There is 100% chance it will be challenged in court. Let’s do this the right way and argue before the courts first, especially while they are favorable.
In Gonzales the Supremes ruled the local police do not have a Constitutional obligation to protect the people. Therefore, in Heller they ruled that the people have the right to use tools “in common use for lawful purposes” (from Miller) to protect themselves. In McDonald, they ruled this applies to state laws.
What do local PDs use? What about federal law enforcement? Well, they won’t use things that are for unlawful purposes (supposedly) and they commonly use them. Any magazine ban (or “clip,” as the tards say) will meet a stiff challenge unless the police are willing to ban it from themselves, which I find highly unlikely.
The real threat are taxes on these items. $200 per mag plus registration plus $200 per round . . . it would be the end. However, that is not the question for New Yorkers right now. It may be for us come tomorrow, but not for this particular ban.
Yup, that is the first step. I suspect the Democrats are hoping to scare some militia folks into something violent, which they'd only use to crack down on guns further.
I agree, the left is probably going to struggle with gun bans, so liberal states will go for massive taxation on bullets and magazines.
One thing I think would be effective is for red states with good leadership to make a point of doing the opposite of the what liberal states are doing. And do this with as much media attention as possible. You are already seeing this on the taxation front. Every time California, NY or Illinois talk about raising taxes further, Texas, Louisiana, etc, should move to lower theirs. Red state governors should begin making it a point to attract good people, in addition to good businesses, to their states. So NY tries to tax magazines, VA can move to lower taxes on guns and accessories. Do this publicly with as much fanfare as possible.