[carguychris]

My take is the Obama administration will... make the cost prohibitive to the consumer instead of a more direct approach of bans or confiscation.

My thoughts exactly. At the risk of planting ideas in the minds of the opposition, I have a hunch that future AWB-type legislation may take the form of taxes on "evil" features rather than an outright ban. Reasons:

• In the post-Heller legal environment, the chances of surviving a court challenge are better for a taxation scheme modeled on the NFA, which is pretty much settled law, than for a Clinton AWB-style outright ban on commonly possessed items.
• Memories of the rampant profiteering on "pre-ban" items during the original AWB will trigger an epic buying frenzy before a theoretical "AWB II" goes into effect. This will result in a short-term increase in the number of banned items in circulation. OTOH let's say that a $5 tax will be imposed on so-called "hi-cap" magazines. There would be limited incentive for people to panic-buy if the mags will remain available, just at a slightly higher price.
• Numerous conservative state legislatures have recently imposed "sin taxes" on items like cigarettes to close budget deficits. A similar mild taxation scheme could siphon off enough left-leaning but fiscally conservative moderates to get the measure through the House.
• Even if the measure is virtually worthless as a ban and/or a revenue-raising measure, it could be sold to the far left of the President's party as a mere first step, as with the PPACA.

Vigilance is the key.