This is crazy and really goes against all firearm safety rules.
Still, they do prove that a .308 is not enough to knock you down, although it makes perfect sense.
Obviously the shock and internal damage of a bullet entering the body with no energy absorbed and distributed by a vest is going to have much greater effect.
Stumble
Bookmark
Digg
Reddit
Hi, welcome to my blog! This blog is dedicated to all things firearms related. I hope you enjoy it.
I want this blog to appeal to a worldwide audience and so I will be focusing on firearms and shooting rather than country specific politics. There are already many great blogs defending your rights!
Please feel free to contact me at this address:
- Steve Johnson
wow…these guys are nuts. and irresponsible. but man they trust those vests.
Geez, what a couple of mental patients. I don’t care how good the armor is, that is just wrong on so many safety levels, I didn’t want to watch when they actually shot themselves.
One of my favorite clips on the internet. If you want I will send you some other firearm related videos.
They knew what they were doing and all the safety was account for. Anyway the load is probably reduced on both cartridge.
[...] Shot point blank with a 308 to prove it won’t knock you down. Relax, he’s got a vest. [...]
Here, shoot me again…
Here, shoot me again…
“Anyway the load is probably reduced on both cartridge.”
Why would they need to reduce the load. First, it’s not an accurate test if you aren’t using actual standard rifle ammo. Second, if firing the round doesn’t knock over the person shooting it, then the round obviously doesn’t contain enough kinetic energy to knock over the person it hits.
Reduced load or not, it violates at least two, and probably all four, of the basic firearm rules. And I honestly do not give a flying squirrel’s left testicle if they were wearing armor or not, trusting it or not… that is just straight-up stupid, and not the image responsible firearm owners want to encourage.
Back in ancient Rome, when an engineer designed a bridge, he stood under it while the first loads were taken across it.
Engineering isn’t about gray areas. It is about fail or succeed.
Why would they need to reduce the load. First, it’s not an accurate test if you aren’t using actual standard rifle ammo. Second, if firing the round doesn’t knock over the person shooting it, then the round obviously doesn’t contain enough kinetic energy to knock over the person it hits.
————–
I know bullets don’t knock people down. I wasn’t born yesterday. The reduce load is for safety. That was my point.
OK…. they need to see the nice guys in the white coats… (and the straight jackets)
Davis has been doing this ever since he started “Second Cjance” and would go to local pistol matches to show Police Officers that his vests worked and that he “Stood” behind them
[...] Remember, a bigger bullet will not throw anyone backwards. If you think it does, there may be nothing wrong with that thought if you don’t know any better. The Firearm Blog has some video you might find interesting. Note, do NOT do anything you see in the video on their site as they are “violating” most firearm safety “rules.” Go to their blog. [...]
“Standing” behind the armor is good marketing not safety. It may be safe, but you could show it by tying it to a balloon, etc…
However, I like the education they provide most people who think a .45 ACp (or other “larger” calibedr) will throw you backwards. I love Hollywood and those who talk about stopping power as if it relates to stopping the forward momentum of the target rather than the shot killing the attacker prior to them reaching you.
Hollywood–giving us the bullet that goes around corners because the shooter twists their gun-hand as they pull the trigger. Don’t they do any research to know that the SLOWER the pitch, the more curve the ball gets? How are they both slowing the bullet and increasing its resistance? Sigh…