@AntiLazarus "It took the U.S. government 191 years – from 1791 until 1982 – to run up its first trillion dollars in debt. The second and third trillions got on the scoreboard much more quickly – each in just four years. By the time George W. Bush was inaugurated in 2001, the National Debt stood at $5.7-trillion. He ran up more debt faster than nearly all of his predecessors combined: just under $4.9-trillion.
@AntiLazarus Bit more than $4T in 8 years versus Obama/Dems projected $12.7-trillion by the end of the fiscal year on September 30th.... The admin's four year estimate shows that by the end of September 2012, the Debt will have soared to $16.2-trillion – which amounts to nearly 100% of the projected GDP that year. Not bad for a 4 year run...Since you want to blame all of Obama's trouble on Bush, should Reagan era debt be blamed on Carter? Not exactly a rosy period...
@sorryociffer Projected has nothing to do with it. We're not talking about what might happen, so stop trying to change the subject. The fact is that Bush II has as of now increased the national debt more than any other president in history, if measured in dollars.
Also, please tell me about how Bush's debt accumulated, versus Obama's? I don't suppose the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression could have had anything to do with Obama's? Nothing's big enough to let a Democrat off, eh?
@AntiLazarus Continued..."The National Debt stood at $10.6-trillon on the day Barack Obama took office. But if his budget projections are accurate, he'll run up nearly as much government debt in four years as President Bush did in eight."
It's funny how you keep forgetting who was in all but COMPLETE control of the purse strings for the last almost 12 years... Inconvenient truth? Don't like how your lib friends were enjoying the graving train they were conducting?
@sorryociffer If you're referring to our current recession-induced deficits, you're correct, they are the largest. I know you're not trying to pass off a collapse in tax revenue caused by the Republican's recession as somehow being Obama's fault. That would be egregiously dishonest, but I suppose conservatives don't know any other way.
@sorryociffer Furthermore, I see you tried to ignore the fact that George W. Bush added far more to the deficit than any other president in history. You can ignore history if you want, but the grownups don't have to take you seriously.
@sorryociffer Beyond that, you still haven't dealt with my earlier correction--your "total DoD military expenditures" are not even close. In fact, the total is twice that, over a trillion. You left out the DoE's nuclear energy programs, the DHS budget and, you know, the cost of the actual wars, as well as interest on the previousy budget-busting military budgets.
LMAO that you think spending bills have anything to do whatever with the deficit.
@sorryociffer Thank you for taking the time to further embarrass yourself, as you have now demonstrated that you have no idea how Social Security works.
"Social Security is prohibited from spending any money beyond what it has in its trust fund. This means that it cannot lawfully contribute to the federal budget deficit, since every penny that it pays out must have come from taxes raised through the program or the interest garnered from the bonds held by the trust fund."
My guess, is that if you are a liberal, you vote for liberal politicians who like nothing more than to try to take guns away with scare tactics and lies. If you vote for them, then you, by proxy, are just as extreme and self-righteous as they are. You may be a nice guy, but if you vote for liberals, with few exceptions, you are anti-gun and are trying to take something from me and weaken other law abiding people. Bad/ill people will always find a way to get a weapon, legal or not.
@sorryociffer The last "liberal" I voted for was Obama and anyone with any knowledge of politics would have known that he's Bush 2.0. The thing I liked about him is that he stuck to his views as a senator on the 2nd amendment-he disagreed with depriving Americans from their 2nd amendment constitutional rights. He has lived up to that view regardless of rumors that he hasn't. I don't vote blindly on party lines but on the issues. It's a polarizing topic that needs to discussed calmly I think...
Are you serious? Did you look at his comments and voting record in Ill? Gun control is very unpopular now and with so many other issues of much greater importance happening he simply isn't pushing it so as to have fewer political fights going on. You REALLY need to research his stance on this more. And if you new that he was simply Bush 2.0 why did you vote for him, after all Bush was the devil incarnate to libs. And the "last" you voted for means nothing.
Man it never gets old when people get on shooting videos and try to point out your safety flaws... i.e. the cars being parked in front of the shooting line or you finger being on the trigger before the gun is raised. Is it to prove to the other viewers that you may know more about shooting than the poster? What a pain...
@TheEvilX338 high pressure..but i wouldn't say its hard hitting. With top loads it only gets max of 400ftlbs of energy. A 9mm or a .40 can easily top that. What it lacks in energy it makes up in tranference of energy it has. Its more efficient in delivering all the available energy it has, more so that traditional jhp in service pistol calibers. That tumbling hp and v-max works very reliably and well in tissue destruction
@Ratkill9000 its very light...since i'm used to large calibers also, i almost don't even notice any. Thats what i think is another component that makes this gun so deadly. I can get off so many accurate shots that a head shot at normal sd scenario distance would be almost too easy
To make people ask questions about something that is not what they think.
The cars were parked in designated spots and behind the line and the target was in front of the line. Call the PA DCNR and complain about their range design.
The cars are not down range. The range parking spots are even with the line. I was shooting approx 30 degrees off of perpendicular to the line. Cars nor other people were in danger. Thanks though, the world needs more back seat RO's who aren't there to witness what actually happens at a range and then crow about how it should have been done.
This FN 5.7 is awesome and a huge step forward in handgun technology.. your thinkin its just a lil 5.7mm round that doesnt belong with the heavier caliber .357 .45acp .40. and you would be wrong. the new era of submachine guns which specifially made for Special forces operations are upgrading to p90's over the legendary mp5 because the 5.7mm was specfically made to go thru body armor not just vests. it has a higher volocity at 2000ft than a .45 does at 550ft, and to think it comes in a pistol
Onn3 your in the Netherlands you don't have the same freedom as the USA. The Netherlands has a lot of problems, you do nothing about them. USA has the same problems, corrupt politics, it's being cleaned up fast. America just won a major fight over their right to keep and bear arms. Learn more, you may want to move there or not. If the USA is so bad and crazy why is there a 8 year wait for people wanting to become Americans legally, makes you wonder?
@0nn3 Many cameras record at approx 24 FPS(Cinematic speed). "Live action" is accepted to be around 30FPS, as processed by our brain. The camera captured a frame just EXACTLY the time of the fireball, unlike the other shots.
While we ar onthe subject of BG I sawa video on here somewhere that shows how to make your own. Still expensive but well worth it. I still think that the best ones to test out on are Javelina.
@TGLymantaiste Would this produce the same damage as an M-16?, im just curious, because they shoot the 5.56 and this shoots a 5.7x28. Also could i convert this to full auto( like a glock)???
@brainysnaeha Not if you live in Arizona, there is one store i know that will have one in stock and cabelas here in az sells the ammo and a reasonable price. Not to mention p90s are found here too, i went into one store that had three or four fn p90s semi-auto. So in conclusion Arizona is one bad ass state to live in, because of the laxed gun laws so liberal nut jobs beware, we are arming up so don't piss us (as in US; USA) off. I saw a shirt at the Diamondbacks vs Brewers game Saturday, awesome
@calypsobikes is said, "I'd rather be a conservative nut job than be a liberal with no nuts and no job!" AWESOME SHIRT. I hate liberal democraps, they are the lowest form of politician in the world!
@0nn3 Liberals make a habit of not accepting others opinions as much as they accuse others of. They call people hate mongers, homophobes, sexist, racist etc when others don't fallow lock step with them. Liberals love diversity, as long as it means being just like them.
Well, I guess I could find some proof, but any high velocity ammo, such as a 5.56, or even a .22 long rifle, is able to penetrate certain body armors.
He is correct many civilian rounds will go through body armor, even regular hunting rounds and regular FMJ. There are different levels of armor that correspond to the threat type you expect to encounter. Low level vests weigh less and are more comfortable as well as cheaper but run the risk of larger and or faster rounds penetrating.
What startled me at first was the fireball from the first shot. For a couple shots after that I was anticipating more and they just weren't as noticeable after that. The recoil was REMARKABLY low even being VERY light.
Perhaps if our leftist Gov were more concerned with security and paid attention to obvious signs of domestic terrorism instead of offending people and made it policy for a military base to actually be secure it would not have happened.
Perhaps if more people were legally armed and instructed in there use we would have FEWER victims of crime.
I'm glad you are content with the system the way it is. When you end up a victim of a crime, I hope the officers AFTER action report taking is good.
@sorryociffer Give the people even more guns to make sure guns aren't a problem? You conservatives surely know how not to make sense. I love guns, but your solution is clearly ridiculous. One of the reason for me to believe the Conservative party is too retarded to rule and ever to vote on.
@0nn3 Yes, let law abiding people have guns to protect themselves from those who liberals coddle and excuse and who ignore laws and will get guns anyway. That's why they are criminals...THEY BREAK LAWS. The liberal solution is ridiculous...take/restrict guns from those who FOLLOW the law?!?!? Statistics, even from our own government show, that states with more liberal gun laws have lower violent crime rates than states that have punitive gun laws. Liberals are nuttier than squirrel shit.
@0nn3 For someone who says they love guns, you seem quite ignorant of them and the laws. In NY for instance any retail sale of a gun requires a NICS check at the time of sale. This uses FBI/state data to check for local, state, and national warrants or convictions/orders of protection. So, to answer your question, the Fed Gov decides whether to give the dealer permission to complete the sale. Legal owners have more to fear from a DA than criminals do if they use it to protect themselves.
@sorryociffer yea but that still means some people without a criminal record can abuse it. I do not know a lot about U.S. gun laws since I'm not american. Loving guns can be expressed in something as simple as admiring their destructive capabilities.
@0nn3 Of course there are. The system is not perfect, people are not infallible. You act like you see the world through rose colored glasses. Someone might break the law, so punish the other 98% who don't? That's ridiculous. You could outlaw guns and require them to be turned in tomorrow and the criminals will still have/get them and only the innocent will be hurt by it. Loving guns is also not just about their destructive ability, but I would not expect you to understand.
@0nn3: to be as to-the-point as possible, you are an idiot. in your rambling incoherent argument you fail to realize that our second amendment right is the right to be armed. i would not expect a netherlander to understand, but the first act of any tyrannical government is to disarm its citizens.
we are all within our rights to own weapons, so since you admittedly are ignorant of our laws here, perhaps you should go debate a subject you have some knowledge of.
@PooPoo2U Lol, you're just a plain ignorant asshole. We've got more freedom here for sure, we've got the right to get high :) But to be honest you've convinced me. You guys should really have guns. The more americans shoot eachother the less there are :D
@0nn3: actually, americans have the right to get high as well, as only possession is illegal, not consumption. sure, it's "legal" there, but i'm looking at the latest numbers available.
US marijuana users: 12.6% of the population (37 million people)
Dutch marijuana users: 3.8% of the population (a whopping 627,000 people)
yea, those laws here, they really ruin it for the smokers.
so, as you see, you know absolutely jack about shit.
@PooPoo2U lolz I know the numbers don't worry, but tbh I doubt that they're legitimate. In Amsterdam the average for youths is 4 joints a day, makes you wonder no?
@0nn3: look it up if you don't believe me. i'm sure some kids over there average four joints a day, but most of the people i know who smoke average closer to 1/2 an ounce a day. makes you wonder no?
@0nn3: look up the world health organization's report on countries with most marijuana and cocaine users, america tops the list even WITH our nearly draconian drug laws.
talk all you want, i won't argue with you any more. not because i'm angry, but because you're so wrong that you've even managed to start a side argument that is also INCORRECT.
@0nn3 You again? The right to get high, wow...yep, you got us beat. I'm picturing you as some stoner who just floats through life. While our socialist government is taking our freedoms more and more, we still have more freedom than most any other country on earth. I fully support Americans shooting each other because the vast majority of them will be criminals shooting each other (liberals) and cops and law abiding civilians shooting criminals (Conservatives shooting liberals).
Wow, typical left-wing mentality. Blame the gun rather than the terrorist-friendly government that is more concerned with political correctness than national security, and the insane regulations that prevent military personel from carrying their weapons on their own base.
And btw the "stopping power" of that gun is not that impressive, it was designed to penetrate light armor in lieu of being a potent manstopper.
This pistol is probably one of the most interesting handguns I have seen in the recent years. I am gonna get one as soon as my money situation becomes better. Last gun I got was a Colt 22 years ago, now it has doubled in it's value, because Colt only made it for 2 years. I think this gun will be the same.
Well, yes and no...the round relies on its speed for it's ability to stop people. To get that speed the bullet has to be very light, light bullets don't penetrate barriers or heavy clothing as well. The FBI wants a min 12" of penetration before it will adopt a round.
On the + side, it is very high capacity, has very minimal recoil and is very light and easy to shoot. There are some aftermarket ammunition that does improve on what FN did but it does cost more. For home defense, it should be fine
To be honest, with the FN branded rounds, I don't know. The aftermarket specialty rounds I THINK do. If you do a search for FN 5.7 ammo you should get several hits on companies who make it and could better guide you to an appropriate round.
It is an impressive pistol non the less, I was shooting at a paper plate at 50 yards in the vid and hit it with boring ease the first time shooting it. The fire ball with the 1st round startled me though, never expected such flash from such a small round.
I'm jealous. I hear the action is real smooth on these. Combine that with 20 rounds and a ball point. I like where the mag release is too. Sweet pistol, but for a grand? I'd rather spend a few hundred for a carbine.
I'm looking into getting a FN Five Seven. Is there any chance you can tell exactly how much you paid? I asked the FN dealer, they said "about $1000". I would like to know a specific answer if you could provide me with that. How is the grouping, and what is the maximum range you've been able to shoot accurately? Thank you.
I live in AZ and recent popularity has spiked the 5.7 from 800 to 950. I bought mine at a gun show for exactly 800 so it might depend on what state your in. As far as grouping goes, if your a decent shooter you will be looking at about a 4in grouping at 60yds. Less kick than a 9mm, but what makes it so nice is that the gun has balance from a full mag to the last round.
Actually, they are rather small,, they don't have much stopping power, it was designed mainly designed as an armor piercing pistol. It's isn't as effective as a 9mm for stopping power.
This pistol was not made for home defense, clearly made for special purposes like penetrating through thick armor. If you we're to shoot a person without armor, it would jsut go right through, and anyone knows that a bullet that goes right through does barely any damage. Damage from a bullet comes from its shattering and mushrooming effect.. this bullet needs some tough armor before it actually shatters and mushrooms.. so in fact your .22 would prove more lethal to an un-armored target.
I have not purchased mine yet. However I would imagine something that does not splinter or fragment inside the body would be perfect home defense. The perp goes down, you tie them up, put pressure on the wound call the cops - or if your in a state that allows excessive force - you put 1 in the head to finish the job. In Michigan now - "if you feel threatened" by someone breaking in while your home you have legal authority to kill them (reference an ex cop).
all that you just said would be a foolish way to see yourself in prison for a long time in any state. If you ever have to shoot someone, the idea is that you want them to die (thats kinda why you were shooting them to start with). There is only one side of the truth then, yours. If you ever shoot someone in the head that is already on the ground or immobile, you are going to go to jail. forever. No state forgives someone that kills in a manner such as that.
You are right that it's never ok to shoot someone after they are down. However the point of self defense is never to kill someone, it is to stop them from killing you. If you have to use deadly force to stop an attacker and they die, It does not mean that you wanted them to die. You only wanted them to stop and you had no choice.
If you ever point a gun at any living thing it is because you are trying to kill it. There are no "safe bullets" that will not kill someone if you shoot them. I see what you are saying, but if you ever use a gun on a person then you are trying to kill them. If you happen to not kill them then thats fine too but if you pull the trigger and hit center mass (like you should) then chances are good that you are gonna kill them.
My point is more about the wording used. obviously If you are not willing to kill someone you should not be pointing a gun at them. In court though, if you say you were trying to kill them, the jury may take it the wrong way. I was thought that you should say "I feared for my life" and explain that you had no alterative. The last thing I want is for you, or anyone, to go to prison for defending yourself. Stay safe and good shooting.
I understand what you mean. I also know better than to go in front of a judge and say anything like that. Just pointing a gun at someone with ill intent can get you attempted murder in some states. If you are not willing to kill someone you should not even be carrying a gun. just because it looks cool or it makes you feel safer having it on you does not mean that you are any safer. Probably more at risk because that may very well be the gun that kills you.
Well it won't do as much damage if it goes right through really. Thing too is that a person does not usually get shot in the vitals. The rounds of the Five-seveN and P90 where designed to fragment after hitting 'armor'.. if that armor isn't present chances are that your soft tissue won't provide enough 'impact' for it to mushroom.. sure it does splinter and all.. just not as much as a 9mm, .40 or .45... and mroe chances that it just goes right through.
Yeah you're right and it also really depend on the type of ammo you're using many different types for many different reason either self-defense,hunting,ultraspeed,varmint,cheap target practicing,low recoil, etc. Get the hollow point ones get some of the high quality from elite ammunition the are costly though.
@AdmiralGST The AR ball round does the same thing in soft tissue sometimes it makes a perforating wound which will definitely suck but the shootee doesn't die right now which is the (or at least my) goal when shooting someone. If it hits bone it will tumble but that is not reliable. The ball round will not normally frag.
@AdmiralGST I dont need to see the gel test. I have seen the perforating wounds first hand. the M855 round tumbles sometimes at long range but up close it wants to zip right through soft tissue. it will tumble if it hits bone or if the range is farther out. sometimes and sometimes not. It barely has time to tumble in the little guys.
I can't wait until my 30 round mags come in for my 5.7.this is a true anti-zombie pistol.
20MMbushmaster 2 months ago
20 fucking bullets? holy shit how can it even hold 10?
GuttFeelings 2 months ago
Weak firepower?
When you have a 20 round magazine this gun is a killer!
brainysnaeha 5 months ago
This is a loud pistol & now one of my favorites!
ptgoldman 5 months ago
The last 10 comments have NOTHING to do with the vid. You people are lonely. Whats next, bitching about that Lewinski giving a BJ to Clinton?
commonsense369 6 months ago 3
@AntiLazarus "It took the U.S. government 191 years – from 1791 until 1982 – to run up its first trillion dollars in debt. The second and third trillions got on the scoreboard much more quickly – each in just four years. By the time George W. Bush was inaugurated in 2001, the National Debt stood at $5.7-trillion. He ran up more debt faster than nearly all of his predecessors combined: just under $4.9-trillion.
sorryociffer 7 months ago
@AntiLazarus Bit more than $4T in 8 years versus Obama/Dems projected $12.7-trillion by the end of the fiscal year on September 30th.... The admin's four year estimate shows that by the end of September 2012, the Debt will have soared to $16.2-trillion – which amounts to nearly 100% of the projected GDP that year. Not bad for a 4 year run...Since you want to blame all of Obama's trouble on Bush, should Reagan era debt be blamed on Carter? Not exactly a rosy period...
sorryociffer 7 months ago
@sorryociffer Projected has nothing to do with it. We're not talking about what might happen, so stop trying to change the subject. The fact is that Bush II has as of now increased the national debt more than any other president in history, if measured in dollars.
Also, please tell me about how Bush's debt accumulated, versus Obama's? I don't suppose the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression could have had anything to do with Obama's? Nothing's big enough to let a Democrat off, eh?
AntiLazarus 7 months ago
@AntiLazarus Continued..."The National Debt stood at $10.6-trillon on the day Barack Obama took office. But if his budget projections are accurate, he'll run up nearly as much government debt in four years as President Bush did in eight."
It's funny how you keep forgetting who was in all but COMPLETE control of the purse strings for the last almost 12 years... Inconvenient truth? Don't like how your lib friends were enjoying the graving train they were conducting?
sorryociffer 7 months ago
@sorryociffer If you're referring to our current recession-induced deficits, you're correct, they are the largest. I know you're not trying to pass off a collapse in tax revenue caused by the Republican's recession as somehow being Obama's fault. That would be egregiously dishonest, but I suppose conservatives don't know any other way.
AntiLazarus 7 months ago
@sorryociffer Furthermore, I see you tried to ignore the fact that George W. Bush added far more to the deficit than any other president in history. You can ignore history if you want, but the grownups don't have to take you seriously.
AntiLazarus 7 months ago
@sorryociffer Beyond that, you still haven't dealt with my earlier correction--your "total DoD military expenditures" are not even close. In fact, the total is twice that, over a trillion. You left out the DoE's nuclear energy programs, the DHS budget and, you know, the cost of the actual wars, as well as interest on the previousy budget-busting military budgets.
LMAO that you think spending bills have anything to do whatever with the deficit.
AntiLazarus 7 months ago
@sorryociffer Thank you for taking the time to further embarrass yourself, as you have now demonstrated that you have no idea how Social Security works.
"Social Security is prohibited from spending any money beyond what it has in its trust fund. This means that it cannot lawfully contribute to the federal budget deficit, since every penny that it pays out must have come from taxes raised through the program or the interest garnered from the bonds held by the trust fund."
AntiLazarus 7 months ago
FN collector? I noticed the F2K and P90 on the car. I'm prob gonna look into getting one of those if there as smooth as you say.
Blindsniper1993 7 months ago
is it subsonic?
treydogg201 9 months ago
fn fans?
MushroomPictures 9 months ago
@eddymann04
My guess, is that if you are a liberal, you vote for liberal politicians who like nothing more than to try to take guns away with scare tactics and lies. If you vote for them, then you, by proxy, are just as extreme and self-righteous as they are. You may be a nice guy, but if you vote for liberals, with few exceptions, you are anti-gun and are trying to take something from me and weaken other law abiding people. Bad/ill people will always find a way to get a weapon, legal or not.
sorryociffer 9 months ago
@sorryociffer The last "liberal" I voted for was Obama and anyone with any knowledge of politics would have known that he's Bush 2.0. The thing I liked about him is that he stuck to his views as a senator on the 2nd amendment-he disagreed with depriving Americans from their 2nd amendment constitutional rights. He has lived up to that view regardless of rumors that he hasn't. I don't vote blindly on party lines but on the issues. It's a polarizing topic that needs to discussed calmly I think...
eddymann04 9 months ago
@eddymann04
Are you serious? Did you look at his comments and voting record in Ill? Gun control is very unpopular now and with so many other issues of much greater importance happening he simply isn't pushing it so as to have fewer political fights going on. You REALLY need to research his stance on this more. And if you new that he was simply Bush 2.0 why did you vote for him, after all Bush was the devil incarnate to libs. And the "last" you voted for means nothing.
sorryociffer 9 months ago
Man it never gets old when people get on shooting videos and try to point out your safety flaws... i.e. the cars being parked in front of the shooting line or you finger being on the trigger before the gun is raised. Is it to prove to the other viewers that you may know more about shooting than the poster? What a pain...
marionrtb09 10 months ago
Hard hitting cartridge
TheEvilX338 11 months ago
@TheEvilX338 high pressure..but i wouldn't say its hard hitting. With top loads it only gets max of 400ftlbs of energy. A 9mm or a .40 can easily top that. What it lacks in energy it makes up in tranference of energy it has. Its more efficient in delivering all the available energy it has, more so that traditional jhp in service pistol calibers. That tumbling hp and v-max works very reliably and well in tissue destruction
reesie0414 9 months ago
Compared to a Colt .45 or a .357mag how is the recoil of this gun? Curious, i've shot the .45 and the .357magnum
Ratkill9000 11 months ago
@Ratkill9000 its very light...since i'm used to large calibers also, i almost don't even notice any. Thats what i think is another component that makes this gun so deadly. I can get off so many accurate shots that a head shot at normal sd scenario distance would be almost too easy
reesie0414 9 months ago
thats a fucking rifle ahahah not a pistol lolololol well it sounds like one
skateforgirls13 1 year ago
@skateforgirls13
ya man id hate to be hit with one of them suckers
Salutatorium 1 year ago
awesome!!!
Alex924777 1 year ago
Damn, I see an F2000. I wanna see that thing.
FatalFist 1 year ago
So im just wondering why you park your cars IN FRONT of the gun instead of behind?
o56kid 1 year ago 16
@o56kid
To make people ask questions about something that is not what they think.
The cars were parked in designated spots and behind the line and the target was in front of the line. Call the PA DCNR and complain about their range design.
sorryociffer 1 year ago 5
@sorryociffer That is a great gun, definitely on my to buy list.
oxyman10 1 year ago
@o56kid because they know how to shoot a gun, only a fucking retards would shoot those cars.
AnemicRancor 4 months ago
@o56kid that is retarded...i guess they don't care if ricochet scratches the shit out of their cars
PaleRider626 4 months ago
Why is there so much muzzle flash on the first shot and then almost none on the subsequent ones?
StargateFan414 1 year ago
@StargateFan414 It's most likely that the camera isn't fast enough to capture every muzzle flash.
Jimb0tr0n 11 months ago
@JulietRomeoJuliet
The cars are not down range. The range parking spots are even with the line. I was shooting approx 30 degrees off of perpendicular to the line. Cars nor other people were in danger. Thanks though, the world needs more back seat RO's who aren't there to witness what actually happens at a range and then crow about how it should have been done.
sorryociffer 1 year ago
is a 5.7 legal for civilian shooters to own? cuz dammit! i want one!
fentonyoung 1 year ago
This FN 5.7 is awesome and a huge step forward in handgun technology.. your thinkin its just a lil 5.7mm round that doesnt belong with the heavier caliber .357 .45acp .40. and you would be wrong. the new era of submachine guns which specifially made for Special forces operations are upgrading to p90's over the legendary mp5 because the 5.7mm was specfically made to go thru body armor not just vests. it has a higher volocity at 2000ft than a .45 does at 550ft, and to think it comes in a pistol
shelbykr500kr 1 year ago
@shelbykr500kr Don't forget about the MP7 =D lol
DeltaWinters88 1 year ago
@shelbykr500kr
The power of penetration.
brainysnaeha 5 months ago
50 yards? thats nuts if ur accurate at that distance
dickhornymouth 1 year ago
Its sounds so powerful for the size of the round.
TaZ101SAGA 1 year ago
Onn3 your in the Netherlands you don't have the same freedom as the USA. The Netherlands has a lot of problems, you do nothing about them. USA has the same problems, corrupt politics, it's being cleaned up fast. America just won a major fight over their right to keep and bear arms. Learn more, you may want to move there or not. If the USA is so bad and crazy why is there a 8 year wait for people wanting to become Americans legally, makes you wonder?
mik22pik 1 year ago
DAMN!!! 20 shots?
rick552 1 year ago
@rick552 yup the cartridge is quite small
02dartda 1 year ago
@rick552 Imagine an extended magazine? Hand loading a couple dozen when training a group on them would suuuuuck.
flaktower 1 year ago
those things sound like rifle rounds...awesome. Just a shame they are so damn expensive to shoot.
cnknguyen 1 year ago
FN = best firearm manufacturer in the world.
YOWHATTHEHELLUP71 1 year ago
FUCKING SHIT THAT WAS SMOOTH!
MrSmileyAss 1 year ago
Wow, standard magazine is 20 rounds and extended is 30 rounds, that's pretty good.
Haispan3 1 year ago
Nice weapon, how hard is it to get relatively cheap ammo for the 5.7?
tatorsal 1 year ago
how come only the first shot had a fireball?
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3 Many cameras record at approx 24 FPS(Cinematic speed). "Live action" is accepted to be around 30FPS, as processed by our brain. The camera captured a frame just EXACTLY the time of the fireball, unlike the other shots.
sorryociffer 1 year ago
@sorryociffer ok thanks
0nn3 1 year ago
While we ar onthe subject of BG I sawa video on here somewhere that shows how to make your own. Still expensive but well worth it. I still think that the best ones to test out on are Javelina.
TGLymantaiste 1 year ago
I think I need a bolt action rifle. What a great little short range varmint rifle. It would definitely give the old .22 hornet a run for its money.
TGLymantaiste 1 year ago
@TGLymantaiste Would this produce the same damage as an M-16?, im just curious, because they shoot the 5.56 and this shoots a 5.7x28. Also could i convert this to full auto( like a glock)???
MrYessir1234 1 year ago
@MrYessir1234 No this has much lighter bullet going much slower. Ballisticly this is very similar to a .22 hornet, also a good round
TGLymantaiste 1 year ago
Sam Fisher's Pistol
Electrodeposit 1 year ago
This is my all-time favorite pistol!
It just so hard to find not to mention
ammunition rounds!
Light and scary performance for this
pistol!
brainysnaeha 1 year ago
@brainysnaeha Not if you live in Arizona, there is one store i know that will have one in stock and cabelas here in az sells the ammo and a reasonable price. Not to mention p90s are found here too, i went into one store that had three or four fn p90s semi-auto. So in conclusion Arizona is one bad ass state to live in, because of the laxed gun laws so liberal nut jobs beware, we are arming up so don't piss us (as in US; USA) off. I saw a shirt at the Diamondbacks vs Brewers game Saturday, awesome
calypsobikes 1 year ago
@calypsobikes is said, "I'd rather be a conservative nut job than be a liberal with no nuts and no job!" AWESOME SHIRT. I hate liberal democraps, they are the lowest form of politician in the world!
calypsobikes 1 year ago
@calypsobikes lol u are the lowest form of human on the world for being such a moron and not respecting other's opinion
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3 Liberals make a habit of not accepting others opinions as much as they accuse others of. They call people hate mongers, homophobes, sexist, racist etc when others don't fallow lock step with them. Liberals love diversity, as long as it means being just like them.
sorryociffer 1 year ago 29
@sorryociffer finally some one who agrees with me.
bubblezq 1 year ago
@sorryociffer yeah i never understood their crazy logic. Then i guess i never will since i'm not nutty like them..lol
reesie0414 9 months ago
Awsome weapon, I'm saving up for one!, I alwase wanted a five-seven
Tsudoshi09 1 year ago
if u want something to go through body army by a Tokerev.
mark3smle 1 year ago
If you wanted to go through body armor, just buy a .223 pistol. Shoots the same rifle round as an AR 15
Goatoftheforest 1 year ago
can anybody tell me does the "CIVILLIAN" ammo get thru bulletproofvest ??
RoyalAlba1 2 years ago
It does not.
AntitheticMe 2 years ago
noway,not legal..only full metal jacket. military,police.secret service only
vizcaya7 1 year ago
It dose. A LOT of cicillian ammo can puncture a vest.
AstonMartinFan 1 year ago
do you have any proof of that ? if you have let me see it please
RoyalAlba1 1 year ago
Well, I guess I could find some proof, but any high velocity ammo, such as a 5.56, or even a .22 long rifle, is able to penetrate certain body armors.
AstonMartinFan 1 year ago
@RoyalAlba1
He is correct many civilian rounds will go through body armor, even regular hunting rounds and regular FMJ. There are different levels of armor that correspond to the threat type you expect to encounter. Low level vests weigh less and are more comfortable as well as cheaper but run the risk of larger and or faster rounds penetrating.
sorryociffer 1 year ago
@RoyalAlba1
No. But there are ways of getting the good stuff. Or just make your ammo to spec.
ED1T1T 1 year ago
yes i know that you can get the good stuff another way xD but that isnt cheap
RoyalAlba1 1 year ago
Why do you need to know?
Kmannnn 1 year ago
thats a good question, I don't know, but a gun like this is perfect for protection, little kick, and great firing speed.
CDBigShow 1 year ago
this is the best pistol. it's powerful and it allows a fast rate of fire. it's a real beaut and my dream handgun. :D
davetista 2 years ago
wow the fucking echo sounds like a sniper lol
mango7272 2 years ago
That is a lot of fire power for a pistol..
WALL45tech 2 years ago
it uses P90 28mm rounds
Halo3Hamsty 2 years ago
Very interesting to see how much more control you had over the pistol by the fifth shot or so after getting used to it.
freddie2199 2 years ago
@freddie2199
What startled me at first was the fireball from the first shot. For a couple shots after that I was anticipating more and they just weren't as noticeable after that. The recoil was REMARKABLY low even being VERY light.
sorryociffer 2 years ago
What's more powerful - an FN 5.7 or a bomb in a
Islamofascist's underwear?
Let's ask President Spock, Barbara Boxcar, and Nancy Piglosi.
LEOPARDTWO 2 years ago
Damn, that seems loud! My AR 5.7 upper almost sounds like a .22lr
Otacon237 2 years ago
Haven't fired mine yet but cant wait to try some of the blue tip and 192 ammo out
scubaschlenk 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nidal Hasan murdered 12 and shot over 33 people with that gun - are you fools proud of the killing power ?
RioMyDream 2 years ago
Perhaps if our leftist Gov were more concerned with security and paid attention to obvious signs of domestic terrorism instead of offending people and made it policy for a military base to actually be secure it would not have happened.
Perhaps if more people were legally armed and instructed in there use we would have FEWER victims of crime.
I'm glad you are content with the system the way it is. When you end up a victim of a crime, I hope the officers AFTER action report taking is good.
sorryociffer 2 years ago 2
i am exmilitary and owned guns too - i get your point ,,, i just feel funny glorifying killing power.......
RioMyDream 2 years ago
We good guys don't think of it as killing. We think of it as problem solving.
tabre 2 years ago
@sorryociffer Give the people even more guns to make sure guns aren't a problem? You conservatives surely know how not to make sense. I love guns, but your solution is clearly ridiculous. One of the reason for me to believe the Conservative party is too retarded to rule and ever to vote on.
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3 Yes, let law abiding people have guns to protect themselves from those who liberals coddle and excuse and who ignore laws and will get guns anyway. That's why they are criminals...THEY BREAK LAWS. The liberal solution is ridiculous...take/restrict guns from those who FOLLOW the law?!?!? Statistics, even from our own government show, that states with more liberal gun laws have lower violent crime rates than states that have punitive gun laws. Liberals are nuttier than squirrel shit.
sorryociffer 1 year ago
@sorryociffer And who will be the almighty judge to decide who's law abiding and who isnt, any moron can buy a gun...
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3 For someone who says they love guns, you seem quite ignorant of them and the laws. In NY for instance any retail sale of a gun requires a NICS check at the time of sale. This uses FBI/state data to check for local, state, and national warrants or convictions/orders of protection. So, to answer your question, the Fed Gov decides whether to give the dealer permission to complete the sale. Legal owners have more to fear from a DA than criminals do if they use it to protect themselves.
sorryociffer 1 year ago
@sorryociffer yea but that still means some people without a criminal record can abuse it. I do not know a lot about U.S. gun laws since I'm not american. Loving guns can be expressed in something as simple as admiring their destructive capabilities.
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3 you are not American.
you do not understand
go home and take your laws with you
good day
bubblezq 1 year ago
@0nn3 Of course there are. The system is not perfect, people are not infallible. You act like you see the world through rose colored glasses. Someone might break the law, so punish the other 98% who don't? That's ridiculous. You could outlaw guns and require them to be turned in tomorrow and the criminals will still have/get them and only the innocent will be hurt by it. Loving guns is also not just about their destructive ability, but I would not expect you to understand.
sorryociffer 1 year ago
@sorryociffer hehe whatever..
0nn3 1 year ago
@sorryociffer I completely agree!
BeyondtheChaos1 1 year ago
@0nn3: to be as to-the-point as possible, you are an idiot. in your rambling incoherent argument you fail to realize that our second amendment right is the right to be armed. i would not expect a netherlander to understand, but the first act of any tyrannical government is to disarm its citizens.
we are all within our rights to own weapons, so since you admittedly are ignorant of our laws here, perhaps you should go debate a subject you have some knowledge of.
PooPoo2U 1 year ago
@PooPoo2U Lol, you're just a plain ignorant asshole. We've got more freedom here for sure, we've got the right to get high :) But to be honest you've convinced me. You guys should really have guns. The more americans shoot eachother the less there are :D
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3: actually, americans have the right to get high as well, as only possession is illegal, not consumption. sure, it's "legal" there, but i'm looking at the latest numbers available.
US marijuana users: 12.6% of the population (37 million people)
Dutch marijuana users: 3.8% of the population (a whopping 627,000 people)
yea, those laws here, they really ruin it for the smokers.
so, as you see, you know absolutely jack about shit.
PooPoo2U 1 year ago
@PooPoo2U lolz I know the numbers don't worry, but tbh I doubt that they're legitimate. In Amsterdam the average for youths is 4 joints a day, makes you wonder no?
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3: look it up if you don't believe me. i'm sure some kids over there average four joints a day, but most of the people i know who smoke average closer to 1/2 an ounce a day. makes you wonder no?
PooPoo2U 1 year ago
@PooPoo2U uhm, it's like the average amount a youngster smokes in A'dam is 4 joints. SO that's with all the normal people included :)
0nn3 1 year ago
@0nn3: look up the world health organization's report on countries with most marijuana and cocaine users, america tops the list even WITH our nearly draconian drug laws.
talk all you want, i won't argue with you any more. not because i'm angry, but because you're so wrong that you've even managed to start a side argument that is also INCORRECT.
PooPoo2U 1 year ago
@0nn3 You again? The right to get high, wow...yep, you got us beat. I'm picturing you as some stoner who just floats through life. While our socialist government is taking our freedoms more and more, we still have more freedom than most any other country on earth. I fully support Americans shooting each other because the vast majority of them will be criminals shooting each other (liberals) and cops and law abiding civilians shooting criminals (Conservatives shooting liberals).
sorryociffer 1 year ago
What freedom are they taking away?
Churchx77 1 year ago
@sorryociffer Hoorah
ELITEHAMSTER123 1 year ago
@sorryociffer USA has one of the lowest gun crime rates in the world... the lowest being one of the Nordic countries i dont remember the name.
Aetherius74 1 year ago
@PooPoo2U I knew after reading this ridiculous that it had to come from some place in Europe. You guys are fucked in the head.
LetsPlayStarcraft 11 months ago
Comment removed
PooPoo2U 11 months ago
@LetsPlayStarcraft: "You guys"?
I'm Irish-American and have dual citizenship.
PooPoo2U 11 months ago
@0nn3 wow...do you really need a judge to show you who is a threat to lives and who isn't?
t1msguitar 1 year ago
So what you're saying is the shooting would never have happened if this gun never existed?
SuzakuoftheSouth 2 years ago 2
Wow, typical left-wing mentality. Blame the gun rather than the terrorist-friendly government that is more concerned with political correctness than national security, and the insane regulations that prevent military personel from carrying their weapons on their own base.
And btw the "stopping power" of that gun is not that impressive, it was designed to penetrate light armor in lieu of being a potent manstopper.
Otacon237 2 years ago
@RioMyDream
Terrorists murdered 2,976 people with four planes - are you fools proud of that flying power ?
Touhou1990 2 years ago
@RioMyDream go play x-box you left-wing socialist pussy. Nidal Hasam killed those people. The tool is not to blame you sheeple retard.
HYBRIDCOMBATIVES 1 year ago
20 rounds of long range terror!
jonnytheninja2 2 years ago
Herstal FN real guns
dave777blaster 2 years ago
Does it jam often?
AurumenK 2 years ago
you dont deserve to be alive
azdrifter520 2 years ago
i like this one, especially the looks of the pistol.
soppiedekuthond 2 years ago
how many does it hold?
rocky20000g 2 years ago
20 shots extendid clip holds 30
CASHxISxKlNG 2 years ago
up to 31 with extended clip.
TodaysRapSucks 2 years ago
i love my 5.7 it isnt a good cc pistol, but as far as penetration and velocity , it is amazing. my glock 27 is what i carry everyday
pjicleanair420 2 years ago
You must be an FN fan like me. Is that a PS90 & and a FS2000 on the hood of the car? All awesome guns.
flippin1701 2 years ago 6
agree with the 2000 and the pistol, but P90 is really just for fans... (sorry but I just cant like ALL guns ^^)
Wambo07 2 years ago
This is amazing pistol 20 round,effectice caliber:5,7x28mm and picatinny in American Version!!!(SA)
daredo93 2 years ago 3
its like shooting a 22 high velocity not exactley knockdown power but lethal none the less
pjicleanair420 2 years ago
Man I've been looking at the NF for months.
20 rounds, A.P.
Looked like smooth recoil.
DarkMonkArt 2 years ago
its Fabrique Nationale
pjicleanair420 2 years ago 2
This pistol is probably one of the most interesting handguns I have seen in the recent years. I am gonna get one as soon as my money situation becomes better. Last gun I got was a Colt 22 years ago, now it has doubled in it's value, because Colt only made it for 2 years. I think this gun will be the same.
moderndesignworks 2 years ago 3
Is this a good home defence gun?
Robbaz 2 years ago
Well, yes and no...the round relies on its speed for it's ability to stop people. To get that speed the bullet has to be very light, light bullets don't penetrate barriers or heavy clothing as well. The FBI wants a min 12" of penetration before it will adopt a round.
On the + side, it is very high capacity, has very minimal recoil and is very light and easy to shoot. There are some aftermarket ammunition that does improve on what FN did but it does cost more. For home defense, it should be fine
sorryociffer 2 years ago
Does the Five-seveN achieve the 12" of required penetration?
Nice video, by the way.
JasonRedfield 2 years ago
To be honest, with the FN branded rounds, I don't know. The aftermarket specialty rounds I THINK do. If you do a search for FN 5.7 ammo you should get several hits on companies who make it and could better guide you to an appropriate round.
It is an impressive pistol non the less, I was shooting at a paper plate at 50 yards in the vid and hit it with boring ease the first time shooting it. The fire ball with the 1st round startled me though, never expected such flash from such a small round.
sorryociffer 2 years ago
I've heard of the SS109s having surprisingly good stopping capabilities, in some cases, near that of a 9x19mm (not sure whether that's true).
Anyways, thanks for the info.
JasonRedfield 2 years ago
I don't know about 22 is a good defense gun, but it's better than nothing right?............22 usually makes a good assassin's gun........=-)
moderndesignworks 2 years ago
then this gun came along to kick the .22 off its throne.
AdmiralGST 2 years ago 2
it seems loud, is there a supressor for this gun?
G48202 2 years ago
You can just use a 5.56 suppressor, it's only .14 of a mm.
omfg191 2 years ago
I'm jealous. I hear the action is real smooth on these. Combine that with 20 rounds and a ball point. I like where the mag release is too. Sweet pistol, but for a grand? I'd rather spend a few hundred for a carbine.
JackassHill 2 years ago
you cant hide a carbine under your tee shirt though...
s197stangdragger 2 years ago 2
I'm looking into getting a FN Five Seven. Is there any chance you can tell exactly how much you paid? I asked the FN dealer, they said "about $1000". I would like to know a specific answer if you could provide me with that. How is the grouping, and what is the maximum range you've been able to shoot accurately? Thank you.
mar221985 2 years ago
They range from $900-$1100...Depends on what the dealer feels like charging....
sorryociffer 2 years ago
I live in AZ and recent popularity has spiked the 5.7 from 800 to 950. I bought mine at a gun show for exactly 800 so it might depend on what state your in. As far as grouping goes, if your a decent shooter you will be looking at about a 4in grouping at 60yds. Less kick than a 9mm, but what makes it so nice is that the gun has balance from a full mag to the last round.
Ihsaan19 2 years ago
oh yer a five seven round can go through 3 layers of kealar
deathram10 2 years ago
this is a leathle weapon. it can be loaded with so many differant rounds love dis weap one of my favorates
deathram10 2 years ago
i love this gun where can u buy one
solidsnake200467 2 years ago
I'm sorry to ask this, but what is the Five-seveN's build material? I understand the body is polymer, but is it all polymer? Or is the slide metal?
HaloCrysis 2 years ago
20 rounds that sounds like a nice personal defence hand gun
skippy120 2 years ago 2
Actually, they are rather small,, they don't have much stopping power, it was designed mainly designed as an armor piercing pistol. It's isn't as effective as a 9mm for stopping power.
GODSPEEDseven 2 years ago
i think 20 rounds from anything bigger than a .22 is plenty of stoping power
skippy120 2 years ago
This pistol was not made for home defense, clearly made for special purposes like penetrating through thick armor. If you we're to shoot a person without armor, it would jsut go right through, and anyone knows that a bullet that goes right through does barely any damage. Damage from a bullet comes from its shattering and mushrooming effect.. this bullet needs some tough armor before it actually shatters and mushrooms.. so in fact your .22 would prove more lethal to an un-armored target.
GODSPEEDseven 2 years ago
I have not purchased mine yet. However I would imagine something that does not splinter or fragment inside the body would be perfect home defense. The perp goes down, you tie them up, put pressure on the wound call the cops - or if your in a state that allows excessive force - you put 1 in the head to finish the job. In Michigan now - "if you feel threatened" by someone breaking in while your home you have legal authority to kill them (reference an ex cop).
mar221985 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
where i live, you would get murder 2 for that one. and im happy to live in under those circumstances. you gun nuts are crazy.
deaglan1 2 years ago
better them than me.
AdmiralGST 2 years ago
all that you just said would be a foolish way to see yourself in prison for a long time in any state. If you ever have to shoot someone, the idea is that you want them to die (thats kinda why you were shooting them to start with). There is only one side of the truth then, yours. If you ever shoot someone in the head that is already on the ground or immobile, you are going to go to jail. forever. No state forgives someone that kills in a manner such as that.
s197stangdragger 2 years ago
You are right that it's never ok to shoot someone after they are down. However the point of self defense is never to kill someone, it is to stop them from killing you. If you have to use deadly force to stop an attacker and they die, It does not mean that you wanted them to die. You only wanted them to stop and you had no choice.
2Dandersen 2 years ago
If you ever point a gun at any living thing it is because you are trying to kill it. There are no "safe bullets" that will not kill someone if you shoot them. I see what you are saying, but if you ever use a gun on a person then you are trying to kill them. If you happen to not kill them then thats fine too but if you pull the trigger and hit center mass (like you should) then chances are good that you are gonna kill them.
s197stangdragger 2 years ago 2
My point is more about the wording used. obviously If you are not willing to kill someone you should not be pointing a gun at them. In court though, if you say you were trying to kill them, the jury may take it the wrong way. I was thought that you should say "I feared for my life" and explain that you had no alterative. The last thing I want is for you, or anyone, to go to prison for defending yourself. Stay safe and good shooting.
2Dandersen 2 years ago
I understand what you mean. I also know better than to go in front of a judge and say anything like that. Just pointing a gun at someone with ill intent can get you attempted murder in some states. If you are not willing to kill someone you should not even be carrying a gun. just because it looks cool or it makes you feel safer having it on you does not mean that you are any safer. Probably more at risk because that may very well be the gun that kills you.
s197stangdragger 2 years ago
so a 5.7 that goes right through you heart, lungs, kidneys does no damage because it didn't fragment, mushroom, or splinter.
thank you for that undefeatable wisdom.
the 5.7 does fragment and tumble in a persons body
AdmiralGST 2 years ago 4
Well it won't do as much damage if it goes right through really. Thing too is that a person does not usually get shot in the vitals. The rounds of the Five-seveN and P90 where designed to fragment after hitting 'armor'.. if that armor isn't present chances are that your soft tissue won't provide enough 'impact' for it to mushroom.. sure it does splinter and all.. just not as much as a 9mm, .40 or .45... and mroe chances that it just goes right through.
GODSPEEDseven 2 years ago
it doesn't need to hit armour first, look up what it does to a non armoured phone book, 5.7 x 28 vs 9mm
AdmiralGST 2 years ago 3
Yeah you're right and it also really depend on the type of ammo you're using many different types for many different reason either self-defense,hunting,ultraspeed,varmint,cheap target practicing,low recoil, etc. Get the hollow point ones get some of the high quality from elite ammunition the are costly though.
sylvainh2o 2 years ago
@AdmiralGST The AR ball round does the same thing in soft tissue sometimes it makes a perforating wound which will definitely suck but the shootee doesn't die right now which is the (or at least my) goal when shooting someone. If it hits bone it will tumble but that is not reliable. The ball round will not normally frag.
TGLymantaiste 1 year ago
@TGLymantaiste Ball does tumble in a persons body, you should check out ballistic gel tests.
AdmiralGST 1 year ago
@AdmiralGST I dont need to see the gel test. I have seen the perforating wounds first hand. the M855 round tumbles sometimes at long range but up close it wants to zip right through soft tissue. it will tumble if it hits bone or if the range is farther out. sometimes and sometimes not. It barely has time to tumble in the little guys.
TGLymantaiste 1 year ago
Look up this video:
5.7x28mm from FN FiveSeven versus 9mm (2nd test)
It provides deeper insight into what I've been trying to explain.
GODSPEEDseven 2 years ago
watch the FN Five seveN vs 9mm video, ur post is bullshit, the Five seveN is just as effective as the 9mm and causes almose more destruction.
morgansniper 2 years ago