Muscatine

Sorry.  I was under the impression we were discussing the movie theater situation where the gunman stood up in full view, walked up and down a flight of stairs,  and massacred a room full of people who had cover, but no firearms.  The dream world you mention is where you think you could stand in front of trained citizens who have cover AND weapons, and come out unscathed, body armor or not. 

Get some training.  Soon. Classes are held several times a year.  Been there.  Done that.  Know what I'm talking about.  Worry about you. 

"This whole last paragraph is just pure speculation on your part.  And wrong."

Ok, you tell us.  What is the real point of your argument about self defense vs. body armor?   My last paragraph is logically correct, of course.   You tell me precisely what you believe is in error?

ie.:    My paragraph broken into bits with relevant questions, to help you:

"Besides all that, the ultimate end point of your argument about the "futility" of trying to fight someone wearing body armor....must only be that you are saying "why bother".   Just give up and die."   So what are you saying if not, in essence, 'you can't stop someone attacking you if they are wearing body armor'? Therefore? 

"And thinking about your family, or my family, or anyone's family in one of these situations is very relevant to this whole discussion.  Are you willing to tell them, "don't bother to arm yourselves or expect anyone else to fight back with a gun, as it is just a loosing proposition"? "  Well, are you, or are you not, willing to tell your family that?   If not, then you must believe resistance with a self defense weapon is correct if attacked by someone wearing body armor?

  "That's the inescapable outcome of your argument about body armor and armed self defense. "    Well, it has to be, right   If not, what is the outcome of your argument about body armor and armed self defense?    Try to be logical.

How about it malodery.  Can you answer without weaseling?