Flak jackets

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Caliburn

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
142
Location
Colorado
Those old GI flak jackets might stop some pistol rounds but definitely not all. Are the ones that go through them slowed down or pre-expanded or anything? Would a second vest stop those rounds, or would they still be unaffected and zipping right through?

Not that you'd wear two of the heavy and bulky things. Maybe if crackheads are doing a home invasion and are trying to shoot through your bedroom door, could you put 2 jackets against the door and be safe? At least to buy enough time to ready your home defense howitzer?
 
The PASGT vests are somewhere in between level I and level IIA. In other words, not very good. I suppose it's better than nothing, but I wouldn't guarantee that until I talked to a wound ballistics expert because the vest could do more harm than good in some cases.
 
"Flack Vests" are designed to stop unstabelized projectiles. You would be better off, in your proposed scene, to have a metal door.

But step back and consider - even crackheads enter for a reason - to get money or 'stuff' to trade for money. They do not come in to kill. Unless you are targeted individually, why would they hang around to get into a shootout? They want to grab the money and run. Let them have the 'stuff' and they will bail out & run away.
 
Flak jackets are designed to stop shrapnel, and cushion the impact of rocks or other debris from explosions. I cant find the link, but i believe someone died a few months back, when they thought the vest would stop a pistol round. They work great for thier purpose, but wont stop rounds.
 
2 points: I find " Let them have the 'stuff' and they will bail out & run away." Trolls invading your home need only erradication thank you! Such sheeple mentality is....

____Better suited to publication in the Rollingstone or the New York Times. ______________:barf: :barf: Second point is the old flack vest from Vietnam definitely stopped .45acp, Ball I know because we would shoot at an old one when we goofed off! 9mm and all rifle went thru. This was not true of the older canvas vest with ceramic plates that the USMC used in early VN. That sucker would not let anything under battle rifle fire thru, but was really heavy and clunky.
 
Last edited:
After seeing this post, I went down into the' "Room", and pulled out my old flak vest. Man is it ever heavy, I'd say 3X as much as any of my IIIA concealable vests. On the inside the following is written on the factory tag...."BODY ARMOR, FRAGMENTATION PROTECTIVE VEST, GROUND TROOPS".

Several years ago when my dept. was hosting a body armor seminar, I asked several of the reps about the ballistic qualitys of the flak vest. If memory serves me correctly the answer was the ballistic material used in the flak vest was a type of kevlar wool. Not the same process or even the same material used to make the panels in modern concealabe body armor.

As others have posted, The reps. all said the flak vest's main purpose was to defend against shrapnel. We took a panel out, placed it into the clay mould used for testing and shot it with a .22LR out of a rifle barrel. Zip! right through the flak panel.

BTW... modern concealable armor designed to stop handgun rounds works great against shrapnel threats, but is much more expensive to make.
 
Another example of why flak vest is not for incoming rounds, my national guard unit when on a homeland security mission, wore level IIA body armor every day, and added the flak vest for a few times of increased security alerts, or when in fear of explosives. Two totally different products, both work great for their individual applications.
 
Gordon, if you want to kill someone for stealing your toaster, you go ahead. I an neither a sheeple, nor an avenging angel, sent to scour earth of the evildoers. I'll save my lawyer fees for having to defend my life, or the lives of other innocents. And I have defended my life, and been through a "wrongful death" lawsuit - it's not fun.

Once again, people need to make reasonable, informed decisions. I don't feel it necessary to armor my bedroom door. Your choices may vary. But in a risk/benefit anylsis, for most people, a layered defense outside the home, and the mental preperation, training, and tools to defend life inside the home, offers more real protection for your dollar.

Each of us needs to evaluate the real threat, factoring in both the possibility and the probability of a given event happening. Then, put your effort and money on countering the most likely threat.

In some places, and some cultures, home invasion is a real threat. If you are a major drug dealer, who keeps his drugs and cash at home, you increase the odds that either your clients, competitors, or the police will come calling. If you work for some big corporation in a cubical, it is a very low probabilty event. But a random break-in, between the hours of 3-5PM (when kids are out of school, but you are still at work), is a higher probability event.
 
Burn,

For less than the cost of a high-quality pistol, you can buy a good kevlar vest. If you are thinking about this stuff for a reason, go buy one. Anyone who thinks they can't be hit in a gunfight is ... well, not quite right. Cheap insurance, and not nearly as heavy as the old flak vests. Still hot as heck, and not something you want to wear all day, but believe me, when your choices are bad and worse, bad looks pretty good. I wear a fairly heavy kevlar vest fairly often these days, sometimes for more than eight to ten hours. Sweat is a small price to pay for the increased security.

My best advice: Retire the flak jacket, and spend a few bucks on a really good kevlar vest, if you feel the need.
 
I have actually shot a military flak vest that was surplus from the first gulf war. This was at least 10 years ago now and I don't remember the specific details. We leaned the vest against something so it was sitting up like someone was weraing it. I believe it did stop a .22 LR out of a handgun, and I remember an AR15 went right through both sides (front and back). I remember we tried 9mm and .45 ACP; I know it fully penetrated the front but don't remember if they also went through the back or not. I do remember that if you had been wearing it, you would have been hit with anything other than a .22lr out of a handgun.
 
I'm sorry, but an armed crackhead home invasion when I'm at home qualifies as imminent deadly peril in my book. If I can get out, fine, but my preference would be to find good cover and kill them all before saying a word. If your life is in imminent peril you do not need to give a warning or stumble bum around trying to find an exit. Indeed if there is true imminent peril doing so would be extremely foolish. If there really isn't imminent peril, and a warning would work (as with unarmed intruders, kids, etc), then you really don't have just cause to shoot anyway. To paraphrase Tuco from "The Good, The Bad and the Ugly," if you've got to shoot, shoot. Don't talk. :D
 
although a flak vest thread is probably not the right place to debate this. I am not trusting my life to home invaders. To invade is to give me complete legal and moral license to destroy the threat A strong room is highly reccomended by all professional security people,and yes I have for my families benefit steel dead bolted bedroom doors along with entrance doors and anti intrusion landscapeing.. Actually you are wrong in your thoughts about home invasion , it is one of the most likely situations to end in homicide or worse! I quess if all you own is a toaster , and you vote socialist it contains some validity to you. 12 years ago my neighbor 1/4 mile away was home invaded for his gold stash, oops quess his wife and him hospitalized for the wounds they recieved AFTER giving these magot goblins what they wanted was some how better than the sudden, violent reaction they would have recieved around here. I would rather die than be violated , sorry if being being an unreconstructed patriot somehow offends your sensative compliant approach.:p
 
Gordon, I agree the odds of injury are greater in a home invasion, but the odds of being targeted for a home invasion are lower. Unless, like your friend, you keep quanities of valuable, easily fenced, goods in your home, like gold. Home invasions are also more common among the Vietnamese and other Oriental subcultures in our country, who tend to mistrust both banks and the police, and thus are likely to have quantities of cash/gold/jewlery at home.

As I posted earlier, make an informed decision. Your post made it sound like you would leave a secured area to hunt down and shoot anyone in your home. That's your choice. It's not one I would reccomend, but, you do as you wish in your home.

I have no need to defend my choices, or try to insult you in the process. I have used deadly force, and had it attempted against me. I don't need your approval of my courage, or my actions - I was tested, and was not found wanting. And the civil case against me was dismissed, with the dismissal upheld all the way to a Circuit of the Supreme Court. So, I won on the street, and I won in the courts.

Avoiding a use of force is part of my plan to reduce risk to my family, physical, emotional, and financial risk. If attacked, I will fight back with all the means and training in my not inconsiderable "tool box". But if I can avoid all the follow on problems, I can save, at the least, thousands of dollars.

Your choices may vary. Good luck, and, if you need a Court Certified Expert in Use of Force, have your lawyer call me.
 
I would invest in steel doorframes and solid steel exterior doors. These will hold the guys out of the house to begin with. Nasty thorny bushes under windows will help too.

Flak vests stop just flak. They MIGHT if you're lucky stop pistol rounds (weirder things have happened) but they're not designed to. The current-issue Interceptor vests will stop pistol rounds, but without the strike plate in them, won't stop rifle rounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top