[GBullet]

As the ban expired, I noticed that nearly nobody was advertising new guns in pre-ban configuration. So, I asked folks that I know in the gun business and universally got the same answer.

Most of the mags marked LEO/Government only have been sold, either to collectors or wholesalers. Very few manufacturers will offer hi-cap mags until after the election. Only two manufacturers have introduced formerly banned rifles. Some maufacturers may offer hi-cap pistol mags that are already in production in Europe.

Why:

All manufacturers are scared of a Democrat victory in November. Should Kerry, etc. win, Kerry's bill outlawing most currently legal guns would devastate the industry...and eliminate our freedom.

No manufacturer wanted to invest money into a domestic plant (you still can't import foreign rifles with the "bad" features) unless enough pro-Second Amendment folks were elected.

During the ban, non-M16/M4 mags were in limited supply for some LEO and government agencies. My understanding is that military M9 pistol mags have been hard for soldiers to get because politicians were afraid that they would sell them to civilians.

Last month, I heard an ad on the radio for a religious revival in my city. During the ad, the featured minister refered to the election and said, "Remember in November!" Those of us who support the Second Amendment need to do the same.

 

[Rich Z]

Well, this sounds pretty short sighted of the manufacturers to me. Do they not know the definition of "ex post facto"? Once those guns and magazines are created and in the pipeline, any law the government would pass governing their status would be an ex post facto law. They would, in effect, be the new level of what defines a "pre-ban" firearm or magazine. If the government were to pass a blatantly ex post facto law that would affect currently owned firearms or magazines in possession of citizens with the intent of vigorously enacting a confiscation program (in any of its disguises), they would wind up having a very serious civil disobedience problem on their hands.

That kind of crap may have worked in Germany and other nations, but this is America and we are Americans. They would be seriously overestimating their authority to violate OUR constitution with impunity.

I have heard it said somewhere that someday Democrats will be hunted down and shot like rabid dogs. I do not recall the source of that statement, but something like this could very easily be the first falling domino to set the stage for that to become reality.

IMHO

 

[Glenn Bartley]

You cannot be too sure that any such passage of a new AWB would grandfather in existing mags as legal. They (the gun haters) could get rabidly worse if they have enough members in the House and the Senate, and the prez to boot.

 

[Magnum88C]

You cannot be too sure that any such passage of a new AWB would grandfather in existing mags as legal. They (the gun haters) could get rabidly worse if they have enough members in the House and the Senate, and the prez to boot.

No but the extra mags might help get them back out of office. . . :uzi:

 

[Rich Z]

You cannot be too sure that any such passage of a new AWB would grandfather in existing mags as legal. They (the gun haters) could get rabidly worse if they have enough members in the House and the Senate, and the prez to boot.

"Grandfathering" such things is really not an option for our government to ignore when making laws.

EX POST FACTO CLAUSE - A misnomer in that actually two Constitutional clauses are involved. The U.S. Constitution's Article 1 Section 9, C.3 states: 'No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed,' and Section 10 says: 'No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law. . . .'

The 'words and the intent' of the Ex Post Facto Clause encompass '[e]very law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed.' Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. (1 Dall.) 386, 390 (1798) (opinion of Chase, J.).

An ex post facto law is a law passed after the occurrence of an event or action which retrospectively changes the legal consequences of the event or action.

 

[Glenn Bartley]

Touché..........