My take-away from this - Unless you can get 1 mile away easily and quickly, you might as well stay and film the action, because hiding behind the walls of your house won’t protect you at all.
Well, you could always do what the rabbits and snakes do - get flat. Minimize the target.
When the company I work for went through one of it’s “cheapness spasms” and quit letting us stay at decent hotels I ended up in a roach trap near the Oakland Airport. There was so much gunfire I slept in the bathtub with the mattress over the top.
Mine's brick. Does that apply for those also?
Here in hurricane country most of the houses are block. I’m pretty confident I’ll be safe inside.
Aside from the observation that police miss their intended targets 80% of time, this article is pretty stupid. He implores you to stay inside your house, but then goes on to say that your house walls offer you little protection. Dumb, dumb, dumb. Some cover is better than no cover depending on the type of cover, angle of impact of projectile, and discounting any weird shrapnel effects that could result. Really, this article has no reason to be in “Popular Science”. I was hoping for some detailed information about ballistics and its penetration capabilities through various types of building materials or something like that. Instead, he makes a bunch of contradictory assertions why you should do one thing, but doing that one thing really won’t result in a better outcome for you.
If you want to some useful information, you can view these USMC penetration tests.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lprGoEpDXJQ