JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
I really do have to get back to work... after this

I read up on the thread to the part about AOW and ar pistol comparison.... Careful.....

That could backfire be making people feel like the SBR law doesn't ban ENOUGH. Some of those guns do not look "mundane" or something an average Joe would own.

You might be comfortable around them and feel they are normal, but some one who already may be on the fence about Evil Black Rifles would certainly not like to be reminded of how those little evil black pistols are already legal.... I dunno, what do you guys think? If you want to use that argument, I would save it for the end.
 
And what about kids? Could we say that SBR/SBS's are for kids learning to shoot/hunt with their dad. The image of a 12 y.o. decked out in his/her hunter orange learning how to hold a gun (.22, for squirrels?). Think about the CHILDREN!!! (oh man, i crack myself up; I hate it when people use that phrase)
When my son passed the hunters ed class (not many require the class to actually shoot) he had to fire a .243 rifle (albeit a youth model) and a 12 gauge shotgun. If a 12yo can do it I am thinking the petite adult female can too. Look at Top Shot, that little lady had a hard time sholdering the full auto thompson, but she did it. And that is a 12 pound FA gun before the 50 rounds of .45 were added to the drum.
 
We should use pictures like this when talking to the powers that be.
The top rifle is a Colt 6921 (14.5" SBR)
The bottom rifle is a Colt 6920 (16" carbine)
Top is illegal, bottom is legal.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTAZecsORow1UJWlP7MexsFNDxGmL_Jc3j2PMEU6Itljr5XuZt5.jpg
 
Its definitely not an air tight argument that shorter barrels would benefit the smaller in stature... I'm just looking for an angle that will soften the issue. Obviously, female shooters and kids can handle whats currently on the market cause they are already out there shooting. I still think we should push to broaden the perceived demographic beyond "guys with guns that want more guns"
 
We should use pictures like this when talking to the powers that be.
The top rifle is a Colt 6921 (14.5" SBR)
The bottom rifle is a Colt 6920 (16" carbine)
Top is illegal, bottom is legal.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTAZecsORow1UJWlP7MexsFNDxGmL_Jc3j2PMEU6Itljr5XuZt5.jpg

If those pictures are used then it should be pointed out that today's military uses a 14.5" barrel for their M4A1 carbines.
 
I think something other than a "black" rifle should be used as an example. Maybe a 10/22 for example.

While we are all comfortable with firearms, some, or many of the politicians (and their constiuents) are not. All we need is some anti-gunner to say why do "they" need military style weapons.

The less controversy the better.

JMHO

edit: and yes I would like to legally own SBRs and yes I would like to legally own MG's. But first we have to get the laws amended.
 
Last Edited:
I was thinking of showing single shot break open, stocked pistols and bolt action rifles in SBR configuration. Single shot and pump shotguns with 17 inch barrels would look benign, especially if we demonstrate how well they break clay pigeons. We an also show that a pump action SBS is longer than a break open shotgun.

Compare the SBS/SBR with AOW's and large pistols to show how "unuseful" the ban is as an SBS or SBR is less concealable than a pistol and not always as powerful. If I show an ar-15, I would like to configure it with a non-adjustable stock, carry handle sight and no tactical add-ons.

Ranb
 
I was thinking of showing single shot break open, stocked pistols and bolt action rifles in SBR configuration. Single shot and pump shotguns with 17 inch barrels would look benign, especially if we demonstrate how well they break clay pigeons. We an also show that a pump action SBS is longer than a break open shotgun.

Another good example. Also how about a Thompson/Center with stock showing different barrel lengths?


Compare the SBS/SBR with AOW's and large pistols to show how "unuseful" the ban is as an SBS or SBR is less concealable than a pistol and not always as powerful.Ranb

Let me play the devils advocate (and anti gunner): 'then maybe AOW's and Large Pistols should be illegal also'
 
They can say that, but the last time they did, over 200 people showed up for the Senate hearing to oppose those bills and they died in committee. WA RCW's do not define gadget guns (AOW's), they would just be pistols as far as I know. Try to ban pistols in WA and many more people will notice than those that noticed what was going on with the silencer bill.

Ranb
 
There is a small group of people working on pushing an SBS/SBR bill that is supposed to be submitted very soon. For you WA people who want to help, we are gathering a list of names, addresses and phone numbers of people who want to be part of the team. The list will not be published online, but will be given to all of the team members. This will enable us to better coordinate our efforts and prevent wasted efforts and mistakes. The thread is on the Hometown Washington portion of the AR15.com forum. <broken link removed>

Ranb
 
As for the "small stature" argument - I can definitely get on board with that. I started plinking on an old Ithaca breech loader 22LR at age 6, so "Grandpa" gave my girls a pink Crickett 22LR for Christmas a couple of years back so they could start learning to shoot as well. The youngest one, at age 8, is small for her age and is still too small to shoulder even the Crickett. Modifying the stock to a pull length that she COULD use (without tucking the butt under her armpit) would put it at SBR status (under 26" OAL).

Obviously, it's hard to get her interested in shooting when she can't comfortable or ergonomically hold even a kid-sized rifle due to her size. And she's the one that has shown the most interest in trying it! And I'm not about to risk felony conviction in order to have something in my possession in WA state that she could use either...
 
Looks more to me like one is a "backup plan" to the other. The RCW numbers are the same, as is the wording...just that one only lists SBRs and the other tackles SBR and SBS together.

Either way, I'm sure there won't be much action this year on them, but it's good to see the motion starting. I dropped a "thank you" to my representative, who happens to be one of the sponsors (Orcutt).
 
LC

Met your representative at the HB 1016 signing. Ann Rivers was very nice to talk with, and her husband seems like an avid shooter, from her description. She said she was also from LaCenter.

My mistake. Yes, Brian has a plan A and Plan B.
 
Dogfish, thanks for introducing yourself here. We need all the cooperation we can muster for the SBS/SBR bill. I wish I had been able to see what was going on behind the scenes or at least find others who were more "in the know" than I was when bill 1604 died and 1016 was introduced. Thanks.

Randy
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top