Eric Howard, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said that just because there are no statistics to prove it does not mean the expiration of the ban has been a big so-what.

"Now manufacturers are kicking it up, and we're seeing things like fingerprint proof-resistant grips," he said.

BUT the AWB never banned "fingerprint proof-resistant grips."

IF there are now "fingerprint proof-resistant grips" being made, WHY has NO gun control advocate introduced legislation to ban them?

Could it be because it's BS?

"Fingerprint proof-resistant grips"?!

WTF? Does he mean polymer grips? [googles]

Oh. Intratec. Oh, for God's sake, is someone recycling that old myth?

Hey, turns out my Glock's checkered grips are "fingerprint resistant" too! Lock me up, I'm a danger to society!

I wondered about that, too. I don't read many gun magazines but I did a web search and didn't come up with anything. There ARE finishes that are more resistant to fingermarks but that's just to keep the finish looking nice (especially a blue'd one) but why would a criminal be interested in such a "fingerprint proof finish" anyway -- it's not like they're planning to toss the gun after robbing someone...

All I can think is that the Brady idiot actually thought grooved and checkered grips were intended for that purpose rather than to facilitate a better grip.

One thing Karl Rove proved is you pretty much have to be an idiot to listen to liberals -- notice they were the first to the microphones as well.

The deal with liberals is they count on their leftist-MSM to carry the lie forward. The advent of common use of the Internet has nullified all that -- they just keep on lying, but now we can all laugh in their faces, and tell all our friends.

I have fingerproof grips on my guns, they are called gloves :) -- bet a criminal would never have thought of that.