Talk:Bulletproof vest
From Academic Kids
It would be nice to verify the UL standard. Unfortunately, UL charges $210 for it ($445 if you want a hardcopy). Anybody got a copy they can double-check? -- Ortonmc 01:19, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Here's a link to the Google HTML converted cache of NIS Standard 0101.04 (http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:i7USy5GJcJ8J:www.nlectc.org/pdffiles/0101.04RevA.pdf+NIJ+Standard+0101.04&hl=en) since the server hosting the link I posted appears to be down at the moment. Alereon 10:46, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
could somebody please fix the table here? --Musschrott 19:00, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Moved page from "bullet-proof vest" to "bulletproof vest", as non-hyphenated form turns up more hits on Google and Dictionary.com lists "bulletproof" as the primary form of the word. --Lowellian 01:54, Mar 22, 2004 (UTC)
Does anyone have good information about the resistance against projectiles such as arrows or quarrels? --blades 01:07, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
- Sharp edges such as knives, hunting arrows, and shrapnel will cut through the fibers in bullet-resistant soft body armor, penetrating the armor with ease. Bulletproof vests that incorporate hard "threat plates" (made from ceramic, titanium, or a kevlar weave embedded in plastic) will provide protection from such threats. Flak jackets use a material that is designed to snag the jagged edges of shrapnel, which is why it's ineffective against bullets or other threats. I am, however, not an armorer so take my words with the usual salt. Alereon 09:35, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Stopping rifle rounds
I'm no expert but I've read that current standard issue US Army protective vest is able to stop an AK47 round at point blank.
- I think this article has numerous problems. I think that they are trying to differentiate high-powered rifle rounds from assault weapons? Rmhermen 15:02, Jul 31, 2004 (UTC)
- I hope that my edits to the performance standards section address some of your concerns. Alereon 10:49, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
Removal of the "Urban Legends" section
I have removed this section because I believe that nearly the entirety of the section is false and misleading. Different types of bullets DO have different penetration characteristics for body armor, and handgun bullets CAN penetrate body armor, especially the lightweight armor routinely worn by police officers. There are documented cases of handgun bullets penetrating the protective panels (http://www.policeone.com/police-products/tactical/body-armor/articles/65090/) of bulletproof vests, especially the lightweight models used by police officers. Alereon 10:14, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
Restrictions on ownership
Should at least have link to another article in which legal restrictions on ownership or use are mentioned. --Daniel C. Boyer 00:28, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Please don't edit the table
The table on Performance Standards is taken directly from NIS Standard 0101.04, which is a primary source. Please don't edit it, or if you feel an edit is important, mark your changes clearly in some manner. I've been [surrounding them in brackets]. Note also that Level IV is the highest body armor level. There may be types of armors that provide more protection, but describing them as "Level V" is erroneous. I've also found no Google results at all for Level V body armor, so I don't think the term is in use anywhere. Alereon 09:55, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
- All information put into the article can be edited. If you want you can link to the primary source (or in some cases add the material to Wikisource) but preserving primary text is not what we do here. In many cases, government-speak will not good encyclopedia material make. I think the brackets are a very bad idea. Rmhermen 14:03, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
- I appreciate your point of view. The way I'm looking at this is that we're providing information about performance standards for body armor by quoting a relevant passage from the actual standard. My view is that, since we're quoting the actual standard, making changes to it is like altering a direct quote from somebody. I think if we want to insert additional information into the middle of such text or change something, we need to mark it in some way like an editor would. Another option would be to get the same information across without taking a quote directly from the source, but I think in this case quoting the standard is the best way to present the information. Alereon 11:25, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
Is it just me or is that a giant paragraph... I can't really begin to comprehend where to begin breaking down; just wanted to point it out DevastatorIIC 08:51, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
