Tuesday, 08 March 2016 11:05

WA State SBR laws fix passed - updated

Written by

Revised 4/1/16: Governor Inslee signed SB6165 into law! It goes into effect in 90 days after the session that it was passed. Since this was passed as part of the regular session I believe that will be June 9.  
This gives folks who want to do a Form 1 prior to the ATFE 41F changes a window that they can file (have to submit prior to July 14th) .


SOURCE: http://app.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=6165&year=2015#history

There was a glitch in the Legislature's fix for allowing SBRs. Unfortunately, the ATF interpreted it to disallow Form 1's from non-licensed individuals. 

The wording has been fixed and awaits Governor Inslee's signature.


CORRECTION: Speaker signed the bill 3/9/16 and has been delivered to the Governor.

 UPDATE 3/10: Governor has signed 10 bills and vetoed 27 as a result of a budget debate with the State Legislature. This bill does not appear on the signature or vetoed list (http://www.governor.wa.gov/office-governor/official-actions/bill-action).  If not vetoed or signed it becomes laws in 20 days (not counting Sundays).


Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/new-judge-hearing-challenge-to-dc-gun-law-rules-city-can-keep-enforcing-law/2016/03/07/6c392198-e49d-11e5-bc08-3e03a5b41910_story.html

Here we go again, although this actually doesn't change anything immediately since DC has been enforcing its show "just cause" to obtain a handgun permit. Of course, it will be appealed.

It seems even with the Heller ruling residents are still under the mercy of local government officials to carry their firearms. Even as all 50 States in the Union have some form of the anti-gunners still claim that citizen CCW is something out of the ordinary.


Saturday, 05 March 2016 17:47

W VA overrides Gov veto of permitless carry!

Written by

Today the West Virginia Senate followed the House and over-rode the Governor's veto of permitless carry. In 90 days W. VA will become the 9th state. 

Source: http://concealednation.org/2016/03/breaking-wv-house-and-senate-immediately-vote-to-override-governor-veto-permitless-concealed-carry-coming-in-may/

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/bloomberg-gun-control-group-launches-new-ad-against-mcauliffe/2016/02/09/5ef0e3e6-cf16-11e5-b2bc-988409ee911b_story.html

Anti-gun groups are quick to say that pro-gun people are unreasonable and unwilling to compromise.
But apparently, they are quick to attack any pro-gun control supporter who might be willing to make a compromise. Hypocritical much?

Their complaints are very weak. Each side got something, and to use the anti-gunners' mantra:
"If it saves just one life!"

They wanted people with protective orders against them to not be able to give/sell their firearms away, but rather be required to give them to law enforcement. Why?

And the universal background checks requirement for gun shows is voluntary with a stationed police officer at gun shows didn't go far enough. But "if it saves just one life"? Right?

It essentially restores status quo of CCW reciprocity that existed before the AG's "re-examination" and to quote the article: "...in exchange for tighter restrictions on gun ownership by domestic abusers and voluntary background checks at gun shows."

Sounds good, right? Apparently not! I guess unless it is completely draconian or has the word "ban" in it, it is no good.

Let's also not forget the fact that there were a couple of bills introduced that would have reversed the CCW reciprocity AG ruling anyway. One attempted to make VA a CCW license-less state which would honor any state's CCW license!

In the end (and being from the Commonwealth myself) I like Gov. McAuliffe's response:

McAuliffe dismissed the criticism during an appearance in Northern Virginia, saying “everybody supports [the gun deal] except one gun-safety group out of New York City.”

Well, this is an interesting twist. I am kind of impressed that a bipartisan agreement was reached in the Commonwealth of Virginia, however, I am alarmed that the Governor's Office (and Attorney General) have the ability to enforce/interpret the law.

Regardless, it looks like states will be added back in. I know that there are also several bills being floated that would make Virginia a permit-less state and one that would require them to honor any other state's CCW license.





Original article that VA was removing 25 states from their reciprocity list:



Some folks had some questions about my last post and the passage of Nevada SB175. Mainly folks wondered about what states would be added especially those that had been removed recently: Florida, Utah and Arizona.

Unfortunately, I have no idea. What makes us hopeful is that a number of those states were removed since they were not as restrictive as Nevada:

Two states will be removed from the list of recognized states. They are Utah and Florida. It was determined that these states no longer met the two step test required by Nevada law. Utah’s permit process does not require live fire training that Nevada law requires and Florida changed its permit renewal time from five years to seven years before renewal. These issues were substantially different from Nevada’s law.



But the "at least as restrictive" requirement has been stricken:

Sec. 4.5. NRS 202.3689 is hereby amended to read as follows: 202.3689 1. On or before July 1 of each year, the Department shall: (a) [Examine the requirements for the] Determine whether each state requires a person to complete any training, class or program before the issuance of a permit to carry a concealed firearm in [each] that state . [and determine whether the requirements of each state are substantially similar to or more stringent than the requirements set forth in NRS 202.3653 to 202.369, inclusive.]

How that it is going to be determined and approved by the NV police associations remains to be seen. There is no residency requirement that I saw either, so I am hopeful.

The list may be done July 1, and hopefully be approved quickly if it has not been done already.

I am expecting that it will be published here: http://gsd.nv.gov/FeesForms/Brady/CCW-Permit-Recognition/
Notice that it was last published July 24 so it did take a few weeks to get the final list.

Knocking on wood!

Sunday, 26 October 2014 12:48

Some new stuff coming soon

Written by

I have been getting some inquiries if I am still alive.
I am!!

I have some new things coming up shortly. I am ordering the last few parts to complete my BCM build this week, and have a couple new holsters to review:
BladeTech Eclipse for a S&W 1066 and Scorpius Tactical Defender for a Browning HiPower (I know - some different choices). The Ozarks IWB holster (Glock). I have to order it still, but also the internet famous Raven Concealment Systems (RCS) for a more common Glock.

Also, making plans for upcoming ShowSHOW 2015! It just takes $ :)


I am LMAO at this news article posted today. I repost it because I am sure at some point they are going to realize the ridiculousness of a kit that converts a "standard gun" into a semi-auto. Or maybe they won't fix it. They clearly don't care about their gun illiteracy or accuracy in reporting. I suspect they meant converting a 10 round magazine back into its standard capacity (more than 10).

Link to Chicago Tribune Article

SACRAMENTO, Calif., Oct 10 (Reuters) - California Governor
Jerry Brown vetoed several closely watched gun control bills on

Friday, a move that essentially rebuffs an effort by fellow
Democrats to enact a sweeping expansion of firearms regulation
in the most populous U.S. state.

Brown vetoed the strictest bill, which would have classified
any firearm with a removable magazine as an assault weapon,
calling it an "infringement on gun owners' rights." He did,
however sign some new firearms regulations, including a measure
to ban conversion kits used to convert standard guns into

(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein; Editing by Cynthia Johnston)

I am laughing, but I am also deeply saddened by how ignorant MSM and reporters are about firearms. Unfortunately, I fear that it is not limited to firearms, and they don't seem to care about accuracy in reporting.

However, in the meantime, where can I get one of those kits to convert my standard gun into a semi-auto?

Tuesday, 24 September 2013 13:58

High Noon Undertaker Shoulder Holster Review

Written by

I have been wanting to get a new shoulder rig for driving. I currently have a couple, but they are for full-size all-steel pistols and I think that something a little more weight would be more comfortable. I have also been wanting to get another holster for my FNX. I only have the stock (BladeTech) OWB currently.

So, when I saw a close out sale from High Noon with an Undertaker for $70 I jumped at it. Actually, they had Glock 19/23 Under Armor too but I didn't call fast enough the next day. I would have bought that too :) The difference between the two holsters is all leather with hard molded holster vs a synthetic leather like material which is unmolded. I have an Under Armor holster for my S&W (tm)* 1066. It is very leather-like and nice.

*I am not affiliated with the company known as "Smith & Wesson" in any way. It's trademarks are held by whoever they are held by.

Anyway, the Underarmor was a left hand, but they were able to flip the holster portion inside out to make it a right hand. The only difference is that traditionally the smooth side of the leather faces out, while the rough is on inside. In this case it is flipped. This is strictly cosmetic and makes no difference functionally.

I have to say that I am VERY impressed! The holster is very simple in design and quite frankly very well put together. I have only tried a handful of shoulder rigs, with the Galco Miami Classic II being my favorite - at least up until now. The High Noon Under Taker is by far the most comfortable I have worn yet.

I like to wear my holster and mag carrier to ride fairly high up. Galco seems to think that it should ride much lower than I would like and I run out of adjustment. Maybe I am shorter than the average shoulder rig wearer (I am 5'7").

Some observations follow:

High Noon leather quality is very nice, in fact nicer than some other holsters I own. I don't know if it makes any difference but Galco feels like it is sealed or laminated. The High Noon does not and that makes it feel less stiff. Maybe that is why it is more comfortable?

-The High Noon comes with very simple hardware--I like that. The only bulk is from the leather itself.

-The High Noon comes with keepers. VERY VERY nice touch! Since I like the holster/mag carrier to ride up high, there is a lot of extra material.

-The High Noon comes with a lot of notches for adjustment. One pair almost goes up to the top. I found putting that side in the back worked best for me.

-The High Noon's straps are all the same size. Depending on the Galco rig you get this may or may not be true (MC's are the same while the SSII has larger front straps).

-The High Noon mag carrier is drop down. This is similar to the Miami Classic. The Maimi Classic II holds the mags horizontally. I really like (and have gotten use to) this. The horizontal mags are very fast to access. However, the drop down are very secure with the flap. Dual snaps also allow multiple magazine sizes - I tried Glock 23 mags without any problem. Note: Both the MC and MCII can also accomodate mutiple sizes.

Driving with the High Noon was great. Success!
And now some pics. I apologize for the pic quality, my light box accidentally got destroyed in my garage and I have to make a new one. Camera is is my Nokia Lumia cell phone -- I am lazy tonight.

Click on any pic to view the full-size.

Cocked & locked! High Noon gears their holster for hammer down but it works fine.


Simple hardware works great. They do pivot.

Straps pivot on the center diamond. Note the keepers - there are four, although only two are visible in the pic.

Mag crrier

Mag carrier

"Selfie" (haha) just to show how I like to position the holster and mag carrier
WP_20130924_008 (2)

Source: opb.org

"So the sheriff made the decision to go ahead and focus on Multnomah County resident applications, try and reduce that backlog, and then we'll re-open the process for Washington State residents who have business here in Oregon."

Oregon is a little different than most states in that while resident CCW licenses are required by law (shall issue) if the person meets the requirements, non-resident CCW licenses (contiguous states only) are completely discretionary (may issue). This means that the it can (and does) vary from county to county. I know of at least one county that simply does not issue to non-Oregon residents.

It would appear that the Multnomah County is currently inundated by applications. We can assume that since they get a lot of WA applications because of Portland. They state that they will reopen the applications at least from WA in the future. What about the other states, I wonder?

Is it coincidental to the fact that Multinomah County just passed some interesting new firearm restrictions? New restrictions include the open carrying of a firearm while hiking and making it illegal to have a loaded magazine in "public" even if you don't have a firearm! See source: Oregonian

I guess we will find out what happens in the future.

Page 1 of 4