Gimme the lowdown. I've heard more than a few different versions of why Bicep/Upper Arm Armor is absolutely 100% needed (you'll get shot through your side if you don't have it), and an equal number of why you shouldn't use it (some rounds may hit it and deflect into your side).
So, does anybody have the good word? Is it really as simple as saying "Mission Drives the Gear Train"? The reason I'm not accepting that totally in this instance is that how do you really define a typical SWAT "mission", which is what I'm primarily asking about? Should I just count up the number of missions where pistol only was the threat, vs. the number with a rifle threat (since our bicep armor, and I'm assuming most, don't stop a rifle threat)?
I've also heard there is a "study" or article out there someplace that demonstrates the "round following the bicep armor and entering side chest when it may have just passed through or missed entirely". Anybody heard of this?
I'm trying to combat the "more armor is betterrrzzzz" argument, since I've already been there once with the USMC MTV and know that more, heavier armor is NOT always better if it reduces individual capabilities in the fight due to bulk or weight.
What say ya'll?