Wouldn't matter. Even if it stopped it you'd still be dead. It's an anti-aircraft round. In fact if you have a BMG you have to be careful what you shoot because they tend to keep on going.
After you stop jizzing yourself over the type of bullets you own, actually read the article and see he shot it with a bunch of stuff and the human inside would have survived. Then then jet cut open the helmet and retrieved a bunch of bullets from inside the protective layer.
Everyone knows bulletproof is not absolute and doesn't apply to a sufficiently large gun. YoUr VeSt IsNt BuLlEtPrOoF tO mY gUnS adds no new insight and does not demonstrate that owning slightly overpriced bullets makes you smart.
The insight is that someone is calling something bulletproof, which is untrue at best.
The correct term is ballistic resistant body armor, and the plates to stop a heavy calibre weigh a lot, and the impact trauma on armor can be fatal regardless despite no penetration.
The insight is that someone is calling something bulletproof, which is untrue at best.
Except that as I said no one actually thinks anything called bullet proof is proof against all bullets of arbitrarily large calibre and power. The common, colloquial term (which is the appropriate one for a general audience publication) is "bulletproof".
calling something bulletproof, which is untrue at best.
It is a useful term, and has more meaning than the language Nazis associate it with. "Bulletproof" is known to be qualified. Like "Silencer". Neither is 100%, but they are part measures, with the name of the goal, not the result. Both are "correct", in that in common usage, they are known to mean what they do mean. Nobody thinks "bulletproof" will stop all bullets. Even though way too many people think "silencers" work like they do in movies and video games.
The real goal of a silencer is to allow a f
Money will say more in one moment than the most eloquent lover can in years.
Either it came from a 3D printer... (Score:0, Troll)
Choose one, morons.
Re: Either it came from a 3D printer... (Score:3)
Oh yes (Score:2)
0.5 BMG would disagree as well.
Re: (Score:2)
0.5 BMG would disagree as well.
Just to be certain, I would recommend using a Raufoss Mk 211 (Red Waterfall) [wikipedia.org] armor piercing incendiary round.
Maybe Raufoss would even be willing to demonstrate it against a hardened Storm Trooper suit . . . just for shits and giggles.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
0.5 BMG would disagree as well.
Wouldn't matter. Even if it stopped it you'd still be dead. It's an anti-aircraft round. In fact if you have a BMG you have to be careful what you shoot because they tend to keep on going.
Re: Either it came from a 3D printer... (Score:5, Informative)
After you stop jizzing yourself over the type of bullets you own, actually read the article and see he shot it with a bunch of stuff and the human inside would have survived. Then then jet cut open the helmet and retrieved a bunch of bullets from inside the protective layer.
Everyone knows bulletproof is not absolute and doesn't apply to a sufficiently large gun. YoUr VeSt IsNt BuLlEtPrOoF tO mY gUnS adds no new insight and does not demonstrate that owning slightly overpriced bullets makes you smart.
Re: (Score:2)
The insight is that someone is calling something bulletproof, which is untrue at best.
The correct term is ballistic resistant body armor, and the plates to stop a heavy calibre weigh a lot, and the impact trauma on armor can be fatal regardless despite no penetration.
Re: (Score:3)
The insight is that someone is calling something bulletproof, which is untrue at best.
Except that as I said no one actually thinks anything called bullet proof is proof against all bullets of arbitrarily large calibre and power. The common, colloquial term (which is the appropriate one for a general audience publication) is "bulletproof".
Re: (Score:3)
Pedantic OCDs with guns may not be the best mix.
Re: (Score:2)
calling something bulletproof, which is untrue at best.
It is a useful term, and has more meaning than the language Nazis associate it with. "Bulletproof" is known to be qualified. Like "Silencer". Neither is 100%, but they are part measures, with the name of the goal, not the result. Both are "correct", in that in common usage, they are known to mean what they do mean. Nobody thinks "bulletproof" will stop all bullets. Even though way too many people think "silencers" work like they do in movies and video games.
The real goal of a silencer is to allow a f