Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TO THE FLOOR IN A 63

Stupic WA ???

Recommended Posts

This was what I found.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.41.190

What I take from that is you can now legally own an sbr, but you can't build one, can't loan it to anyone, still have to pay the fed tax stamp and application paperwork. Still can't have full auto or an sbs.

 

How do you figure you can't loan it? You can have multiple trustees or beneficiaries.... And you ought to be able to loan it to a Class III dealer, etc. too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a lawyer but unless you are specifically part of an nfa trust to which the sbr is owned, no touchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a lawyer, but I don't think you can be more a part of a trust than trustee or beneficiary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Form 1 for SBRs were being denied and still may be questionable

 

Some moron do-gooder from WA DOL called the ATF and felt it necessary to inform them that the SBR law did explicitly not allow for manufacture of an SBR. ATF freaked out and denied a boatload of pending Form 1s, and still may not be approving any new ones.

 

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_15/582816_Form_1_DENIED___There_it_is_folks____.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can still get one made by a SOT II, whether small shop or national factory.  It just means the price goes up a hundred or two for the complicated process of sticking a pistol upper on a rifle lower.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently ATF is now also denying transfers of NFA items from out of state, which stomps on the "loophole" that people were taking of having SBRs manufactured out of state and then transferred.

 

arfcom user NoloContendere, the attorney behind Hollis vs. Holder, appears to be gearing up to take the state to court over this issue.

 

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_8_15/582816_Form_1_DENIED___There_it_is_folks____.html&page=13#i6461468

 

additional shit from the thread, screenshot from eFile:

 

19363606038_db316274d3_b.jpg

Edited by mancat
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's strikingly similar to the stupid law we had on suppressors for several decades, whereby it was legal to possess a suppressor in WA, but illegal to discharge a firearm with a suppressor attached.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm waiting for them to figure this out so I can do a SBR..anger.gif

 

Just buy one made by a national manufacturer or an SOTII within the state. Problem solved. Hand the SOT-II your parts even.

or FFL III

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm waiting for them to figure this out so I can do a SBR..anger.gif

 

Just buy one made by a national manufacturer or an SOTII within the state. Problem solved. Hand the SOT-II your parts even.

or FFL III

 

I have a SP89 that I want to get a stock for ...... 

stupid Washington.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still better than it was a decade ago. We are still winning this fight.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will always be people trying to dig the next tunnel, but we can get out of this one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×