The utility of armor

Getting hit isn’t fun even with hard armor on, but trauma pads spread the impact widely enough to avoid most injury. ┬áDefinitely beats being able to see daylight through your own torso.

This entry was posted in armor and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The utility of armor

  1. Ray says:

    Only one problem with the “hard armor” Meme: When you need it you won’t have it on. This stuff is NOT concealable armor. You WILL NOT be wearing it every day. If you are reacting to a “mass shooter” or home invader you WILL NOT be running to the car to get this out of the trunk, and even if you have it laying by the bed you won’t have time to put it on. This is combat armor with little to no application outside military or paramilitary service.

    • Y. says:

      Are there really people out there, who’re not involved with say, organized crime, who are so paranoid about crime or mass shootings that they wear body armor?

      • Ray says:

        “Organized Crime”? Are you maybe trolling for one of the Bloomberg anti-freedom groups? Or from some anti-citizen rights cop group? I used to work in a gas station in Louisville ,and wore a Kevlar vest under my shirt every day. There are MANY good , valid , legal reasons to protect yourself with body armor. Its a basic human right. I just don’t think hard armor is at all practical for EDC, and armor is pretty useless if you don’t have it on.

        • Oleg Volk says:

          All true, hard armor makes sense primarily in case of a riot or other civil disturbance from which you either can’t escape or have to break through.

Comments are closed.