By Jonathan Kaminsky, Reuters
A teenage girl avoided serious injury when her glasses deflected a bullet fired during a drive-by shooting at her Seattle home, police said on Sunday.People sometimes question what KIND of protective eyeware is appropriate when on the range. As the accompanying article illustrates, ANYTHING is better than nothing.
The 16-year-old girl was asleep on her living room couch at about 9:40 p.m. local time on Saturday when shots were fired from a dark-colored sedan as it passed her house, Seattle police spokesman Detective Mark Jamieson said. Several bullets went through the walls of the house and one through the front window, Jamieson said.
One of the bullets struck the bridge of the teen's glasses, Jamieson said. She suffered only minor injuries and was treated at a local hospital, he added.
Certainly, they should be impact-resistant. That's the first criteria for choosing safety glasses which are appropriate for wear on a shooting range. Of course, any brittle material is limited to the amount of resistance they can provide, which is why
Yes, they should be shatterproof, too. You don't want shards of glass poking out of your eyeball when the integrity of the lenses is interrupted by impact, either by a bullet or rocks from the berm or even a piece of brass as ejected from the breach of a semi-automatic pistol. That's why Polycarbonate materials are preferable to, say "tempered glass". They're made of plastic, which means "bendable". So, even though they may dent or bend or even break, they are less likely than glass to actually shatter.
Finally, they should protect the eyes from impact from the sides, not just from the front. Ricochets may come from any direction, so if you can see the source of the object, that object may hit your eye. This makes it important to you to choose frames which continue this protection in directions other than straight ahead. Wrap-around frames (such as Smith&Wesson "38 special" offers) allow not only heavy frames, but the lenses also wrap around so that you retain peripheral vision.
Other considerations are price (the S&W example costs less that $12 .. they're affordable), protection from sun, glare, reflection and UV (many polycarbonate lenses are available in a variety of coatings), and style.
Also, some of us have vision problems such as astigmatism near-sightedness and far-sightedness. Opticians have become increasingly aware of these concerns, so it is possible that your own optician can offer you prescription glasses using "safety glass" materials.
If that's not your first choice, there are also glasses which are made to allow you to grind lenses to your prescription and insert them into frames which are designed to accept inserted lenses ... or "RX INSERTS". These are usually heavier frames, sometimes "goggles" and may not suit your sense of style. However, they do allow a combination of materials and vision which are not readily available from other options at a price which fits your budget.
You may have noticed that STYLE is not the first criteria here. Well, styles change, and if you want to spend the money you can get STYLISH safety glasses which meet all your needs and your "wants", too. However, not everyone can readily afford to spend extra money for style when their primary need is safety.
Also, your vision requirements may change as well, which means that every time you have to order a new prescription, you have to spend a lot to replace your old glasses.
As an example, I offer my own changing visual requirements.
I am "far sighted", which means I can see just fine past about five feet but about 20 years ago my eyes changed so much that I need special lenses in order to read comfortably. Ten years ago, I could no longer get a clear image of my front sight, even when my arms were fully extended. That was when I had to change from sunglasses to bifocals. I can see the front sight clearly through the lower half of the lenses, and the target is only slightly blurred at distances far enough that it matters. I can see the targets clearly through the upper half of the lenses. I have the option of choosing to use the lower lenses for far targets, or the upper lenses for the near targets, so I've learned to just tilt my head to get the best compromise .. a perfect sight picture, or 'good enough for close work'.
I shoot right-handed, but I am left-eye dominant. I've learned to handle that but it makes the choice of which lens of which EYE to use in sighting ... again, based on distance.
Now, my vision is again changing. Vision in my dominant left eye has changed to the point where now my RIGHT eye is dominant! I had to change my prescription and order a new set of glasses .. at $480 for the set.
My glasses are NOT strictly speaking, made of "Polycarbonate". Instead, they are "Trivex".
Click the link for specific comparison of "Polycarbonate" vs "Trivex" lenses, but for a quick summary:
Trivex thicker, but lighter, so provides more protection for less overall weight; provide "crisper" optics, both 'central' and 'peripheral'; usually more expensive; comparable impact resistance and coatings (eg: UV protection). Also, Polycarbonate lenses are available in a "wider variety of ... progressive lenses and multifocals".
On the other hand, my bifocals works work just fine for me. Given that I hate wearing glasses ... but "need" to ... it was my choice to go for the more expensive lenses so that I didn't have to buy one pair of glasses for shooting, and another pair of glasses for my daily wear. I have comfort day-by-day, and I don't have to compensate/compromise comfort for safety when I go shooting. Yes, it costs more, but when I'm shooting I am wearing EXACTLY the same glasses I wear every day, so I'm not distracted from my accuracy by looking through lenses which are uncomfortable or unfamiliar.
Your choice may not be the same, and that's fine. If we were not individualists, we would probably not be shooting IPSC matches as often as we can .. or can afford to .. or can find materials to reload our ammunition.
But that's a topic for another discussion.
___________________________
* POLYCHROMATE vs POLYCARBONATE
A final word.
I often use the terms POLYCHROMATE and POLYCARBONATE interchangeably. That's wrong.
POLYCHROMATE:
n. | 1. | (Chem.) A salt of a polychromic acid. |
1. | (Chem.) A compound which exhibits, or from which may be prepared, a variety of colors, as certain solutions derived from vegetables, which display colors by fluorescence |
POLYCARBONATE:
Any of a class of thermoplastics
characterized by high-impact strength, light weight, and flexibility,
and used as shatter-resistant substitutes for glass.
If you, like me, are sometimes confused by the similarity of compound words ... the word we're looking for here is POLYCARBONATE!
2 comments:
Fascinating
far sighted and narrow minded ;-). btw Bill Sahlberg says hi.
Post a Comment