this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
517 points (99.1% liked)

Not The Onion

19088 readers
917 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I feel like that's probably the one thing a vehicle marketed as bullet-proof needs to be... like, actually bullet-proof.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

For non-tactical applications they’re no more or less bulletproof

You sure about that? I mean, they're made of thin stainless steel glued to a plastic shell.

[–] obsoleteacct@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Yeah. Any car that isn't armored should be assumed 0% bulletproof. I wouldn't trust a car door to protect me from a .22.

The engine block is the only thing on a regular cop car that would reliably stop, deflect, or at least slow most bullets.

[–] Gluek@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

And yet it also missed on cybertruck.

[–] Omgpwnies@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I think you missed the whoosh