forum.christogenea.org

The topic I want to discuss is body armour and personal protective equipment (PPE). How practical is it to use such equipment? I find that body armour is often very restrictive and hot, along with other PPE. Is it worth the risk to simply bin it off, or is it better to use as much PPE as possible. I often thought that it might be a good idea to use lighter PPE that although will have less protection, will not be so restrictive. The Osprey body armour we use is rather heavy and the plates will stop a 7.62 round, but one would still be injured and possibly unable to continue. Do the benefits of heavy restrictive PPE outweigh the deficits? I've noticed a lot of private civilian military personal seem to use some but not full PPE. Military are obliged to use full PPE. I personally like to use full PPE, but also appreciate more freedom of movement.

Do you want to be a hoplite, or a peltast? The argument is as old as men have fought. I would say that the 'whole armor of God' is better than either.

wmfinck wrote:Do you want to be a hoplite, or a peltast? The argument is as old as men have fought.

Yep. I guess it just depends on the circumstances and what you want to achieve.

NicoChristian wrote:The topic I want to discuss is body armour and personal protective equipment (PPE). How practical is it to use such equipment? I find that body armour is often very restrictive and hot, along with other PPE. Is it worth the risk to simply bin it off, or is it better to use as much PPE as possible. I often thought that it might be a good idea to use lighter PPE that although will have less protection, will not be so restrictive. The Osprey body armour we use is rather heavy and the plates will stop a 7.62 round, but one would still be injured and possibly unable to continue. Do the benefits of heavy restrictive PPE outweigh the deficits? I've noticed a lot of private civilian military personal seem to use some but not full PPE. Military are obliged to use full PPE. I personally like to use full PPE, but also appreciate more freedom of movement.

The level IIIA Point Blank armor I use has front and back rifle plates and overall it weighs about 16 pounds, not all that heavy. It also has a quick/emergency release. Flip a flap up and pull a cord and the armor falls off, with the front part falling forward and the back part falling back, something to be used if you're suddenly drowning because of the armor.

Look at how effective the armor is... An Iraqi insurgent shot an American soldier in the chest of his armor, most certainly using a 7.62x54R round, and within seconds the soldier was back on his feet moving for cover.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQi7iknSKy0


The armor I have is rated to stop a hit from 30'06 armor piercing round/load.


They make certain plates that are absolutely awesome, I saw one video demonstration where an anti-rifle plate withstood around 64 hits from an AR-15/M-16 before it began to fragment and break and a round finally got through the plate.

wmfinck wrote: I would say that the 'whole armor of God' is better than either.

There is one thing about the armor of God, there is no armor for the back, for those who turn their backs on Christ and their own kind. I would surmise that the same is true with kevlar or other similar man made protections. The Ephesians 6 armor can be worn at any time and anywhere; you can even go to bed with it on in case a SWAT team raids your home in the early A.M. Or while you're taking a shower or swimming.

Mark

wmfinck wrote:Do you want to be a hoplite, or a peltast? The argument is as old as men have fought. I would say that the 'whole armor of God' is better than either.

No emergency releases required....

brucebohn wrote:

wmfinck wrote:Do you want to be a hoplite, or a peltast? The argument is as old as men have fought. I would say that the 'whole armor of God' is better than either.

No emergency releases required....

I think going into battle naked would fall under the category of "tempting God" along the same lines of jumping out of a plane without a parachute or jumping out of a plane with only a main chute and no reserve chute.

SwordBrethren wrote:

brucebohn wrote:

wmfinck wrote:Do you want to be a hoplite, or a peltast? The argument is as old as men have fought. I would say that the 'whole armor of God' is better than either.

No emergency releases required....

I think going into battle naked would fall under the category of "tempting God" along the same lines of jumping out of a plane without a parachute or jumping out of a plane with only a main chute and no reserve chute.

Far from being "naked" , I am well armed, I may not have the latest in
body armor, but certainly not "tempting God". As far as skydiving, I made
the "jump" long ago upon learning Identity, I have left the plane, fully
committed, no turning back and I realize my only hope for a "soft landing"
is my "spiritual parachute". I will keep my powder dry and be prepared for
battle, but in the mean time, I will continue to wrestle and wage war with
the evil spirits that permeate our world, the only way I know how, constant
study and prayer... When the time comes that our enemies shall fall by the
sword and their offspring dashed against the rocks, I will not be AWOL.....

SwordBrethren wrote:

brucebohn wrote:

wmfinck wrote:Do you want to be a hoplite, or a peltast? The argument is as old as men have fought. I would say that the 'whole armor of God' is better than either.

No emergency releases required....

I think going into battle naked would fall under the category of "tempting God" along the same lines of jumping out of a plane without a parachute or jumping out of a plane with only a main chute and no reserve chute.

When I was in the Army there was a saying that went: two things fall from the sky - Airborne Rangers and bird poop. I've never skydived, with the thought that even with a parachute, it falls into the category of tempting God. Figuratively putting on the whole armor of God is not literally going into battle naked. This begs the question: do we put our trust in God or do we put our trust in Kevlar? Even with the so called body armor of man, there are still exposed parts of the body that a bullet can rip apart. Case in point, I wear glasses and I'm not a marksman by any means, in fact, I'm a terrible shot. But, when a squirrel is raping my apple tree on a rainy day, I can put him out of his misery from 50 yards with a pellet gun. When I discover it's a head shot, I can only muse that it wasn't me, but that the trajectory was divinely guided. We hear stories of people who were shot at and their cigarette lighter deflected the bullet or some other miracle of fate. But, it is not coincidence or accident; it has to be the hand of God. Tempting God is playing the odds or gambling if you will. "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."


Mark

I live in NYC, walk to work most nights and am a known racist. If I could legally buy and carry a gun I would. But I can't. Nonetheless that doesn't stop me from walking to work at night because I have the whole armor of God. With the whole armor of God first one can make sensible choices regarding physical armor, weapons, etc. rather than being like, say Mjodr on Stormfront who's religion is his guns. Isn't there a scripture that says in effect that physical training is worth a little but spiritual strength is much more important?