Attempt to ban five-seven
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=128025
Printed Date: 14 March 2026 at 10:28pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Attempt to ban five-seven
Posted By: Glassjaw
Subject: Attempt to ban five-seven
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:04am
|
...Well apparently my states reps are at it again.... They seem to think that the 5.7mm (Hence five-seven) pistol is a "cop killer" gun. It was intended for military and law enforcement...but so are most other guns that people collect. They wish to put a ban on these simply because they can penetrate police bullet proof vests. While they are at it, they might as well ban all other collecter weapons. One thing I found interesting on the report was "The small and compact size." Okay, let me get this straight. It is the only pistol that is small and compact now? I can't remember who it was, but someone here had this to say which is one of the most brillaint things I have read.."Increasing weapon bans will not take them from the hands of criminals simply for this reason, they are criminals. It will only make them harder for honost citizens to get them." If we are going to ban a particular weapon, why not ban a particular golf club? Or a particular car? There are so many things I see wrong with this movement. ------------- |
Replies:
Posted By: Sammy
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:06am
|
I only know the gun from Counterstrike Source, but think of it this way. Imagine you are a cop and the average person you face carries a gun that can shoot through your vest and kill you. Would you want that? Or let some collector have his precious gun? You have to think of the other side.. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Glassjaw
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:08am
I have. But if you are a criminal and you have a gun with you and intend to use it, you are still going to shoot it. Bullet proof vests do not stop all rounds of ammunition fired, while also they only protect a small portion of your body. The fact of the matter is, a criminal with a gun and intent to use it will still shoot at you, maybe hit you maybe not. But if he does there is no promise that it will be in the chest. It could be the head, arms, legs..etc. And as before it could go through the vest. ------------- |
Sammy wrote:Posted By: .Ryan
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:09am
|
Right but since when has banning things stopped criminals from aquiring
them. Making things against the law just denies them from law-abiding
citizens...criminals will have them anyway...
-------------  |
Posted By: Darur
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:11am
They protect the region of your body you are most likely to get hit. Unless your criminal is a bit of a marksman, chances are he wont hit your head in most cases. I am personally very much against banning guns. ------------- Real Men play Tuba [IMG]http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/1859/newsmall6xz.jpg"> PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf! http://www.tippmann.com/forum/wwf77a/log_off_user.asp" rel="nofollow - DONT CLICK ME!!1 |
Posted By: Sammy
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:17am
|
I'm not againt banning guns; we even have a gun (It's a big thing in Southern California to have one). It just didn't seem like you saw it from the other side. Maybe they should just ban certain types of ammunition or hollow point bullets. Finally, I don't see the revelance with golf clubs. I don't see the average criminal holding up a liquor store with a golf club.. -------------
|
Posted By: Glassjaw
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:20am
I understand the other side...I guess it was just the way the media put it that got me ticked off a little. I understand that yes it is more harmful to police and what not, but gah. The one thing that really got me going is all the times they said "cop killer". -10 times of that phrase is enough, let alone like 10 times. Because we all know, the gun was intended to kill po-po's. ------------- |
Posted By: Johndcjr1989
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:32am
|
well my dads a cop so i should be on the side of banning it but i know for a fact that it is MUCH harder to go through the bullet proof vests than ppl think...its got a couple of steel plates in there and the vest itself is friggin thick so good luck penetrating that. hes been shot at but never hit but his buddy was shot with a .223 (same bullet used in an m-16) and the vest stopped it. there are lots of guns that are powerful enough to break through the vest and im not really sure if the 5.7 mm is one of the ones to be really worried about esspecially when how many ppl that u know of own these guns? id be more worried about being shot with a high powered rifle instead. ------------- Rockin' the Ironman Intimidator. The Original Redneck Gangsta |
Posted By: stick_boy_2002
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:47am
mabey im wrong but im pretty sure an M-16 uses a 5.56mm round, a .223 isnt really that big of a round. EDIT: i checked up on it and a .223 and a 5.56 are the same round. |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:39am
The whole argument collapses when you mention the Average Person. Criminals aren't average people. By definition they are people who break laws. Gun controll laws only prevent law abiding peopel from owning them. As for firearms that can penetrate vests, well golly. Anyone who has a decent deer rifle owns a firearm that can penetrate normal cop issue soft body armour. Infact most cop vests are only Level II + wich aren't even rated for 9mm sub guin rounds, and a .223 will smoke through it with no worry. There is a pelothra of firearms that are pistols that can penetrate a Level II vest. Heck most normal calibers (.45ACP, 9x19mm and so on) can be loaded with AP ammunition. To penetrate armour you need something FAST and SMALL. There are a couple of rounds specifically designed like this with small frontal areas and very low weights to penetrate vests. KTW and the French THV are just 2 examples. I forget the manufacturer but there is a South African made Armour penetrating hollow point called the Eliminator, that used to be standard issue Cop ammunition. All of these are muhc easier to get hold of than the expensive FN Five seveN pistol. I personally don't put too much into this 5.7mm round. It is too small, and travels too slowly to be combat effective, IMHO. Its ONLY saving grace is that it can penetrate armour that will stop a normal .45ACP, .40S&w or 9x19mm round. However it has the same energy, size and weight as .22 WMR rounds. Very very dicey. I personally don't think the Five seveN should be banned, and I am a cop who gets issued Level IIIA armour. Level III + armour is the armour with metal or ceramic inserts called trauma plates. These increase the ballistic protection up to 7.62NATO rounds. You could be shooting my chest with an M14 and it won't kill me. The 5.7 will not penetrate this armour level. As others have said, armour only protects your chest and maybe your back. Under your arms is open, and the armour making up the side pannels is generally of a lesser protection anyway. You legs with both Femoral arteries is open to being shot, as is your meck witht he Juggular and your spine. Not to mention that your head is always open for getting shot. By banning a specific type of firearm for the lack of a perceived need opens the door for all firearms to be banned for not fitting inside the requirement box of a group of people who don't even use them. KBK |
Posted By: Sarge14
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:42am
in your post, u said bullet PROOF, dont you mean bullet RESISTANT. Because nothing is Bullet Proof. ------------- Nothing is Stronger than the Heart of a Volunteer Proud to be a Soldier in the United States Army! Commo Leads the Way!! |
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:42am
|
Well banning car theft is useless too. Think about it, the bad guys are going to steal cars regardless, so why cant I? ------------- 
|
Posted By: Roll Tide
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:44am
| I could care less if they banned all firearms. All they do is kill people and animals. |
Posted By: 98God
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:45am
That was ignorant. Firearms don't kill people, people do. |
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:46am
|
And firearms make it so much easier too. -------------
|
Posted By: 98God
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:47am
Yeah that is true. It all depends on how it is used though. Banning all firearms would just piss a lot of people off. Not everyone who owns a gun kills people and animals. |
Posted By: Roll Tide
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:48am
|
Firearms sure do help, huh? I just think that military and law enforcement are the only people that should have them, but we've already made a mistake by letting them become common in society. |
Posted By: stick_boy_2002
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:48am
|
Posted By: stick_boy_2002
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:50am
|
Posted By: Glassjaw
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:54am
So. Lets say for instance you are on a camping trip and you get terrorized by a large animal. You would want no sort of fire arm to protect yourself? And fire arms can not be fired without an operator so....once again...people kill people, not weapons. If you want to ban a gun because it can kill poeple, why not ban baseball bats or brass knuckles or knives? ------------- |
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:59am
Cant say I have ever found myself victim of animal terrorisim. Well, their was that one time that a cottonmouth decided to share the boat with me, but a stick with a knife tied on the end that I keep in the boat took care of it. Yep, cant say that situation could have been solved by a gun. Oh, and if people kill people and not the guns, are you in favor of their being no restrictions what so ever on any sort of firearm? -------------
|
Posted By: Glassjaw
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:02pm
To be quite honost, most but not all. Some weapons civilians serve no purpose of having. Yeah, it may sound like I am contradicting my stand point but there is a difference between a AT4 and an m4. Either way, restrictions or not, criminals can get any weapon they want. Because we all know "cotton mouth" is a large animal.... ------------- |
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:06pm
Ok, so the criminals can have the big guns, so we should do. Companies start making more of them, which means the streets get flooded with them. All the guns you see criminals with were made with honest intent. Oh, and what exactilly do you consider a "Large" animal. I know a cottonmouth isnt a "Large" animal but I would dare say it could kill you just as quick. -------------
|
Posted By: Glassjaw
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:09pm
You don't think these high power illegal weapons are alrady flooded within the criminal community? Well here, let me ask you a question. What is your stand on gun control? What do you think should be banned and what shouldn't? I would consider a large animal a bear or even a violent animal like a wolf. ------------- |
Posted By: Tae Kwon Do
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:20pm
Yes they are flooded in the criminal community, but openening up the civilian market to the same guns, thus letting greedy companies mass produce the guns, putting that many more of them on the market, just does'nt sound like the best plan. I dont think that making more is the way to stop the flow of extra-dangerous firearms. My stance on gun control... Manditory trigger locks on pistols. Limit to 5 firearms per household. No ability to carry unless gone through extensive permit testing for a consealed lisence. (Im not good with model names and the such, so forgive me if you are. I do own firearms, but mine are rather simple) Ban "Assult Weapons". I know this is a tricky subject but any of the M16/M4/AK47/Uzi/MAC10 civilian look-a-likes that are semi-automatic. Special permits can be issued to get around the 5 gun limit if you can show that you are an antiques collector. Im sure there are more points I should make but they are escapeing me right now. -------------
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:22pm
|
Snakes can kill quickly, but that ARE somthing that can be sorted out with a spade or a stick.
Try beat of a grizzly with said pointy stick. Guns laws are all good a propper, however, as I said, criminals break laws. Criminals also use things like knives, baseball bats, bricks and screwdrivers to cause bodily harm and death. I should be allowed all the tools I need to defend myself. Firearms makes it easier to defend myself against others. Especially if they are outnumbering you. KBK |
Posted By: merc
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:39pm
|
did they ever unban the 5.7mm round? i know you can buy the five seven pistol now but i have never seen the ammo anywhere...
as for Tae Kwon Do i have to disagree with you. 5 firearms per house hold is silly. my buddy has 17 firearms just for him then his wife has some and he is starting to get his 4 year old step son into shooting (bb gun). now you might think why would someone need more than 5 firearms. he has 2 .22LR rifles for squirll, 17HMR for wood chucks, a 20 guage, 16 guage, 2 12 guages and a 10 guage shot gun for different game, an SKS 7.62mm rifle for bear 2 black powder long guns, and an M16A1 clone for target shooting. he has others also but i cant remember them... fire arms are no different than any other tools or sporting gear. look at golf could you tell a hard core golfer he can only have 5 clubs? or a fisherman he could only have 5 lures? or a macanic he can only have 5 sockets? "assault" rifles are a blast to shoot probly the most fun ive ever had at a range was ripping off on my buddys ap15 (m16a1 clone). there is no 1 gun that can do it all. edit: http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/carpesignum/detail?.dir=9c71&.dnm=2d4c.jpg&.src=ph - link to my buddys wall ------------- saving the world, one warship at a time. |
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 12:57pm
Maybe, for most, the ownership of all weapons is for the pleasure of just owning and safely using them.... That for me is reason alone not to ban them. Ban the unsafe use of weapons, as already has been done. Other than that there should be no more restrictions. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Bunkered
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 1:30pm
Agreed Hades. Most people have no need for a large SUV, but people still drive them. Far more people are killed in car accidents involving SUVs than are killed by guns. Why don't we ban SUVs to anyone that doesn't have a need for them? Because that's not the way the US works. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 1:43pm
As I understand it the Armour Piercing SS-190 ammunition is not for gneral sale, but you can buy the SS196SR hollow point ones, wich, from the 5-7 will still punch military armour at 50m. KBK |
Posted By: The Guy
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 1:47pm
|
don't think hollow points will pierce a vest very well. are they banning them overall, or just from collectors? |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 1:59pm
|
They haven't banned anything, they are TRYING to ban them from so called civilian ownership. Event hough LEO's are civilians.
I THINK they are hollow points, I'm not too sure about it. But they do penetrate because they still have a fairly small frontal area, yet only at limited ranges. KBK |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:19pm
|
This is just my view on the subject. If some cop, thinks hes going to bully me around and poke his fingers in my chest and get in my face, then put a pair of cuffs on me to humiliate me. I am going make his head into a canoe. So what a cop can have a people killing gun but god forbid a citizen carry a gun that can kill a cop? We are given the right to bare arms to protect us from the government. If any cop tried to put his hands on me, hes dead.
Yes im a little bit of an anarcist, and i DO NOT like the cops in my area. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors"> 
|
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:28pm
Oh yea?! 
Too bad it doesn't exist. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:39pm
|
Cops have the right to carry people killing guns because they put their lives on the line to enforce the laws of the country.
They have to deal with the dregs of scociety who think nothing of wating a humans life. They have to uphold the law in the face of people who make vast profits from breaking them. They also have to put up with people like you. Lack of respect for a cop is one thing. When that lack of respect leads to people not carring if they hurt or kill a cop is another. Cops don't often " bully me around and poke his fingers in my chest and get in my face, then put a pair of cuffs on me to humiliate me" They will generally treat you with the respect and dignity that you show them. If you are hostile towars them they have the right to take steps to preven harm comming to them or others. Hence the cuffs. If you were cought breaking a law, mouthing off to a cop isn't the way to go. They are only doing the job they are paid to do. If you want to change laws, write to congressmen, get elected into the goverment, create change from the inside. Go vote when you are old enough to. Cops enforce laws chosen buy citizens. Get over being a 13 year old who is misunderstood by everyone. Cops protect live by putting their own at risk. Cops should be allowed to defend themselves. It would almost be worth getting guested to tell you how muhc you disgust me with your attitude. However you arne't important enough for me to loose my posting privelages over. Go see a counselor. |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:42pm
|
Im 19 and i dont like cops. Cry about it. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:44pm
|
That "One Gun" would be wicked witht he Playback for target shooting. All 200 in the same hole. I win.
KBK |
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:44pm
|
So what horrible thing did a cop ever do to you? -------------
|
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:48pm
|
Just on a rutine traffic stop, he ripped apart my car, took a knife, and cut open all my things, threw all my stuff out of the car, searched me, my brother and my sister. He put me in cuffs and let me sit out on the side of the road in freezing rain, i told him the cuffs were too tight, he did nothing, i still have no feeling on the top of my left hand. He wasted about 200 dollars worth of feed. Then gave me a "failure to use left turn signal" laughed at me and left. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Hitman
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:51pm
|
This week 4 police officers were killed in Alberta. They were taking down a Marijuana grow operation and were killed by the owner with an automatic weapon. It was a national tragedy. I don't know any specifics about the gun's ammunition size but I am positive that auto-matic weapons are banned in Canada for private ownership. These laws didn't stop this drug grower from owning one. I personally agree with banning, it atleast stops most citizens, but criminals break the law. They don't care if they break another by owning illegal weaponary. But atleast it might stop the one bad tempered citizen who just flips out and shoots someone. ------------- |
Posted By: Hades
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:53pm
|
I am not saying that isnt an unfortunate incident but is this worth killing the next cop that pulls you over? 200 bucks and hurt wrists?
You could have filed a complaint.... -------------
|
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:53pm
|
Banning different guns will not do much. They get their guns on the black market anyway. Making the guns inaccesable to the consumer, will do nothing. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 2:57pm
I did, nothing happened. I just have no respect for police in my area. I know about 2 in my area that police my old stomping grounds, so i see them a lot, they dont hastle me or my friends. Because they have the ability to put a pair of cuffs on me doesnt make it right. I have the ability to break his arm, doesnt make it right, thats why there is police hostility in the lorton, woodbridge, and prince william areas of the DC metro area. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: The Guy
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 3:21pm
|
cops buy their guns on the black market now?? Gee I had it all wrong. I thought they were issued. |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 3:23pm
|
Oh my god... Criminals... Reading posts isnt enough. You have to think as well. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 3:26pm
|
Did you follow your complaint up?
As said before, this guy might not have acted reasonably, but for one rotten apple all the cops deserve to die? And cops don't only have the ability to cuff you, they sometimes have an obligation to cuff you. Especially if you are acting irrationally and with hostility. I don't see how this guy could swing a search of your car without your permission. What was the base of his reasonable belief thta there was reason to search your car? I hate to say it, but it does sound like you got ripped off by a power junkie. Personally I'd have never acted like that, nor would any of my fellow officers. If I were you I would have done much more about laying a complaint on this guy. Unless he had a valid reason for the search and cuffing you like that. And tightness of cuffs isn't something we let the suspect descide. There is obviously a time when it is too tight and it should not be allowed to be like that. Basic introduction to policing teaches you how to cuff a suspect properly. KBK |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 3:29pm
|
If its somthing like that before and hes gonna pull his gun on me, hes dead. Yeah i followed my complaint up. Everyone was basicly lying to protect their friend. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 4:00pm
|
Well that sucks. Haven't ever experienced that where I live, and thats saying something.
Just one problem, it is almos timpossible to claim self defence when shooting at a police officer. You will end up dead. KBK |
Posted By: Aft3rmathPwnsU
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 7:16pm
|
i think all guns shuld be banned and just let everyone use paintball markers...
------------- goin comando n' loven every minute of it.. i'm free, are you? |
Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 9:02pm
Yea, but then police officers would carry Zeus G1's and the baddies would be packin' dm4 and 'cockers. BTW, my dad is the captain of the drug unit in my county and the head of the SRT. Someone said that the number of criminals carrying these weapons is small.... extremely untrue. I live in a small town in North Carloina, and on a recent raid, my father found 6 AK-47's and an M-16, along with about a table full of small handguns. ------------- Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo |
Posted By: DBibeau855
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:04pm
Yeah. I would COMPLETELY understand if i was cussin him out and gettin in his face. He told me to get out of the car and he started mumbeling. I said "what did you say?" and he smalled me against my car and cuffed everyone. Then he went about cutting everything up. "Looking for drugs" Thats what i think happened, must of had a bad day at the office or whatever. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/DBibeau855/?chartstyle=myspacecolors">
|
Posted By: korvecdal815
Date Posted: 05 March 2005 at 11:10pm
| ugh banning guns is hard cus the criminals will get the guns anyway but in some cases it has lowered gun criminal activity. sometimes u just wish guns were never invented but then our ancestors wud have no way of defending themselves from bears......... |
Posted By: Glassjaw
Date Posted: 06 March 2005 at 12:40am
What I was referring to would be an AT4, Vulcan Cannon...etc. compared to a 9mm pistol for instance. I do enjoy owning a rifle and wish I had the money for nicer stuff. I am all for right to bear arms, but it should be capped somewhere. Not at the assault rifle level though. ------------- |
Posted By: Coronado
Date Posted: 06 March 2005 at 1:01am
|
Man, we gun collecter collect guns for 2 reasons 1) Becuase we can and 2) Their FANTASTIC investments, expecially the Machine Guns, since theres a law in 1986 banning machine guns for civilans that were made after May of 1986, Class 3 weapons (Silencers, Machine Guns, and Destructive Devices[Grenade Launcher]) have become a Investment. Ok, as an example, my father is a hard-core gun collecter, when the ban happened, he bought an M16 for $2,000 back in '86, we looked it up last night, and its now worth over $15,000! Now, idk about you guys, but thats one helluva price inflation from $2k to $15k, hell, my local pastor has a silenced Barretta M9, and he brags about how cool it is when he can "shoot intruders without waking the family". Besides, it took me over 9 months for the ATF and the FBI to approve me ownership for a rifle with a barrel under 16"... So, if i was a Felon, Child Molester, Rapist, i think they would of found out about it in 9 months.... and a violation of the Class 3 laws means you spend 15-life in Leavenworth... |
Posted By: Stormcharger
Date Posted: 06 March 2005 at 4:10am
|
You have hit it on the head. Case in point. Several years ago I bought a fully automatic firearm. Cost me $3000, 3 months of paper work, a $200 class III firearms tax, a miroscope, the FBI, ATF, CIA, EPA, and of course the IRS. An idiot in my neibourhood bought a similar gun for $500, without the hassel, in 20 minutes, in downtown Oakland. Who says crime does not pay? The problem with banning guns like the Five seveN, is that most criminals will not commit crimes with $800 firearms. It's much easier to use a $50 Glock bought off the street, stolen from some idiot who doesn't know how to lock his gun up. |
Posted By: PREDATOR'S BACK
Date Posted: 06 March 2005 at 8:10am
The five-seven is in CS:S ------------- 
and your avitar was too big. http://www.legion.gibbering.net/misterx/troutwar.php?s=Cotto nBallz&magic_param |
Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 06 March 2005 at 6:51pm
|
This is all a totally moot point anyway, because the old CZ-52 with the 7.62x25mmTokarev round will also punch a bullet resistant vest quite happily, in a smaller, cheaper, non banned package.
KBK |