounds, but they are much heavier than vests police officers currently wear. So, officers give up protection to have a vest that is somewhat comfortable to wear in hot weather.



------------------
Bruce Stanton
CDR, USN-Ret.
Sgt., Kings Co. Sheriff - Ret.
 
Ok guys I am still confused. Are you saying that really there are no such things as these "cop killer" bullets? That one link claims there is no evidence of such a bullet. I am thinking that if there is such a bullet two things, one that more police would be concerned, and two if it is true than the vests need to be made better. I understand that there are different types of vests, I think Jeff OTMG said that SWAT teams have a certain type of vest that will protect from certain types of bullets. But it seems to me that someone is trying to make a bullet seem alot worse than what it actually is. I really havent heard any police officers stating that this type of bullet needs to be banned, therefore it is to my belief that they dont exist. I just am trying to understand where Judy is getting her information from, according to her police are very worried about this. I havent seen that anywhere. I have started an email to her and have some links to back up assualt weapons that I think are going to stump her, then I am going to ask her to send me some links on where she has been doing her research. So far I havent found anything that she says to be true. When I finally get it all together I will post it here. Thanks all for your help!
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>"...it seems to me that someone is
trying to make a bullet seem alot worse than
what it actually is."[/quote]

You are correct, Miss D. That is exactly the
case here, and with just about every other
issue the antis have latched onto.

-boing
 
Miss D,
"Cop Killer" bullets are a non-issue to most police officers I know and work with. In fact I'd have to say that they are a non issue to ALL of the officers I work with.

They have never come up in any officer survival classes or discussions I've participated in.

Most of the body armor in general use can be penetrated by just about any round out of a rifle. The only thing the "cop killer" bullet issue did was to educate the public, including the criminals, that we wear concealable body armor. Until this issue hit the media most of the public wasn't aware of how prevalent body armor use was. So in my opinion the whole arguement endangered officers more then the existance of the infamous KTW bullets. Forarmed with the knowledge that LEOs wear body armor the criminal can do just as boing suggested and "aim for the head".

I think you'll find that by and far most working police officers don't fear law abiding citizens owning guns or any kind of ammo. How ever the chiefs of a lot of large departments are on the gun control bandwagon. They are the ones stating the police are worried about "cop killer bullets". The working officers for the most part are very pro-gun.

You might ask why the chiefs can have such a different opinion then the officers who actually deal with this on the street, there's one easy answer...money. There are grants and other political favors returned for this support. Rob (from the forum) is a fellow member of LEAA. (Law Enforcement Alliance of America) A very good organization composed of police officers and individual private citizens. LEAA can give you the facts about how the officers who stand behind the president when he announces on of these inititives are paid to be there by there departments as part of their duties. They are not there because they support the legislation. I believe on or more Virginia officers are suing their departments and chiefs for forcing them to particpate in these dog and pony shows.

Another thing you might notice is that very little of this legislation is supported by Sheriffs. Why you ask? I most cases Sheriffs are elected. In many locations this would be bad politics. That's the same reason a some rural Sheriffs departments don't have radar in their squad cars. Might be bad for reelection if the deputies were too agressive writing speeding tickets.

Jeff
 
Where the so-called "antis" are concerned, reason or facts matter not at all. "Cop Killer Bullets" was a phrase jumped on by the anti-gun movement. It was so beautiful. Who could vote against banning cop killer bullets? No one in their right mind. It was a simple wash in the senate and in the house. Practically unopposed, and another chink in the armor of the 2nd fell pretty much overnight. You must understand fully, that there are those in government that want the guns, all of the guns out of the hands of "We the People". They will continue until they succeed. They have all the time in the world. They live for events like the Columbine shooting to further their cause for them. You notice how quickly they responded full of energy and fight to further their political agendas on blood of the dead of Columbine? They didn't even hesitate! Not for 5 minutes. For shame!

Cop Killer Bullets? What nonsense. It is an infringement, pure and simple. Never mind that before this issue was raised, KTW rounds were never used to kill a Law Enforcement Officer who was wearing body armor, never mind that by bringing a full flung public debate to the issue gave a full education to anyone paying any attention at all, to the safety proceedures Law Enforcement utilizes to protect themselves. All the baddies who otherwise may not have known, now know to try and get a headshot.

All of these matters are fine for polite discussion, but I know for a hard fact that an armed citizen is a serious deterent to crime, first hand, hard fact. Not a relative sort of mental exercise kind of statistical analysis.

The right to keep and bear arms, like all human rights, exists independent of the Bill of Rights. The government has no authority to infringe on these rights.

Allowing the "government" access to small arms that are denied the people is an infringement, BY DEFINITION. Look it up.

Arms control is as old as society, it is the tool of oppression, this is historic fact. Crime is as old as history, it exists independent of arms. The only correlation between arms and crime is the better armed the population, the lower the violent crime. I mean crime, I don't mean active warfare like the Middle East. This is historic fact, it has always been this way, it is this way, and all empirical evidence strongly suggests it will remain this way. There is no counter argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top