Civilians versus terrorists with armor?

[Naphtali]

In many terror attacks, in USA and abroad, terrorists wear body armor. I know close to zero about body armor, less about the type of armor available to "your average run-of-the-mill" terrorist. I anticipate that body armor will not be close to US infantry and/or government enforcement agencies - FBI, metropolitan SWAT teams, et al. These agencies are much more likely to violently engage terrorists than civilians - that is, us - so their weaponry and ammunition would be designed to penetrate terrorists' body armor. The agencies' would be less dependent upon being concerned about penetration. Schools are having staff participate in NRA classes to be emotionally and physically able to use handguns to thwart such situation.

What about CCW-ers, open handgun carriers, people - like us - who have handguns secreted in their cars and trucks? A large majority of these people will have quickly available some sort of handgun of 357 Magnum caliber and smaller, nearly all using some sort of controlled expansion bullet. How are we supposed to "deal" with terrorists with armor? Shooting them in the head sounds like what might be a typical response. In such an emergency it is nonsensical to expect clear, clever thinking. (Notice the bazillion shots that LEOs fire in many gunfights.) Likely, a hit anywhere in the torso would have a degree of luck attached.

I personally would be afraid to carry any 357 Magnum ammunition in my S&W 640 that would be effective penetrating body armor while remaining controlled expansion. I also would not carry armor-piercing Full metal jacket high velocity ammunition because it is a one-trick pony; it penetrates armor. Dealing with run-of-the-mill muggers, armed robbers, et al., these bullets would antagonize the bad guys before bleeding them out.

So what do we do?

 

[Fox4506]

Not sure where you would get armor piercing ammo anyway...FMJ is not armor piercing ammo.

Most law enforcement carry pretty much the same ammo we do...hollowpoints. But I would suspect that law enforcement would hopefully have rifles if they go up against terrorists in a shootout.

Not being able to penetrate body armor was a problem for law enforcement in LA when those two guys robbed banks and were wearing lot's of body armor. Remember that?

Fox

 

[murphydog]

If you are carrying a gun of adequate power and carry/practice with it regularly, you are ahead of 98%+ of the population. Worrying about armor-clad terrorists seems excessive, and what equipment to carry to counter this even more so (short of packing a concealed .308).

 

[Shark Bait]

Most terrorists aren't willing to sacrifice their mobility to wear armor. They want to be mobile and do as much damage as they can. They often don't expect to survive their attack anyway. But if they are wearing armor I suggest that you don't engage them unless you are close enough to make an effective shot. Targets to consider on armored individuals are the head, groin, knees and ankles. A shot to one of those targets may not kill, but it may incapacitate them long enough to provide other options.

 

[retiredbadge8091]

That's a big hypothetical seeing as you are more likely to be struck by lightning than face down a terrorist. That being said, a failure drill with either the head or lower torso would probably be your only option. Handguns are defensive by nature and while not the best tool for the situation you describe, may be the greatest weapon at your disposal. Even if only to provide cover fire as you create distance away from the danger, but remember you own every round you send down range.

 

[Watchdog]

Not being able to penetrate body armor was a problem for law enforcement in LA when those two guys robbed banks and were wearing lot's of body armor. Remember that?
Fox

I remember that very well. Not only were those two guys well armored, they seemed to have an unlimited supply of ammo and they had automatic weapons. The police, with their handguns and shotguns, were totally unprepared for that.

 

[joeintexas]

Don't understand why they would wear body armour AND a suicide belt! Seems counterproductive to me. Of course I don't profess to understanding anything they do anyway.

 

[kenv1950]

You will probably never encounter a terrorist in several lifetimes, but remember that terrorist with a bomb belt or vest have a dead switch,when they go down it goes off.
Your better off running because it's a no win situation with a handgun.
Rifle and distance could only win .

 

[Muss Muggins]

In many terror attacks, in USA and abroad, terrorists wear body armor. I know close to zero about body armor, less about the type of armor available to "your average run-of-the-mill" terrorist. I anticipate that body armor will not be close to US infantry and/or government enforcement agencies - FBI, metropolitan SWAT teams, et al. These agencies are much more likely to violently engage terrorists than civilians - that is, us - so their weaponry and ammunition would be designed to penetrate terrorists' body armor. The agencies' would be less dependent upon being concerned about penetration. Schools are having staff participate in NRA classes to be emotionally and physically able to use handguns to thwart such situation.

What about CCW-ers, open handgun carriers, people - like us - who have handguns secreted in their cars and trucks? A large majority of these people will have quickly available some sort of handgun of 357 Magnum caliber and smaller, nearly all using some sort of controlled expansion bullet. How are we supposed to "deal" with terrorists with armor? Shooting them in the head sounds like what might be a typical response. In such an emergency it is nonsensical to expect clear, clever thinking. (Notice the bazillion shots that LEOs fire in many gunfights.) Likely, a hit anywhere in the torso would have a degree of luck attached.

I personally would be afraid to carry any 357 Magnum ammunition in my S&W 640 that would be effective penetrating body armor while remaining controlled expansion. I also would not carry armor-piercing Full metal jacket high velocity ammunition because it is a one-trick pony; it penetrates armor. Dealing with run-of-the-mill muggers, armed robbers, et al., these bullets would antagonize the bad guys before bleeding them out.

So what do we do?

Defend yourself and your family, and retreat to safety as quickly as possible.

 

[federali]

Variables

LEOs train for predictable emergencies. Thus, police learn that most gun battles occur in dim light, in and around doorways and most often within ten feet. It's in the variables where we suffer our casualties---body armor being one of them.

Instructors I've trained with generally advocate shooting for the pelvic girdle or hips as it's a large, easier target compared to the head. While often not immediately fatal, breaking the support structure usually drops the person shot. The pelvis also contains the femoral arteries, branching to each leg. Sever one of these and death usually comes rather quickly.

With terrorist attacks, you may not be the direct target or perhaps you're in a large group that's under attack. You can probably expect to engage from a greater distance but remember that you are still responsible for any injuries or deaths you might cause to non combatants.

As for body armor, always suspect the presence of armor if the perp is overdressed for the weather or appears more bulky through the chest compared to the rest of his body. Likewise, if nothing good happens with shots to the ten ring, it's time to shoot either lower or higher, depending on the circumstances.

 

[cmort666]

I've cleaned the NRA 50' timed and rapid fire targets, one handed.

I'm not too worried about what I can do from a supported position closer in, shooting at a human head.

 

[jdh]

Don't understand why they would wear body armour AND a suicide belt! Seems counterproductive to me. Of course I don't profess to understanding anything they do anyway.

So they don't get shot dead before (a) they reach the target area, (b) trigger the device.

 

[jimmyj]

My range time currently is used mostly for head shots. POA upper lip.
My second area of POA is crotch.

 

[Hapworth]

Indeed the likelihood of ever encountering a terrorist/active shooter situation is ridiculously low; one wearing body armor lower still.

But every day somebody somewhere draws the short stick...

Nobody who went to the Bataclan thought they'd be facing terrorists; nobody who went to a movie theater in Aurora thought they'd be the targets of a mass killing (James Holmes was wearing body armor, by the way).

Building a lifestyle or training regimen purely around these contingencies is foolish. Ignoring or ruling them out is, too.

 

[Hapworth]

We are not supposed to deal on an individual basis with terrorist.

Perhaps, and though I do think that in most situations run, hide or fight is the order (literally) of the day, Washington D.C.'s police chief recently went on record acknowledging, in effect, that when seconds count the police are minutes away, and told citizens that if they see a chance to take down an active shooter, they should attempt to do so.

(Given that D.C. still won't arm its lawful citizens, it appears she's suggesting a bum's rush and a prayer.)

 

[Blackshirt]

All commonly used soft ballistic vests will stop .357 Magnum.
BulletProofME.com Body Armor - Ballistic Protection Levels
You must master the failure drill or carry a rifle to defeat body armor. Even then, Level IV plates will stop most rifle rounds...

 

[W.E.G.]

If the terrorist is close enough that you need to engage him with a 5-shot snubnose, shoot first, and make it a headshot.

If you are in range for the terrorist, and too far to make the headshot you're probably going to die.

Try not to over-think it.

 

[Smoke]

In many terror attacks, in USA and abroad, terrorists wear body armor.

Can you cite this please?

What about CCW-ers, open handgun carriers, people - like us - who have handguns secreted in their cars and trucks

If you have to go all the way to your car to get your gun odds are the incident will be done by the time you get there

 

[Doug M.]

My range time currently is used mostly for head shots. POA upper lip.

*
For head shots, the correct area in which to deliver shots that will have the highest likelihood of success is an upside down triangle with the bottom at the nostrils, and the upper outside corners at the outer edges of the eyes. From the side - right in the ear canal. Less skull armoring the brain, and the most important and vulnerable areas of the brain in a reasonably direct line.

OP: Why on earth is anyone leaving a firearm in their car? It's as useful as mammary glands on a bowling ball if it not on your person where it belongs.

 

[Mister X]

Not a scenario that's a high priority on my list of things to prepare for as a civilian, but my primary goal would be get my family and myself completely clear of the scene to safety. Simply fleeing the scene by running easy is generally the best response. Suppressive fire may make you a target and draw their fire. You may not be able to get completely clear, but just to cover/concealment. If they come to your position, then it's ambush close-quarter shooting/disarming and in ECQ scenarios, it could be said that the handgun is the superior weapon.

And FWIW..even direct, open engagement using a pistol against a rifle is not a hopeless situation contrary to what many naysayers claim. How One Hero Texas Cop With a .45-cal Glock Took Out Two Suspected Terrorists With Rifles, Body Armor | Video | TheBlaze.com

Or how about unarmed vs AK armed terrorist... France train shooting crew left passengers to take terrorist down | Daily Mail Online

....

 

[YogiBear]

Aloha,

Don't forget the Austin, TX, horse cop who while holding on to 2 horses dropped a BG at over 100 yards

Austin cop's sure shot stopped crazed gunman | Fox News

And then there is the Texas CCW guy who took on a nut case with an AK with his 45.
He didn't know the BG was wearing armor and was shot and killed by the BG.
But, not before slowing the BG down enough that LE got him a few minutes later.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_courthouse_shooting

So, a CCW person Can engage an Armored BG and win.

All depends on the Good guy and his shooting ability and his recognizing that if center of mass
is not doing the job, it is time to go for head shots or pelvic shots.

From you tube videos, anyone wearing armor without a hard plate, getting
"tagged" by a magnum caliber handgun will know it. May Not get thru, but,
impact will get his attention. Thus resulting in change of shot placement.

So, lots of Practice at longer ranges with "enough" gun may be in order.

 

[BB57]

In the US, terrorist is not synonymous with suicide bomber.

Compare the number of suicide bombers and attempts in the US versus the run of the mill domestic terrorist armed with a gun or using explosives, vehicles or other weapons without an intent to commit suicide.

The most recent attempt was on NWA flight 253 was in 2009
and it was unsuccessful.

There was the University of Oklahoma bombing in 2005, where the bomber blew him self up but managed to no kill anyone else.

Then we have a bit of a dry spell before these 4 events between 1927 and 1962:

Continental Airlines flight 11 in 1962
National Airlines flight 2511 in 1960
Poe Elementary school in 1959
Bath Township school in 1927

-----

Lots of people have suggested that worrying about body armor is pointless as the bomber will have a dead man switch and suggest that at handgun engagement ranges, you are better off running.

I'll posit that advice is only good advice if you see an actual explosive vest.

-----

What you can do is practice failure to stop drills.

The basic concept is that if you've hit an assailant in the chest 2-3 times already and he's not going down, you need to suspect that he's either wearing body armor or he's on something.

In either case, the response is to transition to a head shot. It's not a precision sniper shot, so I would not worry about the angles and avenues needed to hit the cerebellum and get an instantaneous no twitch stop. Just aim for the center of the head squeeze it off as accurately as you can under the circumstances. Hopefully the hits to the torso will have slowed him down so it's not a moving target, and/or he's moving directly at you so the aspect and lead angles are not a factor.

----

Most LEOs don't use their sights at all in a gun fight. The undertrained take that as proof that no one uses their sights in a gun fight and thus they view training to use them as a waste of time. Those folks probably can't make a head shot much past 7 yards on a stationary target even on a good day at the range.

Don't be those guys.

-----

Ideally, you'll train to use the sights slowly at first, practicing your draw, grip and presentation so that the sights are naturally aligned as the firearm rises into your line of sight. They won't be at first, but just pause, align the sights and then squeeze off the shot. As your skills improve and you develop a consistent grip and establish the eye motor loop, you'll find the rear sights are already aligned with the front sight and the major task is just to place the front sight on target, then pause and verify the sight alignment and make the shot. That's the point where you start working on improving your speed.

Once again over time, as your speed increases while maintaining good combat accuracy, that pause becomes extremely short, to the point where you're talking about maybe .1 to .2 seconds to verify sight alignment. At that point you are primarily verifying that you still need to take the shot.

Once you start working on speed, you'll also start practicing controlled pairs where you shoot the first shot as described above, then take the next shot as soon as the pistol or revolver recovers and the front sight is back on target. You will again rely on that well trained grip to ensure the rear sights are sufficiently aligned for an accurate shot.

Once you have that down, you put the two together, putting a controlled pair center of mass and then transitioning your eyes upward for a head shot. In this case, the brief pause is primarily used to determine if the head shot is still needed, and if he's sagging to the ground the head won't be needed.

With either a semi auto pistol or a revolver, I'm inclined to put 4 shots center of mass, then transition to a head shot for the fifth shot. If he's still active after that, I'm going to be focused leaving the AO while I reload a 5 shot revolver.

----

Which brings us to the very important point that you also want to practice shooting and moving. You're much harder to hit if you're moving and in a gun fight you should be moving laterally towards suitable cover.

If the assailant has a knife or blunt weapon you want to get off the X before he gets there, moving laterally to force a rushing assailant to overcome momentum to try to follow you. That momentum will put him on the outside of what ends up being a spiral as you keep moving 90 degrees away from his line of advance, giving you 3-4 seconds to fil him full of holes, even if the incident starts at a range as short as 20 feet.

Even if you can't shoot at move at your local range, you can practice your foot work as well as drawing and moving with blue gun or a positively known by you to be cleared firearm that is always pointed in a safe direction.

You want to move laterally by stepping out with one foot then bringing the other foot over to meet it, so that you never cross your feet. If you cross your feet, the odds are good that under stress you'll trip your self, and that makes you much more vulnerable in an attack.

 

[gen3guy]

You are probably more likely to get struck by lightning.

But anyway...head shot, then run!

 

[smokindog]

Ya, I was about to suggest a tracer round to the suicide belt

Don't understand why they would wear body armour AND a suicide belt! Seems counterproductive to me. Of course I don't profess to understanding anything they do anyway.

 

[SMSgt]

If you find yourself forced to fight back, you'll fight back with whatever you have "on" you.

Or you can roll over and die, another option for some who feel fighting back with a hand gun is useless.

 

[cmort666]

If the terrorist is close enough that you need to engage him with a 5-shot snubnose, shoot first, and make it a headshot.

And preferably in the back of the head.

 

[Faulkner]

Indeed the likelihood of ever encountering a terrorist/active shooter situation is ridiculously low . . . .

Indeed, that may have been so before some considered importing them into the country.

 

[scooter123]

I recently picked up a 2 1/2 inch model 19-3. One day after spending some quality time with my 300 Blackout at a nearby 50 yard indoor range I got it in my head to try the model 19 out at 50 yards. Put up an NRA 25 yard rapid fire target and ran it all the way to the back of the range. Then I cocked that model 19, sighted it carefully, and fired 2 full cylinders at that target. Every single hit was inside the 7 ring (11 inches) and 8 out of 12 were inside the 8 ring (7.75 inches).

Point being I would not rule out head shots. Spend some time shooting at long range and take care to use proper technique and you just may be surprised at what you are capable of.

 

[Doug M.]

Don't box yourself into the recent stereotype of terrorists. We have had plenty of home grown ones show up in the last 20+ years. What any reasonably person would call a terrorist attack occurred in Colorado Springs today. He killed, as far as I have heard at this time, 1 cop and two civilians, and wounded 9 more. He was apparently held down with suppressive fire by LE, but his location was not well enough known to take him out. He eventually surrendered instead of self-selecting like most of them do, or letting the cops have a shot at him. Apparently, no one in the clinic was armed with a firearm, shame on them. It could have made a difference. Hell, a scalpel in the eye would have made a difference.

BTW: the advice above to shoot someone in the back of the head if they are actively killing or trying to is spot on.

 

[therewolf]

Body Armor will save your life, undoubtedly.

But you will still feel the hit. There will still be

extreme pain, and impact trauma. Not to mention the

force of the round which would normally penetrate an

unarmored person, being stopped on impact with the

armor. So, just saying, body

armor is hardly a free ride through a firefight.

That's before somebody shoots you either in the

neck, head, or kezains...

I know not what others will do, but if I am faced with the

sterling opportunity to stand up to terrorists in defense of country,

constitution, and loved ones, I don't care if those baxters are clad

head to toe in adamantine/kevlar/composite shielding, I won't let those

clowns wreak havoc in my back yard, if I can prevent it...