Groin 2 - Body Armor

R

Rick Solomon

New member
I read the "Shoot 'em in the Groin" topic with great interest :O

What I got out of it was shoot for COM unless the BG is wearing body armor. Great advice, and I plan to should the need arise.

But my question is this: Even if the bad guy is wearing body armor, wouldn't a couple of rounds in any popular defensive caliber/chambering/loading knock somebody back at least a little? Wouldn't the BG be absorbing most of the Kinetic energy of the shot?

I'd like to hear from anyone who's been on either end of such an incident. Did it actually knock the BG back at all?

Did it hurt?
 
Big handgun=bruise, no appearant knock back on stastical base of one. Know of others who have taken one in the vest with similar results.

Sam...armed and polite, just ask my skunk
 
Did you ever watch the bank robbery in W. Hollywood a year ago? They were wearing body armour and the 9mm slugs the cops were sending their way were just bouncing off. They kept on comming...
 
To answer the question, to a degree, I used to attend the SECOND CHANCE COMBAT SHOOT -17 years worth - until the shoot ended. At one of the shoots there was a demo of a SECOND CHANCE HARD CORPS(tm) vest. The person wearing the vest was standing on one foot when hit COM with a 7.62*51 round out of a FAL (if I remember the rifle correctly) at about 25 feet.

1: the shootee did not get hurt.

2: the shootee did not tip over or loose his balance

For more information on SC Saves get a copy of their catalog. Since SC is the bigest company in the town: Second Chance Body Armor, Inc. Central Lake, MI should get the request there.

-------

Don't foreget what Bill Hickock used to say "Shoot 'em in the guts, it takes the fight out of 'em."

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"

[This message has been edited by Jim V (edited September 18, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jim V:
The person wearing the vest was standing on one foot when hit COM with a 7.62*51 round out of a FAL (if I remember the rifle correctly) at about 25 feet.[/quote]

Who in their right mind would be willing to stand there and take a .308 round COM just to prove a vest? Certainly not me. :eek:
 
It's the old law of physics - For every action there is an EQUAL and opposite re-action. If the recoil doesn't knock you down when you fire the bullet, why should it knock down the guy the bullet hits?
 
Chris McDermot: It's a question of time - It doesn't usually hurt to accelerate a car from zero to 60, but decelerating from 60 to zero can hurt a lot if you hit a wall!!

All others: Thanks for the input
 
A little empirical evidence here. I’ve never shot a BG and hope I never have to. I did shoot a BD (buck deer) that showed me a little about "knockdown power" The deer was walking just a little left of straight toward me at about 10 feet (yes feet, not yards). I shot him in the front of the shoulder with #1 buck and not surprisingly he fell down. What did surprise me is he fell toward me, not away. The combination of his slight forward speed and having his shoulder broken had way more influence on his direction than the impact of the 12 gauge. If a 12 gauge doesn’t knock them back, no handgun will.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jim V:
The person wearing the vest was standing on one foot when hit COM with a 7.62*51 round out of a FAL (if I remember the rifle correctly) at about 25 feet.
[/quote]

This is a surprise to me- I had read that the vests were primarily designed to handle fire from handguns. I didn't know that there vests out there designed to take a .308.

Munir


------------------
ahlan wa sahlan
PCV Yemen 1984-86
 
Munir and .357SIG: to answer your question, the actual owner and originator of 2nd Chance "stands behind his products" at many shoots. With ceramic insert plates, the vests can stop varying grades of rifle ammo.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Chris McDermot: It's a question of time - It doesn't usually hurt to accelerate a car from zero to 60, but decelerating from 60 to zero can hurt a lot if you hit a wall!![/quote]

True, but there isn't much difference between the time a handgun bullet spends accelerating in a barrel and the time it spends decelerating when it hits a vest.

Also, what knocks someone down is momentum, not kinetic energy. Consider the difference between what happens to a free-hanging side of beef hit by a 50 grain varmint bullet at 3000 feet per second and one hit by a 2,000,000 grain football player at 15 feet per second. Both projectiles have about 1000 ft lbs of energy, but the one with the helmet will swing the beef a good bit further. ;)
 
VDW: Excellent point.

BUT :D

much of the bullet's energy goes into penetration rather than displacement of the side of beef. If you put some kevlar on it (the beef, that is), it would probably swing a bit further. But you're right, momentum is the key.

This is the most fun I've ever had in Physics class.

[This message has been edited by Rick Solomon (edited September 19, 2000).]
 
FWIW, a friend of my wife's was leaving the mall around closing time just before Xmas last year and was followed out by a dweeb with less than honorable intentions. AS the guy was following her to her car about 10 yds behind her, she pulled her little Beretta .25 turned and yelled for him to get the F*** away from her with the gun aimed at the center of his chest. He laughed and made a derisive comment about the popgun and kept coming. She dropped her point of aim to crotch level and said she hoped he would like singing soprano. He suddenly remebered he had other things to do and disappeared. She got to her car, locked herself in, and then went looking for the SOB to run him over (she's kind of a iron magnolia type).

While a crotch shot may not be the most effective tactically, it does seem to have a fair amount of intimidation value on some POS's. M2
 
Mike in VA brings up a good point, but also brings up a change in direction of the original question as to whether or not to shoot the groin. Threatening to shoot someone in the groin is not the same as actually trying to shoot them in the groin. In his example, the threat to the groin was more convincing than a threat to the chest. Keep in mind, the bad guy showed no weapons of his own and was out in the open. You can threaten someone's groin and have a more substantial impact than threatening the chest, but when it comes to shooting, the bigger impact will come from COM.
 
Some people (jury) might feel like if you were able to nail such a specific area on the body that the perp may not have presented much of a threat because he was probably standing still in one place long enough to draw, aim, and then fire. If you have THAT much time, chances are you might be able to escape. Just thought you could use another perspective.

Ben

------------------
Almost Online IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"
http://ben.gunsnet.net
 
In response to the fella who stated a guy was proofing a vest and allowed a guy to shoot him with a 7.62 x 51 (308 NATO)....I doubt it! Without saying too much here, I've done body armor research for the military using both kevlar vests and ballistic plates over kevlar to test low velocity (handgun) and high velocity (rifle) rounds. Kevlar alone with a handgun round will keep the slug from penetrating, but the kinetic, blunt injury imparted usually will at least cause a contusion and at most cause fractured ribs and a collapsed lung. The rounds don't bounce-off. Kevlar alone with a rifle round will fail and the guy wearing it will be badly hurt or dead. A ballistic plate over Kevlar is capable of containing a rifle round up to 7.62 x 39 (AK rounds), but the kinetic injury imparted to the underlying vest and person is considerable. Large contusions, rib and sternal fractures are common. A collapsed lung and a myocardial contusion are frequent (for torso wounds). But either way, the person being shot definitely knows he's hit and usually is hurt enough to be ineffective on the battlefield. The difference made by the body armor is increased ability to survive a rifle round.
 
Richard Davis (Second Chance), inventor and developer of concealable body armor has been demonstrating his product by shooting himself from day one, back when the vests were made out of ballistic nylon. During the years he has suffered any nubmer of contusions but has not been prevented from continuing what he was doing. The first demonstrations had him shooting himself and then shooting bowling pins off a table to show that LEO's could take a round and continue.

As to the demonstration were the shootee took a 7.62*51 round COM on a Second Chance Hardcorps(tm) vest. He was not injured, he was not knocked off balance, he was able to walk and talk and continue after the hit. No medical attention was required. I photographed the event for the shootee since he was writing a magazine article on "bullet proof" vests at the time. I don't know if the article ever was published though.

For more information on the products of Second Chance, the company's history and the number of saves goto: www.secondchance.com

I have nothing to do with the company except for being a long time shooter at the old Second Chance Combat Shoots.

------------------
1911's forever, or at least until they come up with a hand held electronic rail gun.
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top