Did any of you see that idiot reporter declare that because the rifle was a military style.?

that the police body armor was ineffective? I wonder what rifle other than a .22 or possibly a .30 M1 would not poke big holes in any body armor? And how about the head?

?2013-09-17T15:43:19Z

Favorite Answer

Idiot reporter is redundant.

John Hinkle2013-09-17T15:47:53Z

I guess he missed where it was announced the shooter did NOT use a "military style" weapon.

You know a 223 is only slightly larger than a 22 (but of course with a good bit more power behind it).

And you are right, body armor may or may not be effective against many bullets, but regardless that is why soldiers are taught to fire the first round center mass and the second between the eyes, it is called a double tap.

Joe2013-09-17T15:47:41Z

cnn & mscbn reported that there was a Ar15, They LIED to you! we had 2 handguns that he had taken & a SHOTGUN. You have to really stupid or they are just plain not telling the truth to the American people. Does that mean they are trying to mislead the American public like obamay is? Do they think that we are that stupid?

Victor Meldrew2013-09-17T15:52:37Z

If it was soft body armor you are right. While the plates are multihit test to 39mm

Anonymous2013-09-17T15:46:10Z

The only lifeform lower than a reporter is a politician. .
.

Show more answers (1)