This is a question out of complete ignorance and I’m just curious about ideas people might have about the use of armor especially by non-military/LEO types.
I understand the need for military/LEO shooters to have very extensive and heavy body armor given the aggressive nature of the threat they face. The following is really not applicable in their environment.
What is really the civilian need for armor if there is one? How does it get employed/used or incorporated realistically?
For a while there was a trend to put armor in backpacks for school kids and I wondered if that was an appropriate model for civilian CCW shooters.
Two modes of employment:
The front and back could not both be protected. Does it make sense to have armor only on the back to protect that side not directly in front which would be protected by a weapon? In short you’re using your weapon as frontal armor by throwing fire downrange.
Theoretically using a sling design you could shift the backpack to the front to give frontal protection depending on circumstances. Could armor still be effective if employed in that manner or not rigidly held to the body?
Having had “that guy” two guys down from me at a Pat Rogers class almost put a round through my ankles I’m not sure it’s really likely that you’re going to get a shot in the chest (at least accidentally) I’d say the side and below the waist is much more likely. Even still you’re unlikely to go walking about in the body armor you might carry to class.
I’m not really talking about training however, I’m talking about practical application in everyday life.
How can armor be employed/applied in the civilian CCW such that?
[ol]
[li]It is inconspicuous enough not to attract undue attention
[/li][li]It is practical enough to be employed everyday
[/li][li]It is effective enough to protect against threats that civilians are likely to encounter
[/li][/ol]
What form, shape, and specification would such an armor package take? Does the “armored backpack” marketed to schoolkids have a valid CCW application?
I don’t think it’s outside the bounds of reality to state that your everyday citizen could encounter the same directed threats as an everyday patrol officer. Lots of them, if I didn’t already know that they were wearing a concealment-cut vest under their uniform top, I simply wouldn’t know.
You may have to make some decisions about how you dress to ensure being able to conceal both your carry gun and whatever armor you may wear. Those unwilling to entertain the possibility of making such changes to accommodate whatever bulk they may be adding, be it with a level II/III/IIIA vest, should probably ditch the idea of armoring up.
I have some things to add to this, but I’m not sure I’m tracking the intent of the thread. Are you asking specifically about those backpacks, civilian use in training, or civilian actual use for defensive purposes?
There are several questions implicit/explicit. I honestly don’t have any preconceived ideas I’m simply wondering if other people have thought about it and brainstorm ideas as to what might actually be applicable.
To answer rob_s:
Primarily the intent is civilian actual/defensive use since I don’t view the concealment vests used by LEO as being that practical/comfortable/inconspicuous enough for civilians. So what would work?
Secondarily I questioned the backpack setup as a way of making armor practical enough for a civilian to carry everyday? It’s certainly not as comprehensive as military/LEO armor but does it really have to be given the need/threat faced?
Thirdly is there value to having armor on the back but not on the front? Does the lack of armor on the front negate the value of having it on the back?
Other than practicing/training with the setup as you would any piece of gear, it’s not for training as a civilian. It’s about making armor convenient enough to carry for the civilian.
The back I feel is the priority for armor since a civilian will be trying to retreat if they can in a defensive scenario.
I’m sure I’ll get flamed for this, but I never understood why civilian/non-LE would show up for class wearing plates and armor with a setup even many Military guys/gals don’t have while deployed. If they have the $$ to burn and want to dress up like Joe Contractor, well that’s their business, but what happened to “train like you fight”? I wear armor everyday for work and hate it, but do train with it.
Having a ballistic panel in your backpack however would be a great idea. I believe the US is due for a Mumbai style attack very soon and having something that would help deflect incoming rounds would be very beneficial even for a random lone gunman nut job shooting up the mall you happen to be shopping at. The backpack could easily be turned around to the front to protect that area.
I don’t see why you should get flamed for that. Your observation is almost certainly true and based on experience.
Interestingly it’s curious how many of those guys start to remove their gear every chance they get. Guys like Pat Rogers impress me because unlike their students they’re up on the line the whole time AND wearing their gear non-stop.
Like a gun armor is worthless if its not on your person.
Having a ballistic panel in your backpack however would be a great idea. I believe the US is due for a Mumbai style attack very soon and having something that would help deflect incoming rounds would be very beneficial even for a random lone gunman nut job shooting up the mall you happen to be shopping at. The backpack could easily be turned around to the front to protect that area.
That’s what I was thinking but while good idea in theory I’m less certain of its real-world benefit.
I also don’t know that the backpack armor has any real value for training (since you’re unlikely to get shot in the back) other than conditioning yourself to wear it which is perfectly valid.
I wore armor for one day in Pat’s class in December. I can only speak for myself as to why I wore it when I did, for the length of time that I did. I had three pieces of gear that I was interested in sorting out and I wanted to see how they interacted with one another but also how they worked as standalone items. Those were a MOLLE belt, a soft armor vest with plate pockets (no plates yet), and a chest rig that was designed to attach to the armor or be used standalone. I wore the belt alone on TD1, the belt, armor, and chest rig on TD2, and the chest rig alone with my carry holster on TD3. It was just all part of trying to use the situation at hand to suss out new gear and new concepts.
If you’re curious about the armor/chest rig setup you can read more about it here as well as my own reasons for wanting armor to begin with.
I also happen to think that my setup is far more appropriate to my role than a full CIRAS kit, so I do see your point to an extent. However I’ve attended a lot of training and I think I’ve only ever seen maybe on average one non-professional wearing armor in each class.
That is correct. However I like the fact that if I ever wanted/needed to the option would be there by simply removing the clips on the front. I also like that it would be possible to conceal (albeit with a larger shirt) with plates if I ever had that need.
I did see that. My feeling however is that most civilians are unlikely to have a plate carrier while at work or out on the town. At home it’s obviously a different matter.
I like the premise and I like the clarifying questions. I like the thinking that is occurring, the real thinking about “what do I as a civilian need” vs. just parroting thoughts from training contexts that may not necessarily apply.
I have nothing to add yet (as I hardly know anything about armor) but I am watching.
Iraq Ninja said it best, “I am a big proponent of wearing armor plates if you expect to get shot at.” If one is carrying (or has readily accessible) a gun, then one, reasonably or unreasonably, must “expect to get shot at.”
Do you carry a brief case? A bag? Could you incorporate a stand alone plate? Your call.
As for covering your back while retreating (NIKE defense?), have you considered facing the threat and backing up carefully so as to maintain situational awareness, especially if you are armed? In this case you might want the ability of putting your armor to the front.
Tim Lau on 10-8 posted a rule of thumb that cops ought have a level of protection which would protect against up to and including what they carry. Not a bad aspirational goal for the rest of us, I think. How best do we meet this goal is, as you ask, the question.
If one carries around a truck gun, why not a plate carrier with a couple of mags, lube and BOK? No truck gun? Forget the armor except, perhaps, at home.
I do not disagree. IF one is going to have a long gun as a ready arm, and IF one is going to supplement that long gun with load carriage of some sort, I see no reason why that load carriage wouldn’t incorporate some kind of armor.
Were I to don some kind of body-worn equipment in an emergency I would greatly prefer that it include armor.
This thread was about a hypothetical way to do it…not about what existing option I should carry. This isn’t about me. This is about testing a concept that doesn’t really exist yet and may not even work. Assuming you don’t carry a rifle/carbine CCW you don’t need the armor to feed the gun.
As a CCW do you really expect to be shot at? or do you carry just in case?
Iraq Ninja has a very valid point especially given where he is. I wonder however if he carries armor plates when he goes to the store or gas station when back in CONUS.
Again I’m not talking about a guy who carries a carbine for a living. I’m talking about the rest of us who don’t.
Do you carry a brief case? A bag? Could you incorporate a stand alone plate? Your call.
I carry a Maxpedition Sling bag, it could easily incorporate an armor plate or soft armor but there are none that I know of that are made especially for it. This is why I asked about the backpack idea as that is the only extant solution for people that don’t wear plate carriers every day.
As for covering your back while retreating (NIKE defense?), have you considered facing the threat and backing up carefully so as to maintain situational awareness, especially if you are armed? In this case you might want the ability of putting your armor to the front.
If you’re going to fight…fight. If you’re going to run…run. I’ve been told pretty emphatically by many instructors that you don’t walk backwards. Turn and move. Get to cover as fast as you can and return fire. To me fleeing backward doesn’t make much sense.
If the situation is that I want to get as far away from the gunman as possible I’m going in the other direction. Moreover I might have a loved one that I have to push forward and using my body as a shield. Having the plate on my back allows both. Having the plate on the front implies aggression and moving towards the threat.
That said I can shift my bag to my front regularly like when sitting on a bus or whatever.
If the decision is that I have to carry two plates in a carrier or nothing at all, than I’m going to carry nothing at all as do 99.999% of civilian CCWs.
If that’s the only answer, oh well but I don’t think that it is a very satisfying one.
Tim Lau on 10-8 posted a rule of thumb that cops ought have a level of protection which would protect against up to and including what they carry. Not a bad aspirational goal for the rest of us, I think. How best do we meet this goal is, as you ask, the question.
I don’t view that as viable for a civilian CCW. For an LEO, soldier or contractor that’s obviously a different calculus. That said I don’t think a Level IV plate is the way to go. Level III should be all the armor most CCWs will ever need.
If one carries around a truck gun, why not a plate carrier with a couple of mags, lube and BOK? No truck gun? Forget the armor except, perhaps, at home.
I’m not talking about a truck gun, carbine, rifle or whatever. I’m talking about walking around on the street with your CCW. What if you take public transportation?
Like a firearm why should you forget the armor if you can carry it discretely? Say in a bag.
I’m not looking for advice on how I might carry a plate. I’m looking for a discussion as to an armor solution can work for civilians that probably doesn’t even exist yet.
