"Congress is going to look at this, do an impartial examination, and I believe the issue will die on its merits," Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA, told CNN. He said two studies have shown the ban has had no impact on crime.

[b]Fleischer said there was a study under way looking at the effectiveness of the ban.

"The study is still pending," Fleischer said.[/b]


Who is conducting this study, the Justice Department?  Anyone have any information on this, such as when it's due to be completed?

I am very interested in this as well.

That sounds like the 'study' that the Klintonistas requested and according to John Lott, the scope of it is narrowly designed to make sure the numbers come out good for the ban.

I was afraid that it would be slanted heavily for the AWB.  Still if it's coming out of the Justice Department??, maybe Ashcroft can balance the way the outcome is interpreted?

My sources tell me that it is very critical of pre-ban hi-cap mags and behind the scenes there is a "compromise" bill that is being worked on  by both sides that will ban the sale and import of ALL >10 round mags. The awb will be allowed to sunset but this will be put in its place. All of the new AWB bills may or may not be a diversion used to make gun owners feel like they have won something when the bills don't pass. Bush looks he helped both sides and the sheeple vote him in another term.

How will it feel to be able to buy preban guns, but no hi-cap mags? Yessiirrreee a brand spanking new Sig 550 but only 10 round mags. WOO HOOO!!!

Why ten???

Why not five?

Why not three?

Since when did TEN become "standard" capacity?

So I guess what they're saying is that it's okay to shoot 10 kids on a playground 6000meters away through 28 school walls but if you want to get that eleventh kid you gotta reload... then BANG!! THAT'S when the crack squad of benevolent BATF agents swoop in while you're changing mags.

Yeah, I see the logic of that.

I think that I've said this before, but I'll say it again now: poop.

Now I guess that I should figure out which guns I hope to own someday, and start buying magazines for guns that I may not have for years to come...

Oh come on Mac, has there EVER been any logic to these bans??

This was how I bought my first and only AR.  I started stocking up on 30rd magazines after the AWB passed, but felt really dumb having no rifle to go with them.  Seven years later, I finally got my Bushmaster.

Why don't they just say go for 0 bullet capacity.  It is a nice ROUND number.  Bada Bing!

I'd rather see no more flashhiders and get standard capacity mags back.

Only if I had to choose.

Does this mean I need to sell my pre-ban rifles by sep04 and use the proceeds to buy hi-cap mags???? [;)]

The words and wisdom of Bill ruger...

[i]"No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun" and "I never meant for simple civilians
to have my 20 or 30 round mags or my folding stock".[/i]

IIRC, the ban originally called for a 15 round max capacity until Ruger had to put his 2 cents in.

[url=http://virlib.ncjrs.org] the National Criminal Justice Reference Service [/url]  is a good place to look for previous studies.

There must be a few thousand documents listed.

[url=http://virlib.ncjrs.org/more.asp?category=51&subcategory=139] Here's a few firearms related studies [/url]

I'm sure more than a few are outdated by now.

And a couple of AW related ones.

[url]http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/guic.pdf[/url]

[url]http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/173405.pdf[/url]

Are you aware of the National Academy of Sciences panel on firearms research? The report is due right before the 2004 elections. Read the following by the good Professor John R. Lott Jr.:

…Take the National Academy of Sciences panel on firearms research. The panel began work during the last days of the pro gun control Clinton administration. Its report is scheduled for release right before the 2004 elections, and its findings could hurt politicians who support gun ownership. The project scope set out by the Clinton administration was carefully planned to examine only the negative side of guns. Rather than comparing how firearms facilitate both harm and self-defense, the panel was only asked to examine “firearm violence” …

The Bias Against Guns:
Why Almost Everything You've Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong
John R. Lott Jr.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0895261146/qid=1048286250/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/104-7002702-9668745

I'm not sure which study LaPierre is speaking of. If it's the one that was required as part of the '94 ban, awarded to the NIJ(also linked by LoginName), I wouldn't worry too much. I read it before and didn't see anything in it that would be damaging enough to call for another ban or to extend the current ban. Here's a snip from the NIJ study that basically states that at a time when more of the banned weapons were available, the less criminals used them.