"(1) which is not as detectable as the Security Exemplar (after the removal of grips, stocks, and magazines) by walk-through metal detectors calibrated and operated to detect the Exemplar;or (2) of which any major component, when subjected to inspection by x-ray machines commonly used at airports, does not generate an image that accurately depicts the shape of the component."
Are lawful items under this law.
"they don't suffer from thermal stress,
Everything suffers from thermal stress, especially plastics when compared to metal. Plastics also have lower strengths.
"and they are very shock resistant."
Compared to what? What's the application and alternative materials? Does the design matter? ...ect.
"They are also more ergonomic and inexpensive to produce than steel firearms."
Ergonomic? What are the design parameters and engineering alternates? Cheap! Yes, injection molded plastics are cheap. Composites are a little more. "Polymer firearms are supplanting steel firearms in the same way that composite aircraft are replacing aluminum aircraft."
Maybe you've been reading too many marketing hype. Composites have a use, but they are not replacing much Al, or Ti in aircraft. Consider the NY jet crash a couple weeks after 911. The tail fell off. That's, because they failed to really comprehend the nature of C composites. I prefer a steel frame 45, it's much more rugged, robust and reliable then anything built with plastic, or carbon.
"Your ignorant and inflammatory language in a public forum undermines support for our constitution's second amendment."
Sure it does.
"These antiquated metal detectors can be defeated by active induction cancellation"
WIth much trouble and inside info.
" So, by your same tortured logic, black powder must be a "terrorist substance" that should also be banned."
It's not tortured logic. The govm't doesn't want firearms in some locations. THey have detectors and other means to prevent them from getting in. The same goes for black powder. Black powder isn't supposed to be in those areas either and they have detectors and methods to prevent it.
" These rights have been lost everywhere else, one step at a time, by misguided people like you. By undermining this legacy, you squander everyone's inheritance.
Nah.
" Our nation is unique in our ability to buy and posses the means to defend ourselves and our liberties."
Like I said before, I'm interested in defending against air and mech armor attack, not piddling over nonsense.
The metallic content requirement of the statute has nothing to do with x-ray imaging. A piece of soap can be accurately imaged without any metal in it at all.
Everything suffers from thermal stress, especially plastics when compared to metal. Plastics also have lower strengths.
Plastics have much lower thermal expansion constants and they also fatigue less near the failure limit. Carbon fiber has a much greater tensile strength than any gun metal. Polymers are also more shock absorbent than metal as a material.
Ergonomic? What are the design parameters and engineering alternates? Cheap! Yes, injection molded plastics are cheap.
Injection molding allows more ergonomic shapes to be produced with less machining than cast metal or machined metal components. Again, they are also more shock absorbent. Cost is always a consideration.
Maybe you've been reading too many marketing hype. Composites have a use, but they are not replacing much Al, or Ti in aircraft. Consider the NY jet crash a couple weeks after 911. The tail fell off. That's, because they failed to really comprehend the nature of C composites.
Polymers are becoming more common in aerospace applications, metals less common.
I prefer a steel frame 45, it's much more rugged, robust and reliable then anything built with plastic, or carbon.
I prefer polymers, but I would never support banning steel weapons or slander them publicly with phrases like "gang guns" like you have done with your "assassin pieces" lie. Tell me, who has been assassinated with a non-metallic firearm? No one.
It's not tortured logic. The govm't doesn't want firearms in some locations. THey have detectors and other means to prevent them from getting in.
Permanently prohibiting a firearm design application for what is already antiquated detection technology is foolish and a threat to other types of firearms.
The same goes for black powder. Black powder isn't supposed to be in those areas either and they have detectors and methods to prevent it.
Nitrate testers can be easily defeated. The answer is to ban terrorists, not tools. If I loose my firearms, I will be less willing to defend yours. In the end our children will loose. Sadly, short sighted and self centered firearm owners like you are a worse enemy to our second amendment than any liberal activist.