Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Sunday, February 8, 2009

Who's A 'Cop-Killer'?

As this illustration by Oleg Volk suggests, the Evil Ones who are bent on disarming peaceable Americans face a dilemma.

If they base their prohibitions on weapon type and characteristics, as did the first Federal Assault Weapons Ban, smart manufacturers and gunowners can leapfrog over the legislative language and intent via relatively simple tweaks to firearm and cartridge design. As an example, see Barrett Firearms' response to California's ban on .50 BMG rifles -- the California-legal Barrett .416.

On the other hand, if the Evil Ones' motivation is "law enforcement safety", as they have claimed in their long-standing campaign against "cop-killer bullets", then they must base at least part of their upcoming bans on actual muzzle energy generated by the regulated ammunition. Such a ban would need to be based on current body armor standards, which in turn would require an absolute prohibition on civilian possession and use of all rifle ammunition with ballistics equal to or better than the performance of .308 Winchester 150 grain FMJ (2800 fps/2559 ft. lbs. muzzle; 2582 fps/2176 ft. lbs at 100 yards). Such an energy-based ban (and a subsequent confiscation of all non-compliant ammunition) would be necessary to ensure that most current-issue police body armor would not simply be brushed aside by common deer-hunting and sporting calibers such as .30-06, .223 Remington, and .270 Winchester, let alone the antique military calibers such as .303 British, 7.62x54R Russian, and 8mm Mauser:

What about protection from RIFLES ?

The much higher velocity of rifle rounds requires HARD Body Armor Rifle Plates – Level III or Level IV Ballistic Steel, Ceramic or Polyethylene - usually ~10" by 12" (~25 by 30 cm.) and generally from 4 to 9 lbs (1.8 - 4.1 kg.) per plate to cover the Chest and / or Back (that's 8 to 18 lbs. Front & Back)

SOFT Body Armor vests only offer pistol, Fragmentation, and shotgun protection (birdshot and buckshot, but NOT shotgun slugs). Even doubling up TWO Level III-A soft vests would NOT stop a rifle bullet!

Ergo, the hoplophobes' dilemma -- either

- draw the new AWB2 based on weapon type and features, and thus invite a slew of caliber and design modifications done specifically to evade (or, more properly, "ensure compliance with") the legislation;

- ban all calibers capable of penetrating most current-issue police body armor, and drag another 30 million or more gun-owning Americans into the mire formerly reserved for the "right-wing miltia nut-jobs with their damned assault rifles"; or

- do both, in the hopes of exploiting American gunowners' documented gutlessness on freedom issues.

What option do you think this Presidential advisor is going to recommend?

Alea iacta est.


Anonymous Tom said...


Can you explain further please?

February 9, 2009 at 7:17 AM  
Blogger Concerned American said...

Tom: That's a question for the experts, from whose website that quote is taken:

Bulletproof Me

February 9, 2009 at 2:44 PM  
Blogger idahobob said...

Law enforcement safety.....MY ASS

Just the continuing theme so as to disarm the public.

Can't allow the sheeple to stand up to the PTB, ya know.


February 9, 2009 at 3:11 PM  
Blogger jon said...

well, sure, come on over. i'll gladly hand over my twenty-five-hundred-feet-per-second rounds!

all you gotta do is catch 'em at twenty five hundred feet per second.

February 9, 2009 at 5:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I enjoyed the article but I have some suggestions. We need to watch what we publish on the web and in print. If the enemy camp is like a good deal of us, they read our articles and pay attention to what we are doing. I know I visit their sites regularly just to see what they are doing and put a few tidbits of info out there to really make them mad.
If they do indeed read our posts and articles, they may actually learn something and try and make "more effective(I mean responsible) gun control laws".
All I am saying is that we need to make dam sure we dont give them any "good" ideas

February 9, 2009 at 6:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wish they would just throw the frog into the boiling pot. Maybe more people will wake up quicker.

February 9, 2009 at 8:06 PM  
Anonymous straightarrow said...

I disagree on the need to be more "careful" on what we say. We need to be more adamant in stating just what will happen if they push any more than they have done.

I will not take another step back. They had better.

February 9, 2009 at 9:22 PM  
Anonymous straightarrow said...

I think it only responsible on our part to make them aware of the risk.

February 9, 2009 at 9:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, polyethylene body armor exists. Spectra and Dyneema are brand names for high density, linear polyethylene, usually in fiber form. Other than having a low melting point, it is stronger and tougher than kevlar or steel in strength per per unit weight or cross section. Unlike metal or ceramic rifle plates it doesn't spall at all and is lighter, but has to be thicker than those other armor types.

February 10, 2009 at 1:18 AM  
Anonymous Tom said...

I wonder...

it says 1" of polyethylene.


Anyone got a huge pile of bags and some open space for testing? I think the local range would give me dirty looks if I showed up with something like this.

February 10, 2009 at 3:23 AM  
Blogger drjim said...

Get a hold of the guy at The Box-O-Truth. he'll test anything even remotely "interesting".

February 10, 2009 at 5:43 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home