PDA

View Full Version : HR 1136: Bill introduced to ban the FiveseveN & 5.7x28mm


Nosferatu
03-08-2005, 06:13 PM
H.R.1136
Title: To protect the Nation's law enforcement officers by banning the Five-seveN Pistol and 5.7 x 28mm SS190 and SS192 cartridges, testing handguns and ammunition for capability to penetrate body armor, and prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, or purchase of such handguns or ammunition by civilians.
Sponsor: Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] (introduced 3/7/2005) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 3/7/2005 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.


__________________________


Write your Senators. This NEEDS to get knocked down ASAP. You can find their contact info here: http://www.senate.gov/

Nosferatu
03-08-2005, 06:50 PM
I just sent the following email to the Senators of Arizona, John McCain (R) and Jon Kyl (R).

I suggest you go to www.senate.gove and send a note to your senator expressing your opinion.

Senator McCain,

I am writing you today in regards to the new legislation introduced to the Senate regarding the FN FiveseveN pistol and the 5.7x28mm cartridge, H.R.1136.

As you might already know, armor piercing ammunition has been banned for quite some time under USC Title 18, Section 921. Introducing this bill to ban the FN FiveseveN and the 5.7x29mm is only going to duplicate past efforts and waste valuable time of you and your colleagues.

I urge you to vote against this legislation and put an end to the lies and scare tactics that the Brady Campaign is using to push their own agenda. Gun laws only affect the law-abiding, which by nature, criminals are not.

I appreciate your time.

Regards...

Kevin M. Smith
webmaster@fivesevenforum.com

Eddie
03-08-2005, 08:08 PM
Thanks Kevin,
I emailed both of my State Senators and used your letters as a outline for my own. It was greatly appreciated. You have a real nice site here and hopefully I will have a 5.7 soon.

Keep up the good work buddy!

Eddie 8)

SilverState
03-08-2005, 09:03 PM
I sent e-mails to my senators using the above link. I suggest you all do the same.

Porterfield
03-08-2005, 10:08 PM
Colorado Senators have been sent my version of the above message.

I can't believe these Brady Campaign people.
If something like this passes, I wonder if it will be illegal to carry the gun with SS196?

p99guy
03-09-2005, 07:54 AM
If this passes the pistol itself will be illegal...as well as the ammo.
if you remember what they did with hi capacity shotguns like the USAS12 and striker...they had them reclassified as destructive devices! which makes them the same process to buy as a machine gun. The folks that allready had these shotguns were NOT grandfathered....they had to go though the get the signature of the chief LEO and 200.00 tax, or turn them in before they were arrested and sent to club fed. it could get ugly in several ways

emt1581
03-09-2005, 05:29 PM
Does the ban proposition bill contain anything as the effect of..."this will be considered a DD from now on"?

If not it doesn't make a difference and technically present owners WOULD be grandfathered. I learned in Crim. Just. that if there's no law against something it's legal. :wink:

Curious to the the specific lines of the bill pertaining to the pistols status IF it is banned.

Thanks!

-Emt1581

Nosferatu
03-09-2005, 05:47 PM
As of today, the text still hasn't been received from the Goverment Printing Office. I'll update this thread as soon as it's available.

emt1581
03-09-2005, 05:54 PM
Meaning what?

Thanks

-Emt1581

p99guy
03-09-2005, 08:06 PM
Emt then you truly havent delt with ATF.....they can come up with a rule /policy that in effect is like an executive order and works just as good as a law for handcuff purposes. And I have 21 years in the criminal Justice field...not my first rodeo either
http://img134.exs.cx/img134/1383/mvc028fa3yh.th.jpg (http://img134.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img134&image=mvc028fa3yh.jpg)
and I deal with fairly exotic weapons and put on demos
this is me at TREXPO III working the Chartered Industries of Singapore booth
http://img138.exs.cx/img138/3069/mvc006fa9vd.th.jpg (http://img138.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img138&image=mvc006fa9vd.jpg)

kjones99
03-09-2005, 11:11 PM
forgive me if this already been posted, but here's what the ATF has to say about the FN FiveseveN...

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearmstech/fabriquen.htm

emt1581
03-09-2005, 11:34 PM
p99guy-

What did you mean by "then you truly havent delt with ATF"? I've got a suppressor. I know a thing or two :wink:

Just wondering what argument you were trying to make/defend?

I was just asking for an interpretation of what the last poster meant.

On another note, no one I've spoken to at any of the three gun shops I went to, including the classIII dealer I happened to buy the pistol from, was convinced that the gun was going to be banned. They seem to have the "it's a lot of hooplah for nothing" attitude.

I think they are wrong.

-Emt1581

The Deviant
03-14-2005, 01:10 PM
The full text is now available...

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.1136:

What a load of horse feces. Why should I expect anything less, though?

p99guy
03-14-2005, 06:05 PM
well that does specifically outlaw the pistol itself ,if passed....the testing of everything else to see if a vest(minimum level deemed to be useful to officers) can be penetrated .......crud, if they deem anything that will penetrate a level 1 vest is illegal....we are back to slingshots and .45acp and non +p .38 special :?

03-18-2005, 11:36 AM
Anyone know when this bill is up for a vote ? I'm sure we will hear the
drums start beating on Brady and related web pages, trying to rouse
up hysteria as the vote draws near...

modgun
03-18-2005, 04:44 PM
Things like this dont really help...



http://home.comcast.net/~bwdmail/5577.JPG

emt1581
03-20-2005, 12:42 AM
updates...anyone, anyone???

Thanks!

-Emt1581

emt1581
03-29-2005, 01:49 PM
Dear lord! No one has any updates?!

This thread is a sticky, which must mean that someone figured it was pretty important. Let's not disapoint them mmmmmmk?

Thanks.

-Emt1581

04-02-2005, 07:06 PM
How is it the House ignores The Constitution? What part of "... shall not be infringed." do they NOT understand? Why does the Supreme Court allow these infringing laws to remain? They are all corrupt ... that's how. Republicans and Democrats are all following this unconstitutional path ... which is why I'm a Libertarian. Our country began as a Constitutionally Limited Federal Republic (it's not The Battle Hymn of the Democracy), but has deteriorated to a Congressional Tyranny (look at whose benefits continue to increase, even when we pay more for health care). Only REDUCING GOVERNMENT can make the United States great again.

docfate
04-12-2005, 03:59 PM
How is it the House ignores The Constitution? What part of "... shall not be infringed." do they NOT understand? Why does the Supreme Court allow these infringing laws to remain? They are all corrupt ... that's how. Republicans and Democrats are all following this unconstitutional path ... which is why I'm a Libertarian. Our country began as a Constitutionally Limited Federal Republic (it's not The Battle Hymn of the Democracy), but has deteriorated to a Congressional Tyranny (look at whose benefits continue to increase, even when we pay more for health care). Only REDUCING GOVERNMENT can make the United States great again.


I agree with this, but most people are too lazy, or too disenfranchised to care about politics anymore, because they see it as, no matter who I vote for, in the end everything gets worse.

But I also have written my senators from California about the gun, hopefully, it will do some good, but I know that my senators are staunchly for Gun Control, and sh*t like this, is what they like to vote for. :(

Docfate

Darkmind
04-19-2005, 09:14 AM
Is there any new info on this? Did it get shot down? Is it stuck in a holding pattern? Did I miss something and it got passed?

Mr. Bueno
04-23-2005, 04:22 PM
I dont know, but would like to.... anyone got some intel?

Glimmer31
05-16-2005, 08:03 PM
Guys,
I'm an FFL and have been for 15 years. I have many class 4 toys. The low down on this is they agreed not to import any more ss192 and make some ss196 (I may have the nomenclature wrong.... ss...something...) which comes out the barrel of the IOM at 1600 fps, guarenteed not to make any politician pee their pants. The long and short is they downloaded it. You should as a history lesson check pre-'38 gun laws loading of the 357 magnum.... interesting..... ) However, the Secret Service has adoped the fiveseven IOM as their "gun of choice" of course loaded with the deadly AP rounds. (Imagine 2 or 3 of them shooting into a crowd after a "would be assasin possibly wearing body armor.... can you say "overpenatration" boys and girls?) Only the politicians need that kind of protection...... from us crazies out here. (What if one of them went crazy in there? NAAAAAAA. Never happen....) Anyway, that's the last update newsletter I got around 3/2005. God Bless and keep your powder dry.. -- Glimmer31 ;-)

Nightrunner
05-18-2005, 09:11 PM
I can't help but wonder how the ss195lf is going to go over.........

Darkmind
05-18-2005, 10:36 PM
I can't help but wonder how the ss195lf is going to go over.........



I was thinking the same thing!

Catalyst
05-19-2005, 08:10 AM
Excuse my ignorance, but what are class 4 toys? Also, hello to forum, I own an FN 5.7 IOM and I like it a lot...

p99guy
05-19-2005, 10:31 AM
Glimmer31, SS190AP is NOT a big overpenetrator... ...http://img40.echo.cx/img40/9282/spring2003experienceswiththefn.jpg
http://img105.echo.cx/img105/2360/200501050058dc.jpg

Esteves
06-17-2005, 06:56 PM
My variation on letter-writing:

I am writing you today in regards to the recent legislation introduced to the Senate regarding the FN FiveseveN pistol and two of the .7x28mm cartridges, H.R.1136.

As you might already know, armor piercing ammunition is currently defined and banned from civilians under USC Title 18, Section 921.

The SS190 ammunition has already been classified by the BATFE as armor piercing (AP), and is not legally available to civilians. The SS192 has also been classified by the BATFE as NOT armor piercing, (See http://www.atf.gov/firearms/firearmstech/fabriquen.htm ), but FNH USA has ceased importing it for commercial sale.

The pistol itself is not remarkably different from many other semiautomatic pistols.

Introducing this bill to ban the FN FiveseveN and the 5.7x28mm ammunition will duplicate past efforts and will waste the valuable time of you and your colleagues.

I urge you to vote against this legislation. Restrictive gun laws primarily affect the law-abiding, and have minimal impact on those who will commit other crimes.

I appreciate your time, and energy.

Sincerely,

susan28
06-18-2005, 12:57 PM
well here's my letter to Mr Martinez and Mr Nelson. i used Kevin's letter as a template, but shifted the focus more to the civil rights than "going there" with the AP issue because if we argue that a round should remain legal because it's NOT ap, it's tantamount to saying we think it *shouldn't* be legal if it *is*. and that leaves the door open for all kinds of judicial activism a la brady bunch. just my .02 on that, here's the letter:

"I am writing you today in regards to the new legislation introduced to the Senate regarding the FN FiveseveN pistol and the 5.7x28mm cartridge, H.R.1136.

As a US citizen, i believe the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, encouraging every citizen to take all necessary measures to defend hearth and home, is the single most inviolate principle thereof, and is the very backbone of the liberty we've all come to cherish. And inasmuchas the danger of any weapon lies in the hands of the individual wielding it, I urge you to vote against this legislation and put an end to the lies and scare tactics that the Brady Campaign is using to push their own agenda. Gun laws only affect the law-abiding, which by nature, criminals are not.

The Republican party's traditional support of the Second Amendment is the reason for my loyal support. Please don't let me down, Sir. defeat this legislation.

I appreciate your time.

sincerely,
Susan (last name omitted from this post)

note: Gun Control is an issue which is gaining increasing bipartisan support and Mr Martinez, my senator and a Republican, has expressed open hostility toward the FsN and has vowed to ban it, and Mr Bush has promised to sign the legislation if it crosses his desk. it is therefore important to thoroughly research all candidate before voting, and not just assume that republican = pro-gun.

an example of this is Mr Gore, who during his tenure in the Tennessee legislature was an outspoken proponent of the Second Amendment, notably moreso than his republican opponent, but was pressured into flipping his position when he got to the federal level.

(above statements based upon comments made by Rabbi Mermelstein of the Gun Owners' Alliance in response to a letter i'd written him regarding the difficulty in finding candidates that were both pro-2A and pro-choice, my position being that gun ownership was a choice issue, and that if one is pro-choice one should be de facto pro-2A, from a choice standpoint, just as one can be pro-choice on the abortion issue while being against it on a personal basis, from the simple perspective of minding one's own business).

susan28
06-18-2005, 07:57 PM
btw that's an interesting Gel block in the example, p99guy. is that dye being used to show the cavity? never seen that before. and is that the temp or perm cavity that's black? i see a thin bullet-diameter line in the gel but can't tell if that's the bullet path or a cut line in the gel.

p99guy
06-19-2005, 12:34 AM
yes, a black dye to show the temp stretch cavity, the yaw at 2", and total penetration just reaching 10.5 inches, with the bullet resting tail first. the streaks are an artifact of the perm cavity
note the multiple lines in mid path...approximating the distance between the nose and tail of the bullet apart....it may help to enlarge the pic on your pc

DmL5
06-19-2005, 05:18 PM
Note how the temporary cavity in that picture swells after a couple inches due to the round beginning to tumble, and stays enlarged throughout nearly the entire travel in the block. This means that the round was in yaw almost the entire travel.



-DmL

susan28
06-19-2005, 05:29 PM
yep nice "football" .. anyone have Gel results of the '192? .. i should probably post that question in another thread for the benefit of others.. i'll go do that now and if you have any you can't post in response to that one..

seed
07-27-2005, 10:45 PM
Any updates on this proposed legislation and efforts being taken to block/prevent it?

mjmjr1312
07-27-2005, 11:32 PM
"H.R.1136
Title: To protect the Nation's law enforcement officers by banning the Five-seveN Pistol and 5.7 x 28mm SS190 and SS192 cartridges, testing handguns and ammunition for capability to penetrate body armor, and prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, or purchase of such handguns or ammunition by civilians.
Sponsor: Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] (introduced 3/7/2005) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 3/7/2005 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. "

So if this ban, which i havent heard anything about in a while either, goes through the new rounds coming from any manufacturer (fiocci) will have to now pass testing to make sure it is slow,big, and ineffective like the SS196 and as p99guy once said "we are back to slingshots and .45acp and non +p .38 special :?" I think we would definetly have heard more about this if it was going to happen, hopefully it is just another unsuccessful stap by the gun grabbers otherwise I dont think 9mm will make it because even a 9mm+p or 357sig will occasionally make it through a vest and im sure they will try to turn that into "testing handguns and ammunition for capability to penetrate body armor, and prohibiting the manufacture, importation, sale, or purchase of such handguns or ammunition by civilians.". I think this is too big an opening and everyone will see it so this ban wont make it... after all, elections arent that far away.

-Mike

DmL5
07-28-2005, 12:03 AM
By the way, I doubt SS197 will be capable of penetrating soft armor much better than the SS196 due to the fact that despite higher velocity, it still uses a V-max projectile.



-DmL

seed
07-28-2005, 05:18 AM
Just a thought, but perhaps the introduction and the almost exclusive availability of the 196 stuff is a sort of pro-active measure to quell the beginnings of the otherwise inevitable surge of bandwagon politics. If so, then perhaps we shouldn't be so vocal in our disappointment towards FN for pushing this ammo at this point in time.

Oh and by the way, I am not the least bit surprised that Bush would sign such legislation. This is the same administration which is at the fore-front of destroying our individual rights (i.e. Patriot Act) and seem hell-bent on squeezing the nuts of the individual for the benefit of the privileged influential few. The Dems are hardly any better, but the fact remains that a lot of gun people think the Republicans deserve their unqualified support for the simple reason that they allegedly support 2A. Let the record show that they do not. But they are smart enough to let the Dems fight their battles for them (anti-2A) and look bad doing it. By the way, I'm speaking about the federal level. Only representatives who still give a damn about their constituencies will pay attention to the wishes of them. But on the federal level, disarmed citizens make for easier controlled subjects at the hands of their oppressors. And we are being oppressed ever so slowly, one stripped individual right after another.

Sorry about the rant, but I am so sick of the blind support for the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx who will do whatever xxxxxxxxx Cheney and friends (along with his god in his imagination) tell him to do...I'm truly sorry if this offends any of you, but I chose to exercise my First Ammendment right...while I still have most of it.

anvis69
07-28-2005, 07:37 AM
seed maybe you should go look at who voted for the AW ban to expire and who voted to extend it and tell us who is worse. If Bush really wanted it to reach his desk it would have.Also who are the ones entering legislation and getting ready to vote on a bill to protect the gun industry from law suits ?REPUBLICANS.Who voted for and against the bill to ban 50cals?Who is entering legislation to ban hicap mags HR 3348 again and who entered the legislation this post refers to?DEMOCRATS.Who is keeping it from going anywhere?REPUBLICANS....whats wrong with frat boys?

seed
07-28-2005, 09:48 AM
seed maybe you should go look at who voted for the AW ban to expire and who voted to extend it and tell us who is worse. If Bush really wanted it to reach his desk it would have.Also who are the ones entering legislation and getting ready to vote on a bill to protect the gun industry from law suits ?REPUBLICANS.Who voted for and against the bill to ban 50cals?Who is entering legislation to ban hicap mags HR 3348 again and who entered the legislation this post refers to?DEMOCRATS.Who is keeping it from going anywhere?REPUBLICANS....whats wrong with frat boys?

Anvis69, please don't misunderstand. I understand that the Dems are basically mortal enemies to 2A on the National level for the past 20 years and that the Republicans (at least Republican congressman more directly held accountable by their own constituencies) have taken steps to protect it. That said, I see a difference between Republican support of 2A when comparing the Executive to the Legislative branch. Legislators take a lot of lobby money from one side or the other (or both) as does the President and presidential hopefuls. The difference is that Legislative members will be crucified if they don't align themselves directly with the wishes of their campaign financiers. This is much less of a problem for the President, who will still enjoy the backing of said financiers and their backers, so long as he is not as bad in their eyes as the alternative (come election time). To put it more bluntly, do you think you will live to see the day when the NRA will back a Dem for the office of the presidency? Neither do I. Bush and friends know this and therefore can get away with not living up to the ideal standards of pro-2A. In fact, they merely just have to appear more sympathetic most times. And sometimes this means a positive result for RKBA, despite the fact that he would readily sign an anti-2A bill that comes across his desk.

I guess what I am trying to say is that although one can believe that Bush's anti-2A statements are merely bluffs, I don't think so. But in Bush's case, instead of being impatient and alienating a big group of stead-fast single-issue supporters (who regularly vote) by directly attacking the 2A, he can have his cake and eat it too (please pardon the cliche)...so long as the Dems continue to deny reality, fight RKBA and as a result keep losing big elections. He will let them look the fool and pay the price for doing so.

Let me just end this long post by summing it up this way: Bush is a wolf in sheep's clothing when it comes to 2A. But it is important for him to keep up the ruse (sp) for as long as he can. And so long as the Dems are viewed as rabid anti-2A politicians, he can keep it up for quite a while. The Dems will do his work for him, and he will come out smelling like a rose. In the end, the 2A still loses more and more teeth.

susan28
07-28-2005, 10:00 AM
politics, especially federal, are about votes, and with the repubs' putting alot of their eggs in the "public safety/national security" basket to get the votes, it's not whether or not guns make us safer either as individuals or as a nation, or even what they think on the matter, but what they think the *public* thinks on the matter that guides their decisions.

their goals (and those of both parties), are primarily economic; civil rights issues are merely a means to get them into office and into our pockets. that's why they're called "voting issues". basically both follow the money trail and with all the fear-mongering about domestic terrorism - justified or not - i'm afraid the money trail might lead to weapons bans if the public is perceived as believing gutting the 2A will fight terrorism.

you think if the repubs thought they could grab a chunk of that much-coveted dem "swing vote" by banning guns that they wouldn't do it? they've got the evangelicals in their pockets and those people won't vote democrat even if the dems went pro-2A because they vote a straight-up (no pun intended) "family values" ticket. so with that voting block guaranteed, the repubs can really get reckless in other matters as long as they keep championing the pro-life / anti-gay thing. i'd wager that the average evangelical would still vote repub even if they pushed an 80% tax rate for people below the poverty level and the dems were handing out hams on sunday. it's a matter of conscience for them, and i know because my mother is one and has agreed with the above scenario. so the anti-gun lobby now represents a golden opportunity for the repubs to tip the scales, and with the Bradys' emphasis on "the children", they're right in line with the "buzzwords" of the repubs' "social conservative" base. remember we're talking perception here, not reality.

we here on this board know better, of course, and value the FsN as the *counter* terrorist weapon as which it was designed, but with the image this administration is creating - that our safety rests with the government and not with ourselves - if this gun is successfully portrayed as endangering the police it will be deemed "unpatriotic" - right along with the right to privacy - and every non-gun-owning repub citizen - and alot of gun owners, too, if people's (all republicans, i always ask) reactions to mine are any indication, - will condemn it.

and fwiw i don't judge Mr Bush on his past. i don't like drug-scapegoating because it's just too convenient a way to discredit someone without having to address the issues at hand, but when it comes to Mr Bush and the FsN, he has promised to sign the legislation, and Mr Gonzalez is against the gun, and that doesn't bode well.

now as anvis pointed out, if Mr Bush was hell-bent on something, he could probably get it through, but he's not hell *for* it either, that's for sure, and that's a step away from the traditional repub support we've enjoyed in the past.

Nightrunner
07-28-2005, 10:20 AM
Sorry about the rant, but I am so sick of the blind support for the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx who will do whatever xxxxxxxxx Cheney and friends (along with his god in his imagination) tell him to do...I'm truly sorry if this offends any of you, but I chose to exercise my First Ammendment right...while I still have most of it.



Seed,
As you said it above, I will use the same 1st amendment right now.
THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL SITE. IF YOU THINK IT IS YOU ARE INCORRECT.
TAKE YOUR POLITICAL xxxx ELSEWHERE. YOU OPINION xxxx TOO. YOU DO NOT KNOW EVERYTHING AND YOU ARE INCORRECT AT TIMES. GET OVER YOURSELF AND LEAVE TO POLITICAL TIRADES TO PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE A CLUE WHAT THE xxxx THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.

AND THEN GO TO THOSE SITES AND START YOUR xxxx, AS THIS IS NOT A POLITICAL SITE. WE TALK 5.7X28 WEAPONS.

Besides you are .................(fill in the blank)

susan28
07-28-2005, 10:26 AM
i agree with your last post seed which is why i direct alot of my 2A efforts toward democratic politicians nowadays. i make them aware of the huge swing vote they could get if they'd call of their war on guns, since no pro-choice person will ever vote republican, and the dem-vote is more based on pro-choice than anti-gun.

basically the dems' pro-choice stance allows them to offend their anti-gun constituency without losing it just as the repubs' anti-choice stance allows them to offend their pro-gun constituents. both have large "locked in" voting blocs and depend on the "swing vote" to win elections, and i think that going pro-2A could help the dems "flip" some republicans who aren't overly rabid on the family-values thing, just as going pro-choice (won't happen tho) could bring many pro-2A democrats to the repub side.

anvis69
07-28-2005, 10:30 AM
You guys have some great points .
Do they have to do some ass kissing to get elected ..well of coarse if they didn't they wouldn't get elected. But i tend to look at what a person does rather than what he says during an election cycle.Bush has been in office 5 1/2 years and our gun rights are better now that they were before he came in. It's a step at a time. Is he perfect, HELL NO . I hate his illegal imigrant stance for one and there are many others.But in this day in age it's basically the better of 2 evils.Thats life.When it was election time Bush said that he would sign the AW ban but he knew he would never get it and basically made the argument a mute point.Notice how there wasn't really any time spent on guns during the election?

Well i'm going to watch CSpan now to watch S392 get debated.

Glen

susan28
07-28-2005, 10:38 AM
hah that's what i'm watching Glen :) great minds :)

p99guy
07-28-2005, 11:00 AM
Folks, I need to remind you that we arent a political website, we do not allow personal attacks, or use of launguage you cant say on prime time TV.
this thread has took a turn for the worst and brought opposing views to this site , best kept to ones self,other sites, and a ballot box.