Quoted: You are telling me that all guns are equally as dangerous. If they were the "Bullet Proof Vest" you might wear will stop anything. Right?
|
Since many officers are killed with their own pistols, they usually base their choice of ballistic vest protection on the sidearm they carry. If weight & bulk were no concern, most LEO's I know would wear SAPI ("combat armor") or equivalent.
I know no cop wants to look down teh barrel of a gun or find one they may have fallen to. I shot a 30-06 with a cop frind of mine that went through 3/8 inch steel like it was butter at 60 yeards. He even said if anyone pulls out a rifle(after seeing that) he will not stand his ground like he would against a handgun. Not that he wouldn't stand up to the guy and do his duty,but he will think twice because everyshot could be deadly opposed to a handgun where the vest will stop it.
|
While I commend your friend for being aware of tactical considerations, I question his absolute faith in the body armor available today. In addition, many officers have been killed when shots have missed the protection area of their BV's.
Most rifle ammuntion will penetrate BV's - not just Armor Piercing or other "specialty" rounds. That's why when the dems talked about banning all "cop killer bullets" that could penetrate BV's, many folks were concerned that the ban could include such things as .30-.30 soft point hunting ammo.
Of course, our "friends' in congress would never stoop that low, right?
I know your point and kinda agree.
|
The allow me to advise you:
[public enemy]Don't believe the hype! [/public enemy]
|
The idea that "Gun X" is more "dangerous" than "Gun Y" is an example of the divide - and - conquer public relations tactics used by the antis against EBR's and handguns... the so called "non hunting firearms".
Don't allow yourself to be an unwitting accomplice.