Ignorant crap from the local newspaper. - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

MSD · 01-12-2005, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Cop-Killer bullets feared
Powerful ammunition found in Trumbull

TRUMBULL - The town' s cops had heard about this type of deadly ammunition -- bullets that could pierce the vests they wore for protection.

Last October, town police officers found a new Herstal FN 5.7 handgun on the freon seat of the car driven by Andrew Komlosi, 60, a Kent Lane man charged with drunken driving.

The gun in the vehicle, for which Komlosi had a permit, was loaded, police said.

Officers confiscated the gun and its powerful hollow-point ammunition, designed to penetrate modern, military-style bullet-resistant vests.

"We had information that these existed," police Lt Keith Golding, the department spokesman, said about the bullets.

On Monday, police Sgt. Leonard Scinto, one of the department's firearms training officers, took the gun and ammunition to the shooting range and took aim at a kevlar vest. His reaction when it pierced the vest? "Uh-oh"

"I had my suspicions it was going to go through because of the way the bullet is designed," Scinto said.

In a recent demonstration, the 5.7-by-28mm bullet had pierced the vest and lodged in the back.

"This is by no stretch of the imagination a scientific test," Scinto said of the demonstration, adding that it was nonetheless chilling.

When the department's standard ammunition was fired from a .45-caliber Glock, the vest was knocked off its holder, but it was not penetrated.

When department members realized what they had found, Scinto sent out a teletype to other law-enforcement agencies around the country.

That bulletin drew the interest of WNBC-TV in New York City, which is producing a segment on armor-piercing bullets that is to air sometime this week.

Komlosi purchased the gun and ammunition from a local gun shop, police said. Scinto said the only armor-piercing bullet specifically banned in Connecticut is the .50-caliber.

Scinto said he's still trying or figure if the bullets are banned under federal law.

He and his fellow officers say they see no need for civilians to have bullets that can pierce body armor.

"It's totally unnecessary to me," Scinto said.

"It's made for nothing but killing someone wearing a vest," Golding said. "There is no other reason."

For now, the Police Department is holding the gun until the courts tell it what to do with it.

"Hopefully, they will tell us to destroy it," he said.

The article is accompanied by this picture and caption:

Here we go again with lies and misinformation about guns and their owners. The 5.7 pictured is obviously not a hollow-point, making that part of the article nothing but a blatant lie. The 9mm round isn't even in the picture. Aside from factual errors, the thing that really bothered me is that the police and the reporter are making a big deal over something that happened several months ago in order to demonize gun owners. The guy had a permit for it, he should have had it locked up since he was intoxicated, but he did own it legally. The article also mentioned that it was loaded. What the hell do you expect people to do with their carry weapons, duck behind a barrel while the bad guy shoots at them?

I'm writing a letter to the editor about it, anything you guys think I should include? I'm going to point out the errors mentioned above, and give a brief explanation of what hollow-points really are and how they work. The people around here are politically pretty moderate, so maybe I can undo a little bit of damage if they print a reasonable, well-written counter-argument.

(Note: I've posted this on another forum, so if you happen to run into it posted under a different username, it's not plagarized, just double-posted for maximum audience/response)

gump · 01-12-2005, 10:30 AM

hearing stories like this just makes me sick. the media will do anything to put down gun owners.

[QUOTE]He and his fellow officers say they see no need for civilians to have bullets that can pierce body armor.

"It's totally unnecessary to me," Scinto said.QUOTE]

unnecessary? not to me. i think if you want to buy armor piercing rounds you should be allowed. i dont have a need for any but someone out there might like shooting through steal plates as targets. i see no difference in that as myself shooting at and thru a paper target.

Redlemon · 01-12-2005, 10:34 AM

Ah, the fine reporting of the CommPost. I read that this morning as well.

I will first admit, I know nothing about guns, so the factual mistakes go right over my head. However, I didn't see any demonization of gun owners in the article. All I got from my uncaffinated readthrough this morning was "There are armor-piercing bullets available for sale in Connecticut. They may or may not be legal. Police don't like armor-piercing bullets." I don't see anything wrong with the intent of the article.

SiNai · 01-12-2005, 10:49 AM

I'm guessing the reason they make such a big deal about the gun being loaded is because it is, I'm pretty sure, illegal to carry a loaded gun in a vehicle (doesn't it have to be in a case, too?). Also, it isn't really the ownership of the gun that is in question, it's the legality of the ammo found. I can't say anything about those bullets in the picture, but if he's carrying ammo that can pierce armor, that's a problem..

whocarz · 01-12-2005, 11:42 AM

Well shit, I guess they should lock me up and throw away the key, since I have a lot of ammo that can pierce standard issue police vests like it wasn't even there. Fact is, just because you own ammunition that can penetrate armor doesn't prove intent to kill police. The only law this guy broke was driving drunk. They should give his gun back ASAP.

Scorpion23 · 01-12-2005, 11:53 AM

"His reaction when it pierced the vest? "Uh-oh""

It's probably the way he's quoted in the paper, but their range officer sounds like he doesn't know what he's doing.

"When department members realized what they had found, Scinto sent out a teletype to other law-enforcement agencies around the country."

Ok, maybe it's just me. But shouldn't anyone involved with firearms on a regular basis already know that AP ammo exists? And that it can pierce armor?

BabySealClubber · 01-12-2005, 12:11 PM

what was the range that they shot the vest at? body armor is only effective with pretty much any ammo at certain ranges.

DelayedReaction · 01-12-2005, 12:43 PM

Armor-piercing ammunition is illegal for civilians to own. That doesn't mean they've banned ammo that CAN pierce armor, just ammunition that has a steel core and is explicitely designed for this purpose.

The 5.7mm round is capable of piercing a vest, and it also has some rather nasty wound ballistics to it (from what I understand it likes to tumble). But it shouldn't be illegal. It's rarely used (I don't think a FN FiveSeven, the only gun that fires it to my knowledge, has ever been used in a crime), and is much more expensive than 9mm or .45 ammunition.

Criminals don't use expensive high-end guns and weapons to commit crimes. They use whatever they can get off the street.

The article itself was simply beyond ignorance. Hollow-points are the exact opposite of armor piercing rounds!

gump · 01-12-2005, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DelayedReaction

Criminals don't use expensive high-end guns and weapons to commit crimes. They use whatever they can get off the street.

very good point.

The_Dunedan · 01-12-2005, 02:05 PM

My stepfather's gunshop carries these pistols and their ammunition.

The hollowpoint 5.7mm civillian-legal ammunition is quite capable of piercing up to Level-III ballistic armor. However, the ammunition is extremely expensive, and the weapons that fire it start at about $1300 new. This is not a criminal threat, trust me.

Willravel · 01-12-2005, 02:18 PM

I love the "Cop-Killer bullets feared" headline. That's rich.
You might want to include in your letter the fact that the respoonsibility of the news is to at least attempt to tell the truth. You might also write some gun compaines (like Herstal) and tell them that a lawsuit against this crappy newspaper could generate some extra money.

01-12-2005, 02:40 PM

For someone who is entirely ignorant of the issues, what is hollow-point ammunition, and what would one use it for over say regular ammunition?

The_Dunedan · 01-12-2005, 02:46 PM

Hollow-point ammunition is exactly what it sounds like: the bullet has a hollow cavity molded into the nose. This causes it to expand violently when it hits something, which not only results in greater Kinetic-Energy Transfer ( a crucial factor for causing shock and disabling a target ), but causes the bullet to slow down very quickly, which helps prevent over-penetration.

HP ammo is superior for self-defense because it causes greater shock-trauma and bleeding to the target, is less likely to overpenetrate and injure an innocent/noncombatant, and imparts more physical force when it strikes. Conventional "ball" ammunition will simply blow through a target: this causes potentially-fatal injuries, but the injuries are not fatal as quickly, less shock is delivered, and the risks of hitting something behind the target are greatly increased.

Because HP ammo is designed to expand upon impact, it is terrible at penetrating body-armor. Ballistic body-armor works by spreading impact-related force out over a large area; to get through it you need something "sharp" which can more easily part the fibers. Shooting through ballistic armor with HP ammo is somewhat analagous to splitting logs with a baseball bat ( HP ammo ) as opposed to a maul ( Ball ammo ) or axe ( AP ammo ).

cuervo · 01-12-2005, 03:40 PM

I've seen the FN 5-7s in the $850+ range.

The armor-piercing ammunition is not being sold on the civilian market.

Their test case may have pierced the armor based on range or the fact the the armor was not supported in any way.

Suave · 01-12-2005, 04:10 PM

Strange, I thought the Five Seven was only available to military customers. Aside from that, yeah the article is stupid, but it should be expected. After all, newspapers make money off of eliciting strong emotional responses, whether they're being accurate or not.

The_Dunedan · 01-12-2005, 04:47 PM

Suave,
It only became available to Civillian buyers about 18 months ago, and they're still quite rare due to the scarcity of weapons and ammunition.

jorgelito · 01-12-2005, 05:11 PM

Thanks The_Dunedan for the "novice gun lesson". I had always believed (or was led to believe) that hollow points were indeed armor piercing. Good to know they're not (necessarily) nor are intended to be.

Shouldn't a law enforcement officer be a bit more informed than that? Spreading mis-information to the public is really a disservice.

Anyways, the main gun issue always seems to boil down to mixing up lawful (rightful) gun ownership and straight up criminals. I agree, that civilians and gun enthusiasts (I don't have any stats or hard evidence handy) generally don't buy lawful guns just to commit crimes. The police should only be worried if they bust up a crackhouse and find assault weapons, kevlar vests and AP bullets. That's an "Uh oh" moment. But if Joe Blow wants to spend his hard earned cash on HP or whatever, then he should, without any guff from anyone. Unless he commits a crime.

Althought I will admit, drunkeness and loaded guns scare me.

The_Dunedan · 01-12-2005, 05:14 PM

Drunkenness and loaded guns scare everybody, especially Gun-culture people like myself; we know what a stray bullet could do!

longbough · 01-12-2005, 05:27 PM

As you're probably aware articles like this are generated more through an overt public agenda than to a lack of factual data on the part of the publisher.

It goes without saying you ought to demand they publish a correction to their article.

ziadel · 01-12-2005, 07:15 PM

mebbe sumbmit this to awbansunset.com?

that place has brought more than one reporter to their knees...

lite campfire · 01-12-2005, 09:06 PM

Thanks x2 Dunedan.
1) I was sure HP ammo was specifically NOT armour piercing
2) I also thought the Five seveN and associated was still not avialible to civilians.

iamnormal · 01-12-2005, 11:16 PM

If I was a bad guy I sure wouldn't be useing a gun like that. Traceing who the owner of a uncommon gun wouldn't take long.

Slims · 01-13-2005, 12:16 AM

Actually, the true armor piercing ammunition for the five7 is not available to civilians, it is illegal under current laws and available to LEO's/Military only.

What that gentlemen had was a hollowpoint round, that was designed to expand rather than penetrate armor, though there is not much a regular level II vest can do to stop a small, fast bullet of any kind (like a .22 magnum). The true armor piercing stuff is much worse.

And the hollowpoint ammunition has already been approved for sale in the US and my local gunshop has it for sale along with one of the pistols.

And curiously, why would lawmakers feel the need to make it extra super duper illegal to commit a felony while wearing body armor unless they considered it to be at least a potential problem? and if it is a potential problem, then why do they not want regular law abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves against it?

Edit: I didn't see Dunedains post. He is currently running the shop that is selling the beforementioned pistol.

gump · 01-13-2005, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg700

What that gentlemen had was a hollowpoint round, that was designed to expand rather than penetrate armor, though there is not much a regular level II vest can do to stop a small, fast bullet of any kind (like a .22 magnum)...

thats very true. i've got a friend that works for the local sheriff's department and they had a demonstration how a .22mag could go through a vest. it would stop a .357 hp dead but the .22 and the newer .17 rimfire would penetrate.

MSD · 01-13-2005, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiNai

I'm guessing the reason they make such a big deal about the gun being loaded is because it is, I'm pretty sure, illegal to carry a loaded gun in a vehicle (doesn't it have to be in a case, too?).

It's perfectly legal if you have a permit, which he did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziadel

mebbe sumbmit this to awbansunset.com?

that place has brought more than one reporter to their knees...

I think I'll be doing that after work.

dksuddeth · 01-13-2005, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DelayedReaction

Criminals don't use expensive high-end guns and weapons to commit crimes. They use whatever they can get off the street.

What did the two idiots in california use to rob that bank and then hold a shootout with the cops?

The_Dunedan · 01-13-2005, 10:13 AM

An extremely rare exception. Those guys had somehow managed to buy over $5,000 worth of ( legal ) semi-auto weapons and convert them to full-auto ( illegal ) either by installing illegal conversion parts or by filing down the disconnectors within the action itself.

Weapons Used:
1 HK91 in .308, converted to full-auto with illegal parts. Semi-auto coast: $2000
2 Mak-90s; Chinese-made AK-47 copies in 7.62x39mm, illegally converted to full-auto by filing down the disconnectors. Semi-auto cost: $500 each.
1 Colt CAR-15 in 5.56mm, Converted to full-auto with a black-market Full Auto Fire Control Group. Semi-auto cost: $1500-ish

The illegal full-auto parts used to convert the HK91 and CAR-15 were probably quite costly as well, though I don't know exactly -how- costly.

dksuddeth · 01-13-2005, 12:22 PM

don't know about conversion costs for the HK or the Mak's, but it's not very difficult to convert the AR-15. All you need is someone with some metalworking experience to fashion the very small part. I was also referring to the amount of body armor they had on them though. regular rounds weren't having an effect on them until the police were able to obtain some high powered rifles from a pawnshop.

The_Dunedan · 01-13-2005, 12:25 PM

Yeah, they were wearing Level 4-A ballistic armor, if I remember correctly. It's basically the same stuff a SWAT team uses.

As for converting the AR: the part you mention, the autosear, is easy to fabricate. However, you also need a full-auto selector, bolt, bolt-carrier, and sear....these get expensive fast.

whocarz · 01-13-2005, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DelayedReaction

The 5.7mm round is capable of piercing a vest, and it also has some rather nasty wound ballistics to it (from what I understand it likes to tumble). But it shouldn't be illegal. It's rarely used (I don't think a FN FiveSeven, the only gun that fires it to my knowledge, has ever been used in a crime)

I believe the FN P90 subgun is chambered in 5.7mm as well.

Lebell · 01-14-2005, 03:55 PM

OH brother.

Most has already been said, but I notice that no one has mentioned that most rifle rounds will easily penetrate a ballistic vest.

Guess it's time to round up all those hunters and their 'cop-killer' bullets.

(God, I HATE ignorance paraded as expertise.)

The_Dunedan · 01-14-2005, 04:07 PM

Oh yeah.
Anything will penetrate anything else if it's moving fast enough. A kid's .243 Winchester will easily perforate a Lev-III vest, as will the common .22 WMRF and the .17HMR.

DelayedReaction · 01-14-2005, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whocarz

I believe the FN P90 subgun is chambered in 5.7mm as well.

You're right. I should have said handgun. The FN P90 and FN FiveSeven were designed to work together, and act as a way to arm the support personnel (the cooks, drivers, etc).

jorgelito · 01-15-2005, 12:56 AM

I don't get it: These armor/vests don't sound very effective at all. What am I missing?

izin · 01-15-2005, 04:43 AM

Body armor does it's job well against the majority of threats it's designed to safegaurd against. People have the misconception that bullet proof vests can stop any bullet. It can't. As others have mentioned in this thread, the velocity of the projectile is also a determining factor of the effectiveness of body armor. Police wear vests designed to stop relatively low velocity handgun projectiles. That body armor is designed to be wearable, ie thin and comfortable so police officers will actually wear them every day, and with that comes the trade off that it is ineffective at stopping projectiles fired at greater than handgun velocities.

That article is a joke, but the sad thing is they believe that only the good guys wear body armor. Confronted with facts and common sense, the media is easily outed and made to look foolish. Their agenda and unfortunately more and more law enforcement officials agendas are completely transparent. Don't even get me started on Arnold and 60 Minutes and Ronnie Barrett and the LAPD. I just wish every firearms company responded as Mr. Barrett has when our rights are assaulted under the guise of protecting us.

KirStang · 01-15-2005, 11:13 AM

I have a question, how does a .22 go about penetrating a lev-III vest while the vest can stop something like a .357 (or something similar?). Is it because of the narrow contact point...?

ziadel · 01-15-2005, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KirStang

I have a question, how does a .22 go about penetrating a lev-III vest while the vest can stop something like a .357 (or something similar?). Is it because of the narrow contact point...?

yeppers, thats why you can't stab people with a 2x4, at least not easily...

the smaller the contact area, the smaller the area the projectiles energy is focused on, and it will just tear through...

it also has to do with the bullet itself, a hollow point doesnt have a prayer of
penetrating a vest, a FMJ has a better chance...

someone can prolly explain this better than I can

truthfully, if cops wanted to feel safer they would ban the ammunition that would do LESS damage to their person if they were actually shot with it...

will a .22 mag penetrate a vest? yepp. will it kill? most likely not unless whoever was shot with it doesnt get medical treatment for a while, or it was a million dollar shot, the whole reason the .45 acp came into being was because of an insurrection in the phillipines, we were fighting tribesmen called the Moro and the .38 caliber (9mm) projectile we were firing just wasnt ballsy enough to take em down, hence the .45 was born, but I'm getting off topic here...

its weird, because the most lethal ammo is stopped by the vest, while the less lethal stuff will go through it...

The_Dunedan · 01-15-2005, 02:07 PM

Yup. A vest rated to stop a .44 Magnum can't stop a .22WMRF or .17HMR because of the velocity/SD issue.

Stick · 01-15-2005, 02:35 PM

What a silly article. Even Michael Moore wouldn't stoop this low.
Does the NRA have a media arm? Would they be at all interested in helping you with a
rebuttal to this stupid/childish/scare mongering/lying article?

The_Dunedan · 01-15-2005, 02:48 PM

Stick,
The NRA does have a Media Wing of sorts, but the Media here in the States is heavily Statist, and its' bias is especially noticeable when it comes to gun issues. Their reporting is almost universally biased, dishonest, fragmentary, and sensationalist, as this piece so clearly demonstrates.

As an example: the only uncut, unedited, and unbiased Gun Control debate they've ever shown ( Wayne LaPierre vs Rebecca Peters ) was deemed to "contraversial" and "inflammatory" that you had to get it on Pay-Per-View, as if it were pornographic. Whenever they have a "spot debate" on TV, they usually give some twit from HCI or The Brady Bunch about 90 seconds, and then cut to 20-ish seconds of some "random gunowner;" an individual who always seems to have been purposely chosen in order to perpetuate the Statist stereotype of gunowners and activists as backwards, ignorant, fat, tobacco-chewing rednecks.

IOW, even if the NRA released a response ( which they usually don't; NRA is considered "soft-line" by many American gunowners for this reason among others ) it would get no airtime or page-space, and would be totally ignored by the media.

01-12-2005, 10:34 AM	#3 (permalink)
Redlemon Devoted Donor Location: New England	Ah, the fine reporting of the CommPost. I read that this morning as well. I will first admit, I know nothing about guns, so the factual mistakes go right over my head. However, I didn't see any demonization of gun owners in the article. All I got from my uncaffinated readthrough this morning was "There are armor-piercing bullets available for sale in Connecticut. They may or may not be legal. Police don't like armor-piercing bullets." I don't see anything wrong with the intent of the article. __________________ I can't read your signature. Sorry.

01-12-2005, 10:49 AM	#4 (permalink)
SiNai Dreams In Digital Location: Iowa	I'm guessing the reason they make such a big deal about the gun being loaded is because it is, I'm pretty sure, illegal to carry a loaded gun in a vehicle (doesn't it have to be in a case, too?). Also, it isn't really the ownership of the gun that is in question, it's the legality of the ammo found. I can't say anything about those bullets in the picture, but if he's carrying ammo that can pierce armor, that's a problem.. __________________ I can't seem to remember now What it was like- to live life, before you.. symbiont

01-12-2005, 11:42 AM	#5 (permalink)
whocarz Jarhead Location: Colorado	Well shit, I guess they should lock me up and throw away the key, since I have a lot of ammo that can pierce standard issue police vests like it wasn't even there. Fact is, just because you own ammunition that can penetrate armor doesn't prove intent to kill police. The only law this guy broke was driving drunk. They should give his gun back ASAP. __________________ If there exists anything mightier than destiny, then it is the courage to face destiny unflinchingly. -Geibel Despise not death, but welcome it, for nature wills it like all else. -Marcus Aurelius Come on, you sons of bitches! Do you want to live forever? -GySgt. Daniel J. "Dan" Daly

01-12-2005, 11:53 AM	#6 (permalink)
Scorpion23 Psycho	"His reaction when it pierced the vest? "Uh-oh"" It's probably the way he's quoted in the paper, but their range officer sounds like he doesn't know what he's doing. "When department members realized what they had found, Scinto sent out a teletype to other law-enforcement agencies around the country." Ok, maybe it's just me. But shouldn't anyone involved with firearms on a regular basis already know that AP ammo exists? And that it can pierce armor? Last edited by Scorpion23; 01-12-2005 at 11:55 AM..

01-12-2005, 12:11 PM	#7 (permalink)
BabySealClubber Upright	what was the range that they shot the vest at? body armor is only effective with pretty much any ammo at certain ranges. __________________ I like my women like I like my coffee... in a sack tied to the back of a donkey

01-12-2005, 10:30 AM	#2 (permalink)
gump Addict Location: TN	hearing stories like this just makes me sick. the media will do anything to put down gun owners. [QUOTE]He and his fellow officers say they see no need for civilians to have bullets that can pierce body armor. "It's totally unnecessary to me," Scinto said.QUOTE] unnecessary? not to me. i think if you want to buy armor piercing rounds you should be allowed. i dont have a need for any but someone out there might like shooting through steal plates as targets. i see no difference in that as myself shooting at and thru a paper target.

01-12-2005, 12:43 PM	#8 (permalink)
DelayedReaction BFG Builder Location: University of Maryland	Armor-piercing ammunition is illegal for civilians to own. That doesn't mean they've banned ammo that CAN pierce armor, just ammunition that has a steel core and is explicitely designed for this purpose. The 5.7mm round is capable of piercing a vest, and it also has some rather nasty wound ballistics to it (from what I understand it likes to tumble). But it shouldn't be illegal. It's rarely used (I don't think a FN FiveSeven, the only gun that fires it to my knowledge, has ever been used in a crime), and is much more expensive than 9mm or .45 ammunition. Criminals don't use expensive high-end guns and weapons to commit crimes. They use whatever they can get off the street. The article itself was simply beyond ignorance. Hollow-points are the exact opposite of armor piercing rounds! __________________ If ignorance is bliss, you must be having an orgasm.

01-12-2005, 02:05 PM	#10 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	My stepfather's gunshop carries these pistols and their ammunition. The hollowpoint 5.7mm civillian-legal ammunition is quite capable of piercing up to Level-III ballistic armor. However, the ammunition is extremely expensive, and the weapons that fire it start at about $1300 new. This is not a criminal threat, trust me.

01-12-2005, 02:18 PM	#11 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	I love the "Cop-Killer bullets feared" headline. That's rich. You might want to include in your letter the fact that the respoonsibility of the news is to at least attempt to tell the truth. You might also write some gun compaines (like Herstal) and tell them that a lawsuit against this crappy newspaper could generate some extra money.

01-12-2005, 02:40 PM	#12 (permalink)
zen_tom Guest	For someone who is entirely ignorant of the issues, what is hollow-point ammunition, and what would one use it for over say regular ammunition?

01-12-2005, 02:46 PM	#13 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Hollow-point ammunition is exactly what it sounds like: the bullet has a hollow cavity molded into the nose. This causes it to expand violently when it hits something, which not only results in greater Kinetic-Energy Transfer ( a crucial factor for causing shock and disabling a target ), but causes the bullet to slow down very quickly, which helps prevent over-penetration. HP ammo is superior for self-defense because it causes greater shock-trauma and bleeding to the target, is less likely to overpenetrate and injure an innocent/noncombatant, and imparts more physical force when it strikes. Conventional "ball" ammunition will simply blow through a target: this causes potentially-fatal injuries, but the injuries are not fatal as quickly, less shock is delivered, and the risks of hitting something behind the target are greatly increased. Because HP ammo is designed to expand upon impact, it is terrible at penetrating body-armor. Ballistic body-armor works by spreading impact-related force out over a large area; to get through it you need something "sharp" which can more easily part the fibers. Shooting through ballistic armor with HP ammo is somewhat analagous to splitting logs with a baseball bat ( HP ammo ) as opposed to a maul ( Ball ammo ) or axe ( AP ammo ). Last edited by The_Dunedan; 01-12-2005 at 02:49 PM..

01-12-2005, 03:40 PM	#14 (permalink)
cuervo Tilted Location: NC	I've seen the FN 5-7s in the $850+ range. The armor-piercing ammunition is not being sold on the civilian market. Their test case may have pierced the armor based on range or the fact the the armor was not supported in any way.

01-12-2005, 04:10 PM	#15 (permalink)
Suave Twitterpated Location: My own little world (also Canada)	Strange, I thought the Five Seven was only available to military customers. Aside from that, yeah the article is stupid, but it should be expected. After all, newspapers make money off of eliciting strong emotional responses, whether they're being accurate or not. __________________ "Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions." - Albert Einstein "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." - Plato

01-12-2005, 04:47 PM	#16 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Suave, It only became available to Civillian buyers about 18 months ago, and they're still quite rare due to the scarcity of weapons and ammunition.

01-12-2005, 05:11 PM	#17 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	Thanks The_Dunedan for the "novice gun lesson". I had always believed (or was led to believe) that hollow points were indeed armor piercing. Good to know they're not (necessarily) nor are intended to be. Shouldn't a law enforcement officer be a bit more informed than that? Spreading mis-information to the public is really a disservice. Anyways, the main gun issue always seems to boil down to mixing up lawful (rightful) gun ownership and straight up criminals. I agree, that civilians and gun enthusiasts (I don't have any stats or hard evidence handy) generally don't buy lawful guns just to commit crimes. The police should only be worried if they bust up a crackhouse and find assault weapons, kevlar vests and AP bullets. That's an "Uh oh" moment. But if Joe Blow wants to spend his hard earned cash on HP or whatever, then he should, without any guff from anyone. Unless he commits a crime. Althought I will admit, drunkeness and loaded guns scare me.

01-12-2005, 05:14 PM	#18 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Drunkenness and loaded guns scare everybody, especially Gun-culture people like myself; we know what a stray bullet could do!

01-12-2005, 05:27 PM	#19 (permalink)
longbough Soylent Green is people. Location: Northern California	As you're probably aware articles like this are generated more through an overt public agenda than to a lack of factual data on the part of the publisher. It goes without saying you ought to demand they publish a correction to their article.

01-12-2005, 07:15 PM	#20 (permalink)
ziadel Myrmidon Location: In the twilight and mist.	mebbe sumbmit this to awbansunset.com? that place has brought more than one reporter to their knees... __________________ Ron Paul '08 Vote for Freedom Go ahead and google Dr. Ron Paul. You'll like what you read.

01-12-2005, 09:06 PM	#21 (permalink)
lite campfire Crazy	Thanks x2 Dunedan. 1) I was sure HP ammo was specifically NOT armour piercing 2) I also thought the Five seveN and associated was still not avialible to civilians.

01-12-2005, 11:16 PM	#22 (permalink)
iamnormal Addict Location: In the id	If I was a bad guy I sure wouldn't be useing a gun like that. Traceing who the owner of a uncommon gun wouldn't take long.

01-13-2005, 12:16 AM	#23 (permalink)
Slims Eccentric insomniac Location: North Carolina	Actually, the true armor piercing ammunition for the five7 is not available to civilians, it is illegal under current laws and available to LEO's/Military only. What that gentlemen had was a hollowpoint round, that was designed to expand rather than penetrate armor, though there is not much a regular level II vest can do to stop a small, fast bullet of any kind (like a .22 magnum). The true armor piercing stuff is much worse. And the hollowpoint ammunition has already been approved for sale in the US and my local gunshop has it for sale along with one of the pistols. And curiously, why would lawmakers feel the need to make it extra super duper illegal to commit a felony while wearing body armor unless they considered it to be at least a potential problem? and if it is a potential problem, then why do they not want regular law abiding citizens to be able to defend themselves against it? Edit: I didn't see Dunedains post. He is currently running the shop that is selling the beforementioned pistol. __________________ "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill "All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible." Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence Last edited by Slims; 01-13-2005 at 12:18 AM..

01-13-2005, 10:13 AM	#27 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	An extremely rare exception. Those guys had somehow managed to buy over $5,000 worth of ( legal ) semi-auto weapons and convert them to full-auto ( illegal ) either by installing illegal conversion parts or by filing down the disconnectors within the action itself. Weapons Used: 1 HK91 in .308, converted to full-auto with illegal parts. Semi-auto coast: $2000 2 Mak-90s; Chinese-made AK-47 copies in 7.62x39mm, illegally converted to full-auto by filing down the disconnectors. Semi-auto cost: $500 each. 1 Colt CAR-15 in 5.56mm, Converted to full-auto with a black-market Full Auto Fire Control Group. Semi-auto cost: $1500-ish The illegal full-auto parts used to convert the HK91 and CAR-15 were probably quite costly as well, though I don't know exactly -how- costly.

01-13-2005, 12:22 PM	#28 (permalink)
dksuddeth Junkie Location: bedford, tx	don't know about conversion costs for the HK or the Mak's, but it's not very difficult to convert the AR-15. All you need is someone with some metalworking experience to fashion the very small part. I was also referring to the amount of body armor they had on them though. regular rounds weren't having an effect on them until the police were able to obtain some high powered rifles from a pawnshop. __________________ "no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

01-13-2005, 12:25 PM	#29 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Yeah, they were wearing Level 4-A ballistic armor, if I remember correctly. It's basically the same stuff a SWAT team uses. As for converting the AR: the part you mention, the autosear, is easy to fabricate. However, you also need a full-auto selector, bolt, bolt-carrier, and sear....these get expensive fast.

01-14-2005, 03:55 PM	#31 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	OH brother. Most has already been said, but I notice that no one has mentioned that most rifle rounds will easily penetrate a ballistic vest. Guess it's time to round up all those hunters and their 'cop-killer' bullets. (God, I HATE ignorance paraded as expertise.) __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

01-14-2005, 04:07 PM	#32 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Oh yeah. Anything will penetrate anything else if it's moving fast enough. A kid's .243 Winchester will easily perforate a Lev-III vest, as will the common .22 WMRF and the .17HMR.

01-15-2005, 12:56 AM	#34 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	I don't get it: These armor/vests don't sound very effective at all. What am I missing?

01-15-2005, 04:43 AM	#35 (permalink)
izin Upright	Body armor does it's job well against the majority of threats it's designed to safegaurd against. People have the misconception that bullet proof vests can stop any bullet. It can't. As others have mentioned in this thread, the velocity of the projectile is also a determining factor of the effectiveness of body armor. Police wear vests designed to stop relatively low velocity handgun projectiles. That body armor is designed to be wearable, ie thin and comfortable so police officers will actually wear them every day, and with that comes the trade off that it is ineffective at stopping projectiles fired at greater than handgun velocities. That article is a joke, but the sad thing is they believe that only the good guys wear body armor. Confronted with facts and common sense, the media is easily outed and made to look foolish. Their agenda and unfortunately more and more law enforcement officials agendas are completely transparent. Don't even get me started on Arnold and 60 Minutes and Ronnie Barrett and the LAPD. I just wish every firearms company responded as Mr. Barrett has when our rights are assaulted under the guise of protecting us.

01-15-2005, 11:13 AM	#36 (permalink)
KirStang Future Bureaucrat	I have a question, how does a .22 go about penetrating a lev-III vest while the vest can stop something like a .357 (or something similar?). Is it because of the narrow contact point...?

01-15-2005, 02:07 PM	#38 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Yup. A vest rated to stop a .44 Magnum can't stop a .22WMRF or .17HMR because of the velocity/SD issue.

01-15-2005, 02:35 PM	#39 (permalink)
Stick Psycho Location: Sydney, Australia	What a silly article. Even Michael Moore wouldn't stoop this low. Does the NRA have a media arm? Would they be at all interested in helping you with a rebuttal to this stupid/childish/scare mongering/lying article? __________________ ominous adj. Menacing; threatening. Of or being an omen, especially an evil one.

01-15-2005, 02:48 PM	#40 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Stick, The NRA does have a Media Wing of sorts, but the Media here in the States is heavily Statist, and its' bias is especially noticeable when it comes to gun issues. Their reporting is almost universally biased, dishonest, fragmentary, and sensationalist, as this piece so clearly demonstrates. As an example: the only uncut, unedited, and unbiased Gun Control debate they've ever shown ( Wayne LaPierre vs Rebecca Peters ) was deemed to "contraversial" and "inflammatory" that you had to get it on Pay-Per-View, as if it were pornographic. Whenever they have a "spot debate" on TV, they usually give some twit from HCI or The Brady Bunch about 90 seconds, and then cut to 20-ish seconds of some "random gunowner;" an individual who always seems to have been purposely chosen in order to perpetuate the Statist stereotype of gunowners and activists as backwards, ignorant, fat, tobacco-chewing rednecks. IOW, even if the NRA released a response ( which they usually don't; NRA is considered "soft-line" by many American gunowners for this reason among others ) it would get no airtime or page-space, and would be totally ignored by the media.