Image Courtesy of Safariland
The debate over outer vest carriers vs “under the shirt” soft armor isn’t as tiresome as 9mm vs .45, but it’s not far off. Unlike caliber contention, though, there’s less room for debate.
A significant majority of today’s peace officers are in favor of outer carriers, and even those who aren’t will admit OVERS have some advantages, well, over the UNDERS.
There are two reasons for that. The main one is comfort. The second (related) one is a demonstrable reduction in long-term injury.
Given that, I hope I’m preaching to the choir here. If not, maybe we can kick-start a conversation about it. If so, perhaps the article, along with the comments of LEOs willing to weigh in, will help improve “Over” use as well as officer safety.
That kind of discussion is invaluable, regardless of which side of the debate you come down on. After all, if everyone is thinking alike, no one is thinking.
Over-the-Uniform Evolution
Outer vest carriers aren’t anything new. They’ve actually been around long enough that some young officers introduced to the first iterations are now the old-timers.
Back in my day (read that in a Statler/Waldorf voice), there were few if any external carrier options available. The only real way to offset the weight and discomfort of a duty belt was to use suspenders.
This was less than ideal in several ways. Very few Chiefs or Sheriffs would allow them, and even if authorized by P&Ps, most savvy officers eschewed them as a safety impediment for officers.
The cross-body shoulder strap worn by many agencies was often reviled as a “drunk strap,” something a combative subject could grab onto and use to the officer’s disadvantage. But at least many of those were designed to easily break loose. Not so with suspenders.
We went on to see outer carriers designed to resemble a uniform shirt; those met with some approbation, but not enough to garner widespread acceptance. That took time, improvement in materials and design, and a transition to a new generation (or two) of LEOs. In fact, I would argue that the timeline of outer carrier approval was very roughly contemporaneous with the widespread adoption of patrol rifles and, funny as it might sound, the begrudging acceptance of visible tattoos on new recruits.
Image Courtesy of Safariland
Most significant, however, was a combination of a demand for comfort on the part of line officers, combined with a much delayed (or ignored) acknowledgment of an external carrier’s health benefits.
Why? The two Ms: Money and Manning.
A reduction in common medical issues caused or exacerbated by traditional vests and over-loaded duty belts meant a reduction in injury claims, light-duty assignments, and even early retirements.
Medical bills and medical leave directly impact budget and staffing.
Career Comfort
There is no refuting the long-term individual health benefits of an “Over.” Back injuries, knee injuries, and sciatica have traditionally been common to LEOs. The more experienced the officer, the more likely they are to suffer long-term injury. This might not always remove an officer from service, but it did (and does) degrade both the quality of life and motivation to do the job.
A few years ago, the University of Wisconsin Eau Clair and the Mayo Clinic Health System worked with their local PD to study external carriers vs traditional under-uniform armor.
“The findings are clear and they are significant,” said Dr. Jeff Janot, a professor of kinesiology and faculty lead on the study. “While the vests weigh more, the weight is more evenly distributed so there is less strain on the hips and lower back.”
This is just one study, but it’s supported by vast amounts of anecdotal evidence from large numbers of LEOs.
External carriers are not only less likely to cause long-term health issues, but the increased comfort also makes LEOs more likely to wear their armor in the first place. That’s a Good Thing.
Should everyone be wearing armor whenever they’re on duty or clearly identifiable as a cop? Absolutely. But they don’t. Right, wrong, or indifferent, that’s the way it is. As I see it, anything that combats this is a checkmark in the PRO column.
Other advantages include (but are not limited to):
- Weight is more evenly distributed, shifting from the waist and hips to shoulder and torso.
- There’s more real estate available for equipment.
- Officers who’d otherwise be forced to by belt gear to sit contorted in their patrol car can ride more comfortably.
- Officers in a secure location, i.e., in the squad room writing a report, etc., can easily remove an outer vest to cool off and stretch and can throw it back on just as easily.
The Downside (and What Not to Do)
The two biggest complaints I have seen are simple and in fairness, do have merits.
- A “militaristic” look. This is probably the single greatest observation made by agencies and administrators who are opposed to external vests. The wrong style of carrier, particularly one loaded with unnecessary pockets, pouches, and gear, can appear more militant than what the public is (or was) used to.
- Misuse of the equipment.
Most of the negatives associated with outer carrier can be mitigated or eliminated with proper training and reasonable P&Ps.
Keep It Professional.
Image Courtesy of Safariland
Don’t be the sloppy Joe Bag o’ Donuts that embarrasses the profession. The carrier is part of your uniform. It should be treated, maintained, and cleaned as such. Use some of the additional space you now have available to improve identification. Many professions wear uniforms, and you have to get closer to see it’s a cop. Put a POLICE or SHERIFF placard on there that’s easy to see.
Understand Your Gear and Wear It Properly.
A drop-leg holster can be a good option in the right circumstances, but not if you wear it like Han Solo. The same principle applies to your vest. Make sure it fits correctly. Ensure the panels are positioned correctly. Wear it so you have the right coverage, especially your upper chest and sides.
Don’t Load It Down Like You’re Invading Val Verde.
Young soldiers packing a ruck will fill up every available bit of space. Many officers do the same with their carrier. Just because you have additional real estate available doesn’t mean you have to use it all. Carry what you need to on there, but don’t go full Gecko45. It’s inefficient, and it adds to the militaristic look they’re already complaining about.
Don’t Let It Impact Officer Safety.
For the love of One Adam 12 and all that’s holy, don’t be a dumbass. Don’t tuck your hands into the armpits of your vest and chicken-wing it on a call or traffic stop. There’s no room in Contact and Cover for that sort of stupid, but there could be a place on the NLEOMF wall for it.
Train Like You Patrol.
Don’t run your qual course in utilities and a T-shirt. Wear the gear you work in, not just on the range but even when you’re practicing your draw stroke and dry-firing at home. (This should be the case no matter what kind of armor you wear, be the way.)
Final Thoughts.
If you decide (or are allowed) to go with an outer carrier, remember to exercise due diligence. Armor carriers vary in quality, both in design and in manufacture. I’m most familiar with (and a big fan of) the Oregon City outer carrier, as are several of my friends. If that’s not your preference, Safariland has a whole line of armor and armor carriers with a proven track record of durability and saving lives. Check them out.
Ultimately, you might not have a choice in what you wear or carry, but that doesn’t mean you can’t advocate for something different and better.
Stay safe.
Now weigh in with your pros and cons. We’ll all be better for it.
About the author: David Reeder is a former LEO, retired Defensor Fortis SNCO, a Cadre Dispatch contributor, and the editor of the Safariland Roundup newsletter. You can contact him here.
This article was authored and edited following POLICE editorial standards and style. Opinions expressed may not reflect those of POLICE.