FN "Five-Seven" and "American Handgunner" has really gotten my goat now

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Futo Inu

New member
OK, I wanted the topic to be fully descriptive, and this post is a hybrid of "Handguns" and "Legal/Political".

Today I received an American Handgunner Issue (Jan/Feb 2000) which highlights FN's "Five Seven" by a cover picture and lengthy write up. As you may know, this pistol is not new, but it's still kind of novel to most. It shoots a round which is basically a .224 Boz lengthened by about 3mm (to 28mm). It's called "5.7 x 28", I think, and it fires a .224, 31 gr bullet at about 1,950 fps. It holds 21 rounds of this cartridge. Pretty cool and seems to be well made.

Well, here is how the article begins:

"A radically new pistol/cartridge combination graces the cover of [this issue]. The gun was developed as part of a military weapons system and is also available to law enforcement. For reasons that will become obvious, neither the gun nor the ammunition will ever be sold to civilians or even to individual officers." The the article goes on to describe how the pistol's (and it's sister carbine's) purpose is to defeat soft body armor and kevlar helmets. It describes briefly at one point the infamous "LA bank robber shootout". The weapon bridges the gap between traditional pistol-caliber carbines/SMGs and the .223 rifles/carbines, blah, blah, blah...

Ok, now I'm steaming. Two things. First of all, after reading the article, only one thing is obvious to me - There isn't one reason on earth why any law-abiding citizen should not be allowed to buy/own one; in fact, I can see a significantly important reason why civilians and LEOs alike can and should want to own and use one - precisely for use against bodya-armored VTAs such as the LA bank robbers. Why should SWAT teams be the only ones able to defend their lives against such rogue VTA's? Are citizens' and beat cops' lives not as important?

Secondly, regarding the legal aspect, I cannot see anything remotely illegal under current laws in the US (in free states, that is) about selling/buying/owning/carrying/using one of these weapons. It doesn't violate the weight limit for handguns. There is no such thing as a "velocity limit", as far as I'm aware. I can understand why FN may choose to limit sales to police/military, because of simple profitability concerns, but owning or converting a pistol to this or a similar round would not violate federal laws, would it?
 
And I know someone is going to say "It's because it will be used against cops....It poses an incredibly threat to LEOs when in the hands of criminals..." Yeah, just like "cop-killer bullets", and all rifles and handguns for that matter, according to the antis - there's no real distinction between this and any other weapon - all can be used for good or evil. And everyone knows that if a criminal really wants to kill an LEO wearing body armor, any old bolt 308 or lever 30-30 will do an infinitely better job than a "Five-Seven".

I'm going to give American Handgunner a piece of my mind for their outrageously communist quote. Looks like their snail mail addy is 591 Camino de la Reina, #200, San Diego, CA 92108.

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited November 26, 1999).]
 
Right on Futo, I read that article and it really ticked me off. I dislike being talked down to, and I got the distinct impression that "its for your own good" wording was simply there to ease the frustration of not being "allowed" to purchase one.

------------------
"peace, love, joy, and happiness..."
 
Futo,

Buy a surplus CZ 52 (in .30 Mauser/7.62 Tokarov) for about $175. This round with an 86 grain bullet already exceeds 1400 fps.

Order some .30 caliber sabot thingees from the Shotgun News - whatever they call them, the little plastic cups into which you can insert a .22 varmint round for .308 caliber rifles. Reload with a .40 or .45 grain .223 slug - a ballistic tip would be awesome!

Reload to hot velocities and you will have effectively duplicated or exceeded the 5.7 X 28. You will not be breaking any laws and you will not be wasting a lot of money on some plastic "wonderpistol" with a lot of hype around it.

The concept is nothing new. The .22 Remington "Jet" from 1961 had a muzzle velocity of over 2400 fps!

Theres nothing new under the sun, just new ways to package and market old idea's.


------------------
Keith
The Bears and Bear Maulings Page: members.xoom.com/keithrogan
 
Thanks, Keith, I understand. But one of my points was "there is nothing illegal whatsoever about the Five Seven" (is there?).

What I was actually planning is to get a barrel blank for a AMT Automag III, and convert it to 5.7 mm Johnson (30 carbine to .224), but actually the .30 cal sabots would fit just fine in the 30 carbine, so why even do that? This would be more vel than from a .30 tokarev round, but not really in a concealable pistol like the CZ. Good ideas.

I wonder if a sabot round like that will effectively stabilize a .224 bullet from a short pistol length barrel. Does the sabot get enough spin from the rifling, or does the plastic "slip" over the rifling, reducing the spin? And does the sabot hold the bullet tightly enough to tranfer the spin to the bullet? TIA

[This message has been edited by Futo Inu (edited November 26, 1999).]
 
Futo,

I believe there is a federal law prohibiting armor piercing handgun ammunition sales. This means while the Five Seven (an awesome weapon IMO) is technically legal, the ammunition is not.

Tim
http://www.streetpro.com
Street Smart Professional Equipment
 
So what! YOU can't own this particular weapon. There are hundreds if not thousands of calibers & weapons that can and will defeat body armor. Last thing i want [as a peace officer] in a gun fight of the nature of "L.A. bank robbery scenerio" is a civilian running around with a weapon in the misdt of that choas. [Probably get shot ass shot off as a B.G. to boot for all his or her good intentions]. Also i see you all ready skirted the issue of ownership by re - inventing this particular weapon system with different components. Just because law enforcement can purchase and use these types of weapon sytems does that automatically makes you eligible also? There are quite a few weapons the military uses, that i like, but i"ll never own or use, but i can live with it. Can you? Far as swat goes, there TRAINED to deal with situations of this nature; your not. All human lives are important; let the men and women who are TRAINED to deal with violent persons and quite whining because the civilian population can't own certain style of weapon chosen for LEO porposes.
 
Dittoes, Futo. The article annoyed me too. I thought it was interesting that, in the same issue, a number of "snide" remarks about the FBI made it into the article on the Springfield Armory FBI pistol. This interested me personally because I had written a "letter to the editor" to AH back when they ran the article on the Les Baer, Para-based FBI "HRT" pistol. I had noted that perhaps a Vicki Weaver Memorial model should be made and a few other choice comments. AH editor Cameron Hopkins elected not to run my letter and, on his response postcard, noted that he didn't think that a review of the Baer FBI pistol ought to be "politicized". Based on the Springfield article, ol' Cam is finally waking up and smelling the coffee.

As to FN's "five-seven"...big deal. Jeff Cooper postulated such a piece two decades ago (in the course of reviewing some gas-operated 9mm prototypes from Husqvarna. Hard corps Cooper fans will remember the article in G&A and the goofy, "Buck Rogers" appearance of the prototypes.)

Rosco
 
Futo-

I'm with you on this. I reas the article too and was pretty well annoyed that a publication that supposedly supports our RKBA took that tone. Well they damn well better support our RKBA, because with out it, they have no business.

12-13hom-

I found your response to pretty disturbing. Especially since your profile indicates you are a "peace officer". So do you believe that you being a "peace officer" are intitled to weapons that we mere "civilians" aren't? By your response you obviously do feel this way.

That bothers me. Alot.

By this logic, since my AR15 will do more than an FN 57 should they be restricted to LEO's also?

It's attitudes like this that are causing a real rift between "peace officers" and us lowly "civilians". If you take this as a flame, it is.

------------------
Dan

Si vis pacem para bellum!

Check me out at:
<A HREF="http://www.mindspring.com/~susdan/interest.htm" TARGET=_blank>

www.mindspring.com/~susdan/interest.htm</A>
www.mindspring.com/~susdan/GlocksnGoodies.htm
 
While this particular handgun may never be available to the "general public", that doesn't mean that something similar won't make its way to your local gunshop someday.
FN has some pretty juicy gov't contracts that I'm sure they would want to try to protect if it meant not selling something like the "Five Seven" to civilians.
I saw an article in one of the gun mags earlier this year that evaluated a handgun built by a custom gunsmith based on the .224 Boz. So you could get something similar right now if you were willing to spend the bucks for it. I assume that you would also have to get the ammo custom made, as I don't believe anyone in the civilian end of the industry is currently manufacturing this cartridge.
While the Five Seven and P-90 are an interesting development, they seem to have limited applications. It remains to be seen whether their adoption by the military and police will be judged to be cost effective.
If they do come into widespread use, it's only a matter of time before civilian models become available. Maybe not from FN, but if there is sufficient interest, somebody will put it out there.
 
American handgunner's e-mail is
74673.3624@compuserve.com
or at least it used to be that address.

As to pistols, I think that I will keep the CZ-52 in .30 Tok and not play around with using saboted .22 bullets. (Not the .30 Mauser loading)

------------------
Ne Conjuge Nobiscum
"If there be treachery, let there be jehad!"
 
12-34Hon, I read the article and it bugged me that everyone can't buy it too. And I think you are here to start something not a cop. I am a cop and the first thing I want when the shooting starts is a few civilians with deer rifles to help me out. I know more good civilian shots than my fellow cops.
 
Amen, Futo and protoolman! 12-34, I also found your tone to be snobbish and condescending. When a gun is DISALLOWED to the general public (such as the SKS in Clintlerfornia), it sets a VERY dangerous precedent.
 
Oh, so it's the TRAINING that makes LEOs so stinkin' superior to the Peons that they can be the exclusive holder of specialized tools useful for lethal-force self-defense?

'Scuuze me, but isn't the whole theory of this country that the Citizens hold the power and delegate it to the State's apparatus?

True enough, the best choice is a trained respondent. But I'm the one who's always around to protect me. Deny me the tools and you deny me the right.
 
Law enforcement officers have no more rights
than any other citizen and the issue is not training. To my certain knowledge there are many many TFL members who have training in excess of most LEO's.

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
Welllll . . . This cop doesn't belive he should be "allowed" to own anything 'plain citizens' can't own. I know how to manufacture AP projectiles (never have, just know how) as does 1) anyone with access to the Internet; 2) anyone with an basic knowledge of metals and metalworking machinery; 3) anyone with an understanding of ballistic armor principles. Even 'soft' cast slugs, when driven fast enough, will penetrate conventional concealed body armor. All that said, I have little interest in making, buying, owning, shooting AP ammo. And while I'm certainly not interested in getting shot w/it (or any other ammo), I have absolutely no problem w/law-abiding citizens owning AP. Heck, the bad guys are not going to obey any "no AP pistol ammo" laws anyway--that is why we call them criminals.

I went back to the AH issue referred to above--yah, I see how some could be disturbed by the article.
 
Shouldn't some of these complaints be directed toward the congress that passed laws limiting magazines to 10 rounds and giving ATF the authority to declare ammunition "non sporting" and thus restrict its sale?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top