Bulletproof casual wear, pricey (almost double in dollars)

[Michael]

[web:e8db126bae]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/2567549/Harrods-sells-designer-bulletproof-fashion.html[/web:e8db126bae]

[Doczilla]

Why would you choose a secret, unproven material for your armor when there are plenty of choices of armor materials that are extensively and independently tested and proven to be consistently reliable to defeat rated threat levels? Bullet resistant panels, in both soft and rigid materials, can be obtained at a fraction of this price and sewn into any garment.

And Uzis fire 9mm rounds, hardly the "assault rifle" caliber that the manufacturer is claiming. This threat is defeated by level IIA armor, the lowest level of body armor rated by the NIJ.

This guy's business is obviously aimed at those with more money than sense.

'zilla

[Richard B the EMT]

The link has an article written by a reporter who allowed the designer to shoot him with a ".38mm" handgun while wearing one of the garments.

Someone with firearm experience enlighten me on this. Is it a ".38", or a "38mm"? I have never seen these 2 references together, so could the writer not have a clue either?

Also, I have friends who load their own rounds. They had told me, years ago, of magicians who "caught" fired bullets in their teeth. It turns out that they had also loaded their own rounds, and had loaded them with a lot less than standard load of "gunpowder" (using the word, not knowing if it is the correct one for use in this area). This gave a loud "bang", but a bullet traveling a lot slower than a standard factory loaded round.

Not knowing the individual, the Kevlar like material reputedly used, or the firearms expertise of the reporter, while not calling anyone a charlatan, could someone have conned someone else? Just thinking out loud here.

[Lone Star]

The link has an article written by a reporter who allowed the designer to shoot him with a ".38mm" handgun while wearing one of the garments.

Someone with firearm experience enlighten me on this. Is it a ".38", or a "38mm"? I have never seen these 2 references together, so could the writer not have a clue either?

Also, I have friends who load their own rounds. They had told me, years ago, of magicians who "caught" fired bullets in their teeth. It turns out that they had also loaded their own rounds, and had loaded them with a lot less than standard load of "gunpowder" (using the word, not knowing if it is the correct one for use in this area). This gave a loud "bang", but a bullet traveling a lot slower than a standard factory loaded round.

Not knowing the individual, the Kevlar like material reputedly used, or the firearms expertise of the reporter, while not calling anyone a charlatan, could someone have conned someone else? Just thinking out loud here.

Rich,

No, I don't think you're wrong about the 38mm pistol. I have never heard of such a creature in all the time I've been shooting. If you convert 38mm to inches, you'll find that the projectile will be about 1½ inches, (even the 'old school .45 caliber is only 0.45 inches)

In this case, the 38mm would refer to the bullet diameter; so you're looking at a 1.49" wide bullet. I can't think of any handgun with a bore diameter THAT large! That's 3 times the bore diameter of a .50 caliber pistol!

There IS however, a .38 caliber pistol, which turns out to be 0.356 inches (this is why it can also be fired in the .357 Magnum revolvers).

I currently shoot a 9 X 18mm Makarov semi-automatic pistol, (which is roughly the equivalent of a .380 caliber), and I also shoot a Springfield Armory XD40, a .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol.

The standard 9mm semi-automatic pistol is 9 X 19mm (the 19 mm refers to the length of the casing [where the powder is held, and the primer cap is attached])

Yes, you CAN reduce the amount of gunpowder in a hand loaded round. By doing so, you reduce the muzzle velocity and the effective range, and ultimately, the overall efficacy of the round when it finally reaches the target.

Normally, a round with less than the necessary amount of gunpowder, (referred to as a 'squib load'), results in the bullet not having enough velocity to leave the barrel, causing an obstruction.

Squib load

It's funny that you referenced the old 'catching the bullet between the teeth' trick. Recently on Mythbusters, they tackled that myth, and found out that it's just that.....a myth.

Most of the 'old magicians' would have the pistol loaded with blank rounds (all bang, and no blood), and would have secreted a bullet in their mouth prior to the trick. The gun goes bang, the magician jerks his head backwards (to simulate the impact of the round) and then place the bullet between the teeth with the tongue, smile....showing the 'caught bullet' for the crowd. It was nothing more than sleight of hand.

*DISCLAIMER* DO NOT TRY THIS 'TRICK' TO PROVE ME WRONG KIDS, IT'S BEEN TRIED BEFORE, AND PEOPLE HAVE ENDED UP DEAD WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO CATCH THE BULLET!!!

.

[align=center:797c3ac425]It is possible for a human to catch a fired bullet in one piece with their teeth.[/align:797c3ac425]

BUSTED

A pig’s teeth are significantly stronger than a human’s, and yet were shattered by an impulse test when a bullet, held by a pig head’s teeth under the same pressure as an average human’s maximum bite strength, was suddenly forced forward by a force equivalent to a speeding bullet.

Furthermore, the reaction time needed to perfectly capture a bullet in one’s teeth is too short and has too tight a tolerance for any human (and almost any machine for that matter) to succeed.

Finally, when the bullet was captured perfectly, the velocity that it traveled at completely destroyed even a full metal jacket bullet: it is impossible to catch a bullet in the same state as it exited a gun via solid mechanical means.

MythBusters

[Asysin2leads]

The fact that there are non-intoxicated people, right now, in America, debating whether you can catch a bullet in your teeth or not says much.

[dougd]

The link has an article written by a reporter who allowed the designer to shoot him with a ".38mm" handgun while wearing one of the garments.

How much do you have to drink before you'll allow the manufacturer of this clothing shoot you with a .38 for your story?

[firedoc5]

How much do you have to drink before you'll allow the manufacturer of this clothing shoot you with a .38 for your story?

A whole lot. Years ago I remember a reporter doing something similar and it was just a .22. He cussed and rolled on the ground, and cussed some more. Guess he thought the vest was also impact proof.

[Christopher.Collins]

Maybe Fiddy Cent and other gangster rappers can invest in reasearch and testing to bring down the cost? Like that basketball player who released a cheap shoe line so kids would stop waisting their money.

[Christopher.Collins]

A whole lot. Years ago I remember a reporter doing something similar and it was just a .22. He cussed and rolled on the ground, and cussed some more. Guess he thought the vest was also impact proof.

All I can think of right now is the bullet proof thong on "Super Troopers."

[Upton4785]

In addition to the end of Lone Star's post, they explained a similar trick in the very, very excellent movie "The Prestige". Christian Bale's character "catches" a bullet with his hand.