HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I was wondering how these...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:55 PM

I was wondering how these bulletproof backpacks could protect you



Mystery revealed.

It's a variation on the old air raid drill position. Looks like the feet are still exposed though.

58 replies, 3034 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 58 replies Author Time Post
Reply I was wondering how these bulletproof backpacks could protect you (Original post)
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 OP
spanone Dec 2012 #1
BeyondGeography Dec 2012 #7
Poll_Blind Dec 2012 #8
FSogol Dec 2012 #11
a geek named Bob Dec 2012 #2
morningfog Dec 2012 #3
Jim Warren Dec 2012 #10
FSogol Dec 2012 #12
hlthe2b Dec 2012 #4
Robb Dec 2012 #5
sarisataka Dec 2012 #6
hlthe2b Dec 2012 #16
sarisataka Dec 2012 #18
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #24
DollarBillHines Dec 2012 #39
Coyote_Tan Dec 2012 #20
sasha031 Dec 2012 #9
Xithras Dec 2012 #54
libdem4life Dec 2012 #13
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #14
kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #30
gollygee Dec 2012 #37
reformist2 Dec 2012 #15
rrneck Dec 2012 #17
Fumesucker Dec 2012 #19
GreenPartyVoter Dec 2012 #22
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #44
Fumesucker Dec 2012 #45
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #47
Fumesucker Dec 2012 #49
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #50
GreenPartyVoter Dec 2012 #21
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #23
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #43
RebelOne Dec 2012 #25
hobbit709 Dec 2012 #26
ehrnst Dec 2012 #27
kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #28
Locrian Dec 2012 #29
kestrel91316 Dec 2012 #31
Bucky Dec 2012 #35
Historic NY Dec 2012 #32
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #33
Bucky Dec 2012 #36
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #38
DuaneBidoux Dec 2012 #42
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #58
ehrnst Dec 2012 #34
frylock Dec 2012 #40
DuaneBidoux Dec 2012 #41
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #46
rustydog Dec 2012 #48
Liberal_in_LA Dec 2012 #51
0rganism Dec 2012 #52
ecstatic Dec 2012 #53
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #56
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #55
Kaleva Dec 2012 #57

Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:57 PM

1. it's ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:06 PM

7. We're protecting us from us

We've come a long way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:07 PM

8. I agree. nt

PB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:08 PM

11. +1. A fool and his money are soon parted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:58 PM

2. I'll take 7... n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:59 PM

3. Disaster capitalism. Trying to make a buck on tragedies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:08 PM

10. sell you the rope

you use to hang them with

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:08 PM

12. +100 n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:59 PM

4. Basic physics would suggest...

the first shot would throw the person backwards with enough force they'd drop the pack--leaving them fully vulnerable to the next.

Better than nothing, I guess... But the size of that pack suggests some real back strain for a young kid...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:06 PM

5. To the contrary. Basic physics would suggest a conservation of momentum.

The target gets precisely as much momentum from a bullet as the shooter does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:06 PM

6. Basic physics tells us

it won't, otherwise the shooter would also be thrown back: equal and opposite reaction. Bullets are effective because they focus all of the energy into a very small area allowing penetration. A bullet proof vests forces that energy to be spread across a board area, allowing the body to absorb it with less damage. You can demonstrate this on your own by trying to push a pencil through a piece of paper and then try to push a pop can through one.

It is about the size of backpacks kids use these days; I swear some of them look like they are going on an arctic expedition... The picture is one use but I think it would be better on their backs as they run like hell to safety. In either case, as you say better than nothing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarisataka (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:15 PM

16. That is damned ridiculous... But I have no desire to argue with gun obsessed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:33 PM

18. I don't like facts so...



But I wish you well anyway

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:56 PM

24. Actually no, he is correct.

And I am not gun obsessed, but depending on the ammo at play and rating of the plate, that round will still go through if it's powerful enough... (Ballistics are rated). And it is useless against a riffle round, even a .22.

That is the part the gun obsessed won't tell you.

I used to wear III-A as a medic, heavy, sweaty, hard to do chest compressions with.

Go to a fire, get it off...go to a firefight where the gun play involves AR and Ak type weapons...why bother? So it will give parents a false sense and all that.

I actually considered one for ten minutes due to the places we go to at times to cover the news. Ten minutes, the cost, and the riffle play. I can use the money for something else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:57 PM

39. Those points are legit. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hlthe2b (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:43 PM

20. Mythbusters says no...

 

Does a gun knock you on your ass every time you fire?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:08 PM

9. since Newtown, sales have gone on up 300%

just more insanity...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sasha031 (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:24 PM

54. Which is pointless, as they would have done nothing in Newtown.

I don't know if the one used in the massacre fired .223 or .308, but either of them would have punched through that panel armor like paper at the ranges he shot those kids. Hell, a full suit of Dragon Skin body armor wouldn't have helped at that range.

This backpack maker is just profiting from fearful parents. It's disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:09 PM

13. Corporate types don't miss a lick. Elementary kids don't use backpacks so much...mostly to bring

stuff for Show and Tell. And they don't hang onto them during the school day. Nor did they know which direction the shots were coming from or may come from.

High schools increasingly have police or armed guards...for bringing guns and such in, at least they will be there for other violence.

The only solution...short a perfect mental health system for all who may need it or think they may need it, and assuming the medications are spot on...not usually the case and not likely to happen in our lifetime...there needs to be at least two armed guards at each school...paid for by taxes and registration and penalties and renewals and transfer taxes on ALL guns.

Then we have a conversation about which ones are WMD category, legal, illegal, only for shooting galleries, collection, inherited, etc.etc. Probably as likely as banning them...we are seriously addicted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:10 PM

14. Most schools REQUIRE backpacks be kept in lockers

 

So even if the bags are effective, they won't be very effective locked up in the kid's locker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:07 PM

30. I thought most schools now didn't even HAVE lockers because of

some stupid problem (imagined or real) associated with their use. Kids have to carry all their books with them to every class, at least some places, from what I've heard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:35 PM

37. I guess different paranoid people have different things they're afraid of

Here, the backpacks have to be kept in the lockers (and even our brand new buildings have lockers) because someone might have something horrible in their backpack they might do something horrible with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:14 PM

15. The pro-gun crowd really has reached the end of their rope.


It's the equivalent of the Communists having to build the Berlin Wall, instead of admitting their policies had failed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:19 PM

17. Of course it will protect you.

If you're the asshole selling that bullshit to protect your investment portfolio. I hate disaster capitalists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:38 PM

19. First shot will knock her on her ass, second shot and she's a statistic.

It's security theater, a placebo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:48 PM

22. Exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:01 PM

44. No, the first shot won't knock her down.

You get you gun information from bad movies. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Remember that? The shooter has to absorb exactly the same momentum as the girl would have to absorb.

There are several posts upthread about this. Read them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #44)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:16 PM

45. The way she's squatting it won't take much of an impact on the bag to tip her backwards

And once she starts to move she'll be flailing her arms for balance.

If she was standing up it would be different but rocked back on the heels like that you have very little ability to recover from even a slight push and the short stature makes the fall happen faster so you have less actual time to recover.

The shooter is both standing up and expecting the moment of the push of the gun when he pulls the trigger, it's not really the same situation although the energy imparted is the same.

I volunteer to do the shooting part if someone else will squat and hold the backpack and we can settle this.

One experiment is worth a thousand opinions.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #45)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:32 PM

47. Mo0mentum and energy are not the same.

The momentum of the shooter and the bullet are the same. Momentum = Mass X Velocity This must be equal in both directions.

The energy is vastly different. Energy = Mass X Velocity squared. Since the bullet has a large velocity and that is squared, it gets most of the energy, even though the mass is tiny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:46 PM

49. So?

The momentum imparted to the shooter and the momentum imparted to the target are substantially the same minus some inefficiencies and air friction losses.

Yeah, I flubbed the terminology with a brain fart, good catch, the end result is the same, it won't take much push to get the victim off balance and rocking backward at which point her arms go up flailing to maintain her balance and bob's your uncle.

A one knee position would be a lot more stable but leave more flesh exposed to direct fire.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #49)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:58 PM

50. Yes, one knee would be better.

I was a math major and a physics minor so I can sometime get picky of things like that. I don't think the backpack would be of any real survival help, unless she uses it to help escape. Hiding behind it won't help for long.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:48 PM

21. My younger son's bp is kept out in the hall. No help there. Older son has his with him all day, but

it weighs between 22 and 35lbs depending on which classes he has. It would be a bit of a job to get it placed quickly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:50 PM

23. The other thing you could do is wear it on your chest

And back towards actual cover.

The fact we are having this conversation is horrific though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:52 PM

43. Put in on your back,

keep your head down, and run to better cover.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:58 PM

25. Piece of mind!!?? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:01 PM

26. Just about as well as "Duck and cover" back in the 50's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:01 PM

27. Does it come with a coupon for a free session with a child therapist? (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:03 PM

28. Easy. You put it over your head.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:06 PM

29. the "new duck and cover" - n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:10 PM

31. "Piece of mind" - seriously??? Do people no longer bother to edit their

BUSINESS ADVERTISING????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:32 PM

35. Well, at least it was the correct use of ironic quotation marks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:20 PM

32. Unless you train constantly and have it close by its worthless....

you'd have a better chance running away then sitting crouched. IMHO

A NATO 7.62 and .223 will go through this depending on the exact load a plate would be needed.

http://www.laruetactical.com/backpack-shield

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:21 PM

33. A NATO round will go through regardless

The max is III-A, not rated for a .22 long.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:33 PM

36. Plus her little pink socks are exposed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bucky (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:41 PM

38. That actually s not the problem

They are protecting the core, same as a vest, or close enough.

The problem is the false sense of security this gives parents. The rounds used at Sandy Hook will not even slightly deform going through that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:48 PM

42. I would have NO sense of security if my child has one but...

If I thought it could increase his chance 1% then I would get one.

As I said however it is a pathetic marker of our culture that we have gotten here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DuaneBidoux (Reply #42)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:17 PM

58. If your assailant is firing a Glock 9, the other popular choice

It will. It is rated for that round, well unless the shooter got the ones designed to defeat it...they exist.

As I said in one of these threads, I considered one for myself for ten minutes given where at times we go to get news...but up armored clothes would be a better choice.

And I agree with you...it is sad we are having this conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:22 PM

34. Just tell your kid to ignore their teacher if something out of the ordinary happens...

because you are SAFER behind your backpack!!! </ sarcasm>

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:26 PM

40. are they compatable with the Executive Chute?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:46 PM

41. I understand a parent's inclination--although obviously it is pathetic for our country...

to be here.

I might buy one for my 11 year old step-son. I don't know that it could do any good and like I say it is pathetic that this country has arrived here.

But I tend to want to do ANYTHING that could increase my child's chances in a shooting--even if it is a 1% chance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:18 PM

46. Unless she can use it to escape it won't be much use.

If she can't escape the shooter will walk up to her and shoot around it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:39 PM

48. Keep the sheep afraid of the wolf and sell the sheep a false sense of security

Making money off of fear. The only time this might work is when the student has the backpack in their possession. If it is in a locker or closet, it is just a backpack....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:01 PM

51. ad points out that it's better than nothing at all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:12 PM

52. "in the event of a water landing, your seat cushion can be used as a flotation device"

That's what it reminds me of, anyway. From what I've seen of "water landings" by commercial aircraft, there isn't a whole lot of point to that segment of the flight attendant's speech.

The backpack? Sure it'd help, for the first bullet or two, if the target were prepared, and after that it's anyone's guess. I suppose there's some value.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:17 PM

53. Does it protect against the bushmaster

or whatever that assault weapon is?

Anyhow, it's sad that's we've reached this point. On the night of the Oregon shooting, I was going through mental drills of what I'd do if I were in a mall when a mad gunman came around. It was extremely stressful to think about, and the only thing I could come up with was hiding and hoping. And 3 days later, the Sandy Hook massacre

So clearly, looking into body armor/etc. isn't just fear mongering. We have flood insurance that will most likely never be used. But these mass shootings are happening daily. That being said, I'm not sure that I'm ready to order a bulletproof backpack just yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ecstatic (Reply #53)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:09 PM

56. no

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:27 PM

55. Just another opportunist capitalizing on a terrible event. Sick assholes. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BeyondGeography (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:19 PM

57. Read the whole ad. It's bullet resistant.

Fron the website:

"*meets and exceeds N.I.J. level IIIA level bullet resistance performance (see ballistics info tab for more)."

http://backpackshield.com/

I'd be leary of any company that throws around the term "bullet proof".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread