Executive job w\ body armor manuf. open, but you have to agree to be shot with BA on once a year

In My Humble Opinion
1

Let’s say there is fairly lucrative executive job available with body armor manufacturer. One of the conditions of the job is that the entire executive staff including the CEO suits up once a year with their best current body armor, and gets shot with a caliber round in a location on the vest that the vest is advertised to, and should easily handle relative to its specifications.

The CEO feels doing this is critical to be able represent the product with confidence. It’s also a fantastic advertising tool. Let’s assume the vests to be used for this are pulled off the line and inspected and pass all quality tests.

If you refuse to take the shot you are immediately fired.

Is this legal as a job requirement?

Would you do it?

2

Probably, but a lot would depend on how strict a rule it is, if there were any exceptions for health (etc.) , and how safe the BA is. I can’t imagine this being valid if there is a good chance you might die trying this. That said, police officers often have to voluntarily be tased in order to carry a taser, so I can imagine that such a thing could fly as a job requirement even though it is really stupid.

3

In a heartbeat. No question. I would do this for not much more than my current salary.

4

Doesn’t getting shot while wearing body armor typically result in serious injury?

5

Hard armor, localized or distributed bruising. Soft armor, extreme bruising, soft tissue damage and broken ribs, depending on the location and net power of the round.

All of which are better than ragged holes in you, but I’d think twice about doing it for fun and profit.

6

No, OSHA is not going to allow the executives to be shot with a gun. It is asinine and unnecessary; body armor is marketed as a last resort layer of defense and is tested on gel dummies extensively to measure its protectiveness.

The company, and/or the individuals pulling the trigger would be liable for criminal prosecution (assault with a deadly weapon), as well as civil damages for the injuries and mistakes that will occur. Certainly, the company would immediately loose its insurance coverage if they pulled this stunt.

7

How do police depts. require potential taser carriers to get tasered if this is the case?

8

I don’t think they do. The Taser.com FAQ says that being tased isn’t required to be certified as a user or instructor.

9

Here’s one that does it.

Richard does it all the time…

Some dumbass ruins a nice vest.

Tom says his company is up to the challenge… I doubt anyone was prosecuted.

It may not be legal to make it a requirement, but there are plenty of folks who will do with no questions asked.

And it’s not exactly a new idea…

10

That would be like requiring airbag manufacturers to crash a vehicle into a wall to test their airbags.

11

The absence of prosecution does not mean the criminal liability does not exist.

12

It ought to be.

And I’d be willing to get shot with a vest off the line, but I don’t want to do it every year.
Maybe we can draw numbers and just shoot one exec?

Really it’s no different than a cook walking into his restauarnat on his day off and ordering a meal.

13

Bleh

14

Legalities aside, I’m not at all convinced that this would be a good advertising gimmik. Avid gun owners who are into body armor as well, are probably going to think the guys running this company are dumbasses. Especially if we’re talking about police forces buying this product. The politics alone would probably drive their business elsewhere.

That is of course, unless the company makes really bad ass armor. Then their sensibilities go right out the window and they’ll buy the product.

So at best it has a neutral effect at worst it has a negative effect.

15

This. I’m sure I could find an executive job where one of the requirements isn’t getting shot at.

Quite frankly, based on some of the responses in this thread, I have to wonder if a new requirement for fighting ignorance on the SDMB is to post something utterly ignorant.

Eating a meal typically doesn’t hurt or have a risk of injury or death associated with it.

Well. At least Darwin’s system works as advertised.

16

Was going to link to one of his videos if it hadn’t already been done. My favorite is the one where he stands on one leg while getting shot with, IIRC, an FAL in 7.62 NATO. No, he did not fall over. The stuff works. Until it doesn’t, I guess. I’d be more worried about the guy shooting me screwing up the aim somehow, than I would of the armor failing.

I guess it’s a really crappy job market out there… Just how much would they be paying me again?

Edit: Oh, after re-reading some of the posts in the thread, Second Chance (the company whose president is the guy getting shot in the linked video) has been doing this sort of thing for at least 25 years. I first heard about them from videos like the one ducati linked to. No idea if it helped them with sales.

17

Talk about eating your own dog food.

I edited a video production for a company that made a vehicle intended for use on sensitive ground, like arctic tundra. The inventor would let the vehicle, loaded with a bulldozer, drive over his legs.

18

Wow. What does that thing weigh? I just guessed 10k lbs, and figured about 80 square feet of contact patch. That’s roughly 125 pounds/square foot. Make the tires soft, and it’s almost doable, but add a 40,000 lb machine and I’m out! :eek:

19

Yes.

20

You guys are underestimating the macho gung ho attitude you can find in some workplaces. Back when I was working, I knew people who asked to get shot while wearing a bulletproof vest during firearms training just because they thought it would be fun (these requests were always denied as far as I know). People would also volunteer to get tear gassed (and these requests were accepted). Keep in mind this wasn’t mandatory or even encouraged by the trainers - people were stepping forward and asking to do these things.