NCJ Number
106693
Journal
Law and Order Volume: 35 Issue: 8 Dated: (August 1987) Pages: 29-33
Date Published
1987
Length
5 pages
Annotation
The debate over body armor centers in the pertinent National Institute of Justice Standard 0101.03 (April 1987), whose requirements for body armor make it so uncomfortable that most officers will not wear it.
Abstract
Issues debated include the requirement for waterproofing, protection against blunt trauma, vest replacement, and promotion of the use of body armor by officers. Waterproofing adds heat retention and stiffness to armor, such that officers resist wearing it. Although a heavily soaked vest loses its protective quality while wet, tests have not yet determined how much moisture it takes to degrade Kevlar's ballistic performance. The conditions under which most officers work may not make waterproofing a high priority for body armor. Protection against blunt trauma from bullet impact against the vest also requires making the vest less comfortable to wear. There has never been a case requiring surgery for blunt trauma due to bullet impact on a vest. Tests on the effective life of body armor show performance variance over time related to intensity of use, environmental factors, and garment care. Since a high percentage of officers who own body armor do not wear it because it is too uncomfortable, police officials must decide whether lowered standards that make armor more wearable might be preferable to higher standards that make vests impractical. Some have proposed optional selections for body armor based on a balance between comfort and realistic threat assessment for each police jurisdiction. One approach for encouraging wear is to let each officer select the type of vest he/she prefers after information is provided on armor qualities.