Originally Posted by
Naphtali
I honestly think you're trolling now, as every sentence in that post was nonsense. As a one-time courtesy, I'll play along and point out why each one is nonsense, as though you truly don't already know. But after that I'm not going to reply to another post like that. So to answer the "sincere questions" you asked..
"According to your argument, if you needed to fire your pistol, you should have used a rifle"
-- This conversation has been largely about concealability and comfort in normal civilian life in public. You can't run around town open carrying a rifle from store to store without a high risk of being shot by police. In my state, you can be arrested for open carrying any firearm in public, if they plan to argue in court that you were doing so with the intent of terrorizing the public. Neither of those applies to a concealed pistol legally carried with a permit.
-- If you meant not in public, I already said I keep an SBR under my bed for home defense, so in that case your question makes no sense. So you have to be talking about being in public.
"because no person would ever say, “Damn. Good thing I had a pistol instead of a rifle"
-- You are correct. No one who understands guns would ever say that. But it is illegal (and difficult) to concealed carry a rifle in public.
"or good thing I didn’t have a helmet on"
-- Correct. Anyone would rather be wearing a properly fitted lightweight ballistic helmet if you're being shot at. But you can't concealed wear a helmet. If your plan is to carry one in a bag or something, and take it out and put it on it if someone is robbing you, then you're vastly likelier to be harmed than helped by that plan.
"or good thing I was alone instead of traveling with a 4 man fire team"
-- Correct. Anyone in a gunfight would rather have more guns on their side than the opposition's. I'm not sure what your point is. I do like it better when my wife and I are both concealed carrying vs only I am.
"You realize how ridiculous that sounds?"
-- Yes. As stated above, I realize how ridiculous you sound.
"According to your argument, one must wear armor while sleeping because the gun is beside you on the nightstand"
-- No, in fact I stated the opposite, which is that I never wear armor or a gun at home, though both are easily accessible in the event of a home invasion. And that wearing those at home was, in my opinion, more cost than benefit = it doesn't make sense. Perhaps you are confusing the meanings of "no" and "yes".
"Why even wear pistol rated armor? Step up to plates"
-- I've answered this question at least 3 times, but since you're apparently able to read my posts without actually reading them, here is why (again):
1) It is vastly superior ballistic protection than a soft IIIa panel alone vs. all non-rifle firearms, and virtually all non-firearm weapons
2) It is far lighter, and I have a somewhat recent back injury that motivates me to limit weight on my torso. Even without an injury, lighter = greater speed and mobility.
3) It is much thinner and can be concealed under normal hot weather clothing.
and I haven't said this before, but it's a point worth making and was part of my equation...
4) Your likeliest threats in public are pistols by a huge margin, and least likely rifles. You're generally limited to 10x12 in a rifle plate (larger sizes exist but are rare, and due to their thickness you generally cannot fit them in even a large carrier, and in any case their weight is a colossal downside). With pistol plates you can pretty easily fit an 11x14 plate into any Medium or larger vest or carrier, so long as you ask the manufacturer to size the vest 1" longer than "standard." This does not interfere with driving / any seated activity (which would be the primary concern in a longer vest).
a) That's an increase in protected area of 28.33 percent over a 10x12 rifle plate.
b) The organs that gain that additional protection can include:
- the lateral aspect of both lungs. Survivable (barring an unlucky tension pneumothorax + slow EMS response time) but painful and expensive recovery.
- the spleen. Survivable, though losing your spleen makes you likelier to die from common infections.
- the liver. Usually survivable if the hepatic artery is missed.
- the abdominal aorta and its major branches (renal / splenic / hepatic / mesenteric). You'll die in the ambulance.
- the inferior vena cava. Better odds than an arterial hit, but still easy to die before and even during surgery.
- the mid lumbar spine (L3 and L4) = lower extremity paralysis.
- the small intestine / transverse colon. Potential for an ostomy.
And for any abdominal penetrating trauma, there is real post-operative potential for recurrent abdominal adhesions causing recurrent small bowel obstructions that require intermittent emergency lysis of adhesions surgeries for the rest of your life. Permanent pain is also common.
That's a lot of things I'd rather not have a pistol bullet passing through. A rifle plate doesn't work if you're shot somewhere where it's not.
"no person ever said when shot at that they are glad that they had pistol armor instead of plate armor"
-- You're probably correct that no one has ever said that. But if I were shot by a pistol or a shotgun in the lateral 1" or the bottom 2" of my pistol plates - meaning it would have missed a 10x12 rifle plate and actually shot me instead - then this is exactly what I would say.
If I know in advance that I'm likely to encounter a rifle-wielding opponent, then I want my rifle plates or nothing. But for 99% of civilian gunfights, 11x14 pistol plates are vastly superior.
Again, I'm being kind of stupid charitable assuming any sincerity at all in your last post, so please understand if I don't respond to another. I don't mind spending time being helpful to people who are interested in the subject matter, or at least giving them food for thought about my perspectives (even if we genuinely disagree), but I'm not going to waste my time on nonsense posts.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks