[RedBloodedAmerican]

Sig Pro?

Also a company not far from me owns the rights to a design they made years ago for the military. Red Eye Arms, Inc.

Just because the public and even some LE agencies and military don't know about it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If theres a ban, theres a reason for it.

[bereanway]

I've got a Sig Pro which has about as much steel as a Glock, just a polymer frame.

I would think the bullet components would be a bigger challenge than the gun itself. To make a small handgun with ammo containing no metallic components would be a real challenge. But even if you could do that I would think it could still be detected.

[Ronaldus Magnus]

Just because the public and even some LE agencies and military don't know about it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. If theres a ban, theres a reason for it.

Absolutely false. This ban first originated when columnist Jack Anderson wrote that the then new Glock 17 could not be detected by airport metal detectors. This was as completely fictitious as the porcelain slide on the Glock 7's movie "Die Hard" but started the panic that continues to this very day about a fabricated publicity lie.

Your blind faith in the legislative process betrays you.