Maybe this is more of a physics question but is there any discernible advantage to two layers of body armor? For example, I have IIIA soft body armor and the carrier has an extra pocket for adding plates. I don't have plates but do have an extra soft armor vest that is also IIIA. Even if not making it more effective against more powerful ammo, would it be more likely to hold up against multiple hits?

In before Gecko45 copy pasta.

No, I don't think double stacking soft armor does anything useful beyond making youpuffier.

Planning on getting shot?

Mall Ninja?

Basically any thin plate is going to do a lot more than adding a second layer of soft armor. And there's some pretty cheap options out there.

CS78 said:

---

Basically any thin plate is going to do a lot more than adding a second layer of soft armor. And there's some pretty cheap options out there.

---

Yeah, like a good pair of running shoes!

Gilligan said:

---

Planning on getting shot?

---

Yeah, it'd be nice to know why he's asking that question. Sounds kinda nefarious.

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

MaxPower said:

---

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

---

As someone who has been shot at a lot there are very specific conditions where one would be in that situation. Other than military or law enforcement, what situation do you see yourself in requiring this?

MaxPower said:

---

Maybe this is more of a physics question but is there any discernible advantage to two layers of body armor?

---

Dr. Fauci? Is that you again?

MaxPower said:

---

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

---

Hunting with Dick Cheney

Old RV Ag said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

---

As someone who has been shot at a lot there are very specific conditions where one would be in that situation. Other than military or law enforcement, what situation do you see yourself in requiring this?

---

So everyone on the OB that owns armor is up to something nefarious? I take it you didn't watch the news at all in the last 18 months? Why do you even own a gun if you don't believe you might need to use it in a possible future event?

I'd rather have and not need than need and not have. Private ownership of armor is something the govt could likely easily legislate away.

As I understand it the plates are intended to provide the protection against bullets (whatever caliber they are rated to) and the woven fabric (Kevlar) is your primary protection against shrapnel, knife attacks, the products of a plate strike and distributes impacts. You need both to actually be protected.

denied said:

---

As I understand it the plates are intended to provide the protection against bullets (whatever caliber they are rated to) and the woven fabric (Kevlar) is your primary protection against shrapnel, knife attacks, the products of a plate strike and distributes impacts. You need both to actually be protected.

---

If the Kevlar "plate" is rated by the NIJ, it should stop up to the rated threat level without a hard plate. These are typically pistol calibers.

Hard plates are generally needed to stop rifle threats. Steel plates, really need some type of backer/trauma plate for the reasons you mentioned. Most ceramic/polymer plates are rated to be stand alone and don't require a backer.

MaxPower said:

---

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

---

anyone here live in Houston, SA, DFW????? ...odds arw going up every weekend

txyaloo said:

---

Why do you even own a gun if you don't believe you might need to use it in a possible future event?

---

Nailed it.

Pretty disappointing to see a bunch of Karen style posting this close to Independence Day.

Old RV Ag said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

---

As someone who has been shot at a lot there are very specific conditions where one would be in that situation. Other than military or law enforcement, what situation do you see yourself in requiring this?

---

I don't know maybe a situation where OP thinks he will be getting shot at. Do you think that everyone who owns armor is a criminal?

If i try and buy an F-15 at an airshow am i up to something nefarious?

Baron Von Flag Smasher said:

---

If i try and buy an F-15 at an airshow am i up to something nefarious?

---

I lost my F-15 in a boating accident.

LoudestWHOOP! said:

---

Baron Von Flag Smasher said:

---

If i try and buy an F-15 at an airshow am i up to something nefarious?

---

I lost my F-15 in a boating accident.

---

Time to upgrade to a used F-16!

Back on topic:
In a country (world) that is increasingly trying to take guns away from it's legal gun owners (but not criminals), why not at least be able to take a shot in the back while running away?

javajaws said:

---

LoudestWHOOP! said:

---

Baron Von Flag Smasher said:

---

If i try and buy an F-15 at an airshow am i up to something nefarious?

---

I lost my F-15 in a boating accident.

---

Time to upgrade to a used F-16!

---

Can I buy an evil black F-16 from Eyeguy?

LoudestWHOOP! said:

---

Back on topic:
In a country (world) that is increasingly trying to take guns away from it's legal gun owners (but not criminals),

---

After *gestures vaguely at the last year or two*, its hard to take seriously anyone who still wonders why a "civilian" needs things like ARs and body armor.

"There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at with no result."

Winston Churchill

BenderRodriguez said:

---

---

This is how you show up to a knife fight!

4 said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

---

Hunting with Dick Cheney

---

One of the times being wounded in Nam was from a mortar shell that left a shrapnel splattering on one side. Whenever someone sees the scars and asks what happened, my response is "just a little bird hunting with Dick Cheney"

As for why OP wants/uses body armor, maybe "nefarious" isn't the correct word as I never intended to imply OP was a criminal - if one is wearing body armor regularly or heads to places thinking you need it (and you're not LEO or military), then I do believe it is a valid question of why put yourself in that situation. And, please, spare me the "criminals" as that would mean wearing it everywhere all the time which is overkill. Even as special forces, retreating to live to fight another day is wiser than bullheaded to stand one's ground with likely a bad outcome. A good shooter will take a headshot or disable you where the armor isn't. And to Bender - nice hyperbole to lump in ARs to my question.

Okay, carry on with the Karen and other silly comments

when i used to work in purchasing, one of our international clients ordered some kevlar body vests. one of the senior purchasing agents was all giddy when the delivery came to the warehouse. Our boss was a big gun guy and had the reputation around the office. When those vests came in, senior agent guy was 100% about to let our boss shoot him with the "bulletproof" vest on. Why? I have no idea.

The concept of physics just doesnt exist in some peoples minds i guess.

Old RV Ag said:

---

4 said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

And to Bender - nice hyperbole to lump in ARs to my question.

---

---

---

Wasn't directed at you specifically, just a general observation about people who are still questioning the utility of either these days. But since you seem to be taking it personally, maybe it applies to you too. Don't know, don't care.

But between your posts in this thread and the comments in the latest .308/6.5 slapfight thread about how people who use semi autos can't shoot....

Well, don't get offended by people calling you a duck if you won't stop quacking, ya know?

BenderRodriguez said:

---

Old RV Ag said:

---

4 said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

And to Bender - nice hyperbole to lump in ARs to my question.

---

---

---

Wasn't directed at you specifically, just a general observation about people who are still questioning the utility of either these days. But since you seem to be taking it personally, maybe it applies to you too. Don't know, don't care.

But between your posts in this thread and the comments in the latest .308/6.5 slapfight thread about how people who use semi autos can't shoot....

Well, don't get offended by people calling you a duck if you won't stop quacking, ya know?

---

You've got thin skin or no sense of humor - or both! - if you think my comments in the .308/6.5 was nothing other than joking around.

As for my taking the comment personally I didn't in the way you think but your comment was in response to my question. Anyway, I'm the same as in don't care.

But do lighten up Francis!

Not implying the OP is planning a heist but this was the first thing I thought of.

Old RV Ag said:

---

You've got thin skin or no sense of humor - or both! -

---

Lol.

Okay.

People with thick skin and a sense of humor don't typically get all wound up about a stranger calling them a Karen online when they post Karen things, but whatever floats your boat man. Have a good one.

Old RV Ag said:

---

4 said:

---

MaxPower said:

---

Dunno why it sounds nefarious. Why would anyone even own body armor to begin with if they didn't believe getting shot was a possible future event?

---

Hunting with Dick Cheney

---

One of the times being wounded in Nam was from a mortar shell that left a shrapnel splattering on one side. Whenever someone sees the scars and asks what happened, my response is "just a little bird hunting with Dick Cheney"

As for why OP wants/uses body armor, maybe "nefarious" isn't the correct word as I never intended to imply OP was a criminal - if one is wearing body armor regularly or heads to places thinking you need it (and you're not LEO or military), then I do believe it is a valid question of why put yourself in that situation. And, please, spare me the "criminals" as that would mean wearing it everywhere all the time which is overkill. Even as special forces, retreating to live to fight another day is wiser than bullheaded to stand one's ground with likely a bad outcome. A good shooter will take a headshot or disable you where the armor isn't. And to Bender - nice hyperbole to lump in ARs to my question.

Okay, carry on with the Karen and other silly comments

---

For the record I value your opinion over the local Seal Team 6 wannabes.

so


does this guy get a pass or not?

Ned Kelly?