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

....