Need armor?

[LV_PSO]

I was cleaning out my bookmarks last night and I came across the site where I bought my soft body armor ("bulletproof vest"). Figured I should share it because it was such a good value:

bulletproofme.com

Armor was the #2 most expensive thing for me, and could have easily been more than my gun if I paid full retail. What I ended up with was a factory refurbished vest. A police department had retired it due to age, this website bought it, sent the Kevlar back to the factory for inspection to double-check, had new envelopes sealed around the Kevlar, and then placed it in a brand new carrier.

Take the time to grab a measuring tape and measure yourself on the dimensions he lists on his measurement page, before you call. The sizing isn't as simple as S-M-L so having your measurements on hand helps filter out what won't fit properly.

Very nice guy to deal with, reasonable prices, and a great way to get a starter vest that will let your significant other rest easy while you're at work. Oh, quick shipping too.

[Riderboxer]

There's a christian orginazation somewhere that gives balistic vest for free. Can't remember the website. And is the one you got really bulletproof? I didn't know a "bulletproof" vest existed.

[LV_PSO]

I've heard about the Christian organization too, but I would not be surprised if donations were limited to sworn LEOs.

On the site I mentioned, he has a disclaimer right up top that nothing is truly bulletproof. It's just our culture's way of referring to that piece of equipment.

[N. A. Corbier]

It would be law enforcement officers, not "security guards wanting to play cop." It would require a concerted effort to make them change their opinion, and they'd have to do it quietly to remove public outcry.

[DazednadConfused]

I can appreciate the need to save money but when it boils down to protective gear I will not. I will purchase a re-manufactured air compressor for home improvements but my body armor will be first-line - just as my firearm(s), boots, et al.

[FireRanger]

I can appreciate the need to save money but when it boils down to protective gear I will not. I will purchase a re-manufactured air compressor for home improvements but my body armor will be first-line - just as my firearm(s), boots, et al.

There is nothing wrong with purchasing "refurbished" or "used" firearms, so long as you know what you are looking for and at. I have a Taurus PT92 and a Glock 21 (gen 3) both of which were purchased used but in field ready condition.

The same goes with bullet resistant material, so long as it was "refurbished" by the factory that made it inthe first place, I see no reason why not to have it. Then again maybe I am missing something here about Kevlar and age.

[DazednadConfused]

There is nothing wrong with purchasing "refurbished" or "used" firearms, so long as you know what you are looking for and at. I have a Taurus PT92 and a Glock 21 (gen 3) both of which were purchased used but in field ready condition.

The same goes with bullet resistant material, so long as it was "refurbished" by the factory that made it inthe first place, I see no reason why not to have it. Then again maybe I am missing something here about Kevlar and age.

Ranger - I did not say there was anything wrong with the purchase of used equipment - it is just not my personal preference. I am not a Kevlar SME so I cannot give any "facts" about age, wear, sweat, environmental degradation - a re-manufactured one may be as good as a first-line.

I have purchased used firearms over the years with mixed results (most have been positive).

Cheers

[LV_PSO]

It would be law enforcement officers, not "security guards wanting to play cop." It would require a concerted effort to make them change their opinion, and they'd have to do it quietly to remove public outcry.

...huh?
[scratches head]

[Riderboxer]

Yea iv been trying to figure out what he ment too.

[N. A. Corbier]

Its not hard.

Most, if not all, programs give armor to certified law enforcement officers. Some give it to EMS in bad places. Security guards are not law enforcement officers. Most charities would not give armor to guards, simply because they're not police officers and the charity to to give police officers armor.

The general public perception of security guards has not changed in the past 20 years. Most people would question why a security guard needs body armor in the first place, and that's within the industry, let alone the general public.

Police officers are "heros" who need body armor because everyone is trying to kill them. Security guards are people who sleep at their post, sit in an office building, and "never risk their lives."

You would need a concerted operation, or your own charity, to distribute body armor to security personnel on a charity basis. There are multiple threads here about how the public, your client, and your company think that you're "playing cop" if you choose to wear armor -- and some companies ban armor because it makes the site look dangerous.

[5423]

... The general public perception of security guards has not changed in the past 20 years. Most people would question why a security guard needs body armor in the first place, and that's within the industry, let alone the general public.

People, including our employers, percieve that) Police officers are "heros" who need body armor because everyone is trying to kill them. The general public, including our employers, percieve that) Security guards are people who sleep at their post, sit in an office building, and "never risk their lives." ...

And there's the One Hard Truth about our industry and our jobs.

So far, I've worked under four corporate-level facility General Managers here; on the occasions I've taken a firm stance about this subject ("I'm not ethically able to ask anyone to perform that particular task without prior training and qualifications, issued body armor, and issued weapons"), the responses have been so wildly varied as to be nothing more than a bad joke.

The first guy (manager during the initial creation stages of this facility and security department) took the position of, "Do you own your own weapons? Well, go back home and get 'em; why'd you even show up to work without 'em??" (He was a Texan... :rolleyes::D)

With the second guy, the official stance was, "NO! ABSOLUTELY NO WEAPONS; NO DISCUSSION!". The unofficial stance was, "IF you're carrying, I just don't wanna hear about it..."

With the third GM, it was, "OK; I couldn't either." (He was from Montana...)

With the New Guy, it's, "Uhhhh...why do you need weapons for that?" (Note the use of the word "do", as opposed to "could". He's a finance-type; at least he's willing to entertain the thought of spending the required money, given sufficient justification - in numbers he can understand.)

The point here is that, of the four, the third manager was the only one who seemed to grasp that there may be an unavoidable risk to security personnel, that someone out there could percievably be actively gunnin' for us, given our assigned taskings; that running to a telephone may not be a realistic solution to all incidents and scenarios.

And that guy (GM #3) got fired: he was too willing to spend corporate money.

[James H. Hood]

As we work outdoors in triple-digit temperatures, there is no question of eschewing armor.

[LV_PSO]

As we work outdoors in triple-digit temperatures, there is no question of eschewing armor.

I patrol on bike in Las Vegas. But if I'm armed, I'm armored, even in summer. Just drink more water =]

[PSGuard]

Police officers are "heros" who need body armor because everyone is trying to kill them. Security guards are people who sleep at their post, sit in an office building, and "never risk their lives."

While I wont argue this statement (as many of my co-workers have been fired for sleeping on the job), not all security companies work in secure and safe environs. The people I have met on the job ask if I wear a vest for protection as I deal with those who may be tweaking and may be willing to stab a used needle into my chest.

That being said, take a look at the recent riots in Vancouver, BC, Canada and the security guards who were working that night at their sites needed protection, if they didn’t have any. I’m not saying that all guards need vests, but those who work in possible hostile environments like the RCMP or Police forces work in should be seen as possible targets no matter what.

If charities want to limit who they give vests to, then that’s up to them selves. They should not however think that only Police need protection. That’s just my point of view.

[Mr. Chaple]

While I wont argue this statement (as many of my co-workers have been fired for sleeping on the job), not all security companies work in secure and safe environs. The people I have met on the job ask if I wear a vest for protection as I deal with those who may be tweaking and may be willing to stab a used needle into my chest.

That being said, take a look at the recent riots in Vancouver, BC, Canada and the security guards who were working that night at their sites needed protection, if they didn’t have any. I’m not saying that all guards need vests, but those who work in possible hostile environments like the RCMP or Police forces work in should be seen as possible targets no matter what.

If charities want to limit who they give vests to, then that’s up to them selves. They should not however think that only Police need protection. That’s just my point of view.
from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition



sar·casm (sär 'kăz 'әm) n.

1. A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
2. A form of wit that is marked by the use of sarcastic language and is intended to make its victim the butt of contempt or ridicule.

[Late Latin sarcasmus, from Greek sarkasmos, from sarkazein, to bite the lips in rage, from sarx, sark]-, flesh.]

[PSGuard]

I'm sorry, but it is hard to call that sarcasm as it is the general view of Security Guards world wide.

[LV_PSO]

Thanks for the hijack/grand digression, all, but who wants to return to a discussion of the basics of buying and choosing armor?

Indeed, the merits of a guard having armor are important to chew on, but this thread has devolved into something of a not-so-helpful monster for forum members looking for advice on the actual process of getting armor.

[5423]

Sorry 'bout that; I thought you answered your own question in the original post: (1) Go to BPM.com. (2) Follow their directions.

[LV_PSO]

Sorry 'bout that; I thought you answered your own question in the original post: (1) Go to BPM.com. (2) Follow their directions.

Hey, no offense taken. I just know that purchase was pretty intimidating for me and wanted to put that option out there, and see if anything else had worked well for people.

[5423]

I shoulda mentioned earlier: that's where we buy for my crew. We're happy with 'em.

[N. A. Corbier]

I'm sorry, but it is hard to call that sarcasm as it is the general view of Security Guards world wide.

Its the view of everyone but security guards.

[graywolf_14]

Actually its the view of everyone except dedicated security officers... I personaly see the need for armour no matter where you are working. I have never carried a firearm or worn armour but have still been in situations were I might have needed it. For instance transporting large sums of money in a small car with no protection other than my wits and ability to fight(what little I have)... I made myself blend in as much as possible but still it is hard for people to not notice someone going in and out of banks with large bags a couple times a week... So I deff see the need o wear armour even as a feel good thing.

[flashlightcop509]

Just my .02, but as I've stated elsewhere, I don't care where (with rare or most desolate location) you work, if you wear a uniform that even remotely resembles a police officer, you should be wearing armor...

Remember a few years ago the malls out in the midwest where a couple of nutcases brought weapons to the malls and opened fire? I'd just as soon be wearing a vest as opposed to one day being shot because of some fruit loop that blew a fuse...

Some people simply snap, go all FUBAR, and decide to load up and go on a shooting spree; I'm not entirely certain, but I suppose a uniformed officer in a well populated shopping center will probably be targeted just as fast as a civilian...

[Riderboxer]

N.A. Corbier,your a smart man,however Im gonna have to disagree with you here. I see where you might believe someone might be playing cop,but I really dont think thats the issue. Yea there's certain security jobs where you'd look like a fool doing it,but there are exceptions to many security jobs.

I worked for a college campus where we wore police style uniforms (navy blue) and looked all around like the police except we didnt carry guns and our badges didnt say police. We also had two yellow patches that read "Security". Keep in mind our duties were pretty much almost that of the police,and we were pretty much percived as such. We were issued body armor and it was strongly suggested we wore it. I wore mine every time,no matter how hot or uncomfortable it was.

Plus dont forget the bank guards and the money guards, messengers/drivers.

[Riderboxer]

I personaly see the need for armour no matter where you are working. So I deff see the need o wear armour even as a feel good thing.

No not every officer with every company at every post needs body armor. Im with a company now where neither one of my post would be approite for me to wear body armor. I look nothing like the police and im not in any real danger. Yes body armor is more of just that (a feel good thing). It may save a cops life,because most of those encounters the cop is at is from a distance,therefore accuaracy not as good. However if your a money guard then your basicly screwed,chances are the encounter will be up close and personal and the vest your wearing wont mean a damn thing. That said,id still wear it if in that line of work. (I applied for a job with loomis once and they expected the guards to supply their own vest and firearm,needless to say I couldnt afford that at the time.

[flashlightcop509]

"Yes body armor is more of just that (a feel good thing). It may save a cops life,because most of those encounters the cop is at is from a distance,therefore accuaracy not as good."

Not picking on you, Rider, but most engagements that police officers are required to use their duty weapons occur within 7 yards; Google "21 foot rule" and you'll see what I mean...

You don't have to be an expert marksman to hit a human sized target from 21 feet, especially with the availability of hi-Cap magazines...

[Riderboxer]

"Yes body armor is more of just that (a feel good thing). It may save a cops life,because most of those encounters the cop is at is from a distance,therefore accuaracy not as good."

Not picking on you, Rider, but most engagements that police officers are required to use their duty weapons occur within 7 yards; Google "21 foot rule" and you'll see what I mean...

You don't have to be an expert marksman to hit a human sized target from 21 feet, especially with the availability of hi-Cap magazines...

Your right about the "21 foot rule",but my point was that if an officer does lets say a traffic stop, and the bad guy decides to get brave from the get go,that officer has a bigger reactionary gap than lets say the armed messenger dropping off money or refilling the machines.

So basicly nobody wakes up and says their gonna take out an officer that day,however more people would plan ahead a robbery. This is of course a case by case situation. What it all boils down to is an armored guard for money laundry is somewhat more of a sitting duck. Not saying his job is more dangerous,im just saying his vest is gonna be less efective in that short amount of time and in that short amount of distance. And dont even get me started on training..thats a whole diffirent thread in itself.

[graywolf_14]

Well ok yes their are obviously locations that it may not make sense to wear body armor such as wearing civilian clothing. My experiences with security are mostly with police style uniforms...

[5423]

... So basicly nobody wakes up and says their gonna take out an officer that day...

This is a subject for another thread, but: I beg to differ with the above statement. That is absolutely not the case!

[Riderboxer]

This is a subject for another thread, but: I beg to differ with the above statement. That is absolutely not the case!

Well I mean unless their in a gang and they earn a type of status (respect) by doing so.

Could you give me an example of how im wrong?

[5423]

Well I mean unless their in a gang and they earn a type of status (respect) by doing so.

Could you give me an example of how im wrong?

:D You just did.

Reading that statement, I immediately thought of all the times I'd been told in interviews that a shooter had gone to bed the night before, planning today's hit.

My partner and I actually were told one time (by an out-of-county gang leader) that their gang had planned the weekend roadtrip we'd overseen for three days and nights in order to "blood" two prospects - we'd been the intended hits, all weekend. But (only) because of the manner in which we treated with them, the prospects had been called off, and ordered to choose two other targets closer to home. At one point Saturday evening, we were mere seconds away from the attack; the "go" sign wasn't given only because we were meeting with the gang's council at the time. (Yep, you bet we shared that info with Gangs and Intel, for statewide dissemination!)

Some of the street gangs' members tattoo their male children shortly after birth; the intent is that the boy is born into the gang with no other options in life but to fulfill his destiny - to grow up to be a killer. They know what they're gonna be when they grow up; their baby pictures are all about being posed on the sofa with all the requisite gang paraphernalia: wearing the appropriate outfit, Glock in one hand, beer in the other, and all the "older brothers" and "uncles" surrounding him, flashing the required sign or tats. And although he's considered a part of the gang's "family", he'll never be fully vested until he's killed a gang target - either an enemy gang's member, or a uniformed enforcement officer of some sort - which includes us.

And then there are those who are just plain nuts... psychopaths, sociopaths, etc. Most gang members' behaviors are fairly predictable; nuts aren't at all predictable. But there are an amazing number of 'em who have a latent need to kill periodically. With some of those, the need builds slowly over time untily it can't be ignored any longer; with others, it can be triggered by some outside influence (sight, sound, smell, memory, altercation, etc). Those for whom the need builds over time often plan their killings in great detail, including the day and time. These guys kill just because they feel like it; they may plan ahead in response to a perceived need, or they may just be the sort that kills anything, anytime, anywhere, simply because the urge strikes 'em.

I understand what you were trying to say with your statement, and do agree with your intent: that as security officers, we're statistically much more likely to run into the immediate need for a vest during an armed robbery, etc, than dealing with a planned hit. It was the wording ("... nobody...") that I couldn't agree with.

A hit is a hit; doesn't much matter how long the intent has been percolating in the hitter's pea-brain. The point is that some dirtbag's shooting at you, and you need to survive long enough to return fire and terminate the threat. That's what the armor does for you, IF everything works out as planned.

[flashlightcop509]

Why the He!! would "gangstas" tattoo their infants? Do they not realize that by the time the kid is of "gang" age, the tattoo is gonna look like a Rorschach Test and be pretty much meaningless? :rolleyes:

[5423]

Why the He!! would "gangstas" tattoo their infants? Do they not realize that by the time the kid is of "gang" age, the tattoo is gonna look like a Rorschach Test and be pretty much meaningless? :rolleyes:

Lemme stop laughing first...

I guess they thought it'd work like branding a calf; the mark would grow proportionally with the child.

That started, if I remember correctly, during the mid-Eighties. So the first few jags through the branding pen would now be in their mid- to late-20s... and really starting to show how well that really worked out for them.

Then again, do they really expect a kid tattooed into a gang at birth to have all that great a life expectancy?!?

[graywolf_14]

Well the fact that their gang members kind of means that they dont have the best judgement to begin with...