Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 12/18/2003 8:42:32 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2003 8:43:20 AM EDT by BlackRifleJihad]
Anyone else seen the latest issue of the TAPCO catalog. I was flipping through there and saw an ad for m16/ak47 full auto trigger parts. Not unusual at all, until I see a circle with a line through it, with WA in the middle. At the bottom of the page says **Washington State law prohibits all machine gun parts as per RCW 9.41.220** Now this is true, but there are other states that do as well. Why is WA solely targeted. It's like seeing adds for high caps that can't be shipped to HI, MD, NJ etc. and me thinking, man glad I don't live there!

Anyways, everybody have a good xmas!

BRJ
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 9:14:33 AM EDT
Ask CavVet!
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 10:13:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/18/2003 10:22:42 AM EDT by R-32]
Boiled Frogs......

Washington State follows California's trends 5-7 years behind.

Also was there not a raid by the BATFags about some parts kits not even 6 months ago? With that and the BullsEye shooter deal, I would bet that the BATFE is just doing everything they can to make a few more dollars for that Seattle office. How about the murder of a Anti-Gunner by someone with a converted Makarov pistol, No secret that the FBI is asking Nationwide for owners of those pistols to turn them in for "testing".

Washington State has made the National news with some of the crap that go's on here in the last couple years. Tapco is not the only one, Look in SGN. You will see more and more of it.


Or you could just say that these company's care about you and would not want to sell product to you and risk you getting in trouble...


BTW... TAPCO SUCKS! In honor of CavVet

Link Posted: 12/18/2003 11:27:13 AM EDT
R-32,

I agree TAPCO sucks, just thought it was interesting they singled out WA. Haven't seen the latest issue of SGN, will check it out today though.

BRJ
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 11:53:48 AM EDT

Why is WA solely targeted.



Maybe because P.W. Arms in Redmond was raided by the BATF and that put vendors like TAPCO on notice of potential trouble?

seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/135039792_gunimporter20.html

Link Posted: 12/18/2003 4:38:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By R-32:
BTW... TAPCO SUCKS! In honor of CavVet




So honored! And I could not agree more. Screw the pro-RKBA faction in any way, you make the "You Suck" list!
Link Posted: 12/18/2003 6:54:11 PM EDT
I certainly won't hold it against a company for not selling things to a state where it's illegal to own those things. I most definitely won't hold it against a company who sponsors this site.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 1:30:15 AM EDT
Why does CavVet hate TAPCO?
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 5:13:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JAFO:
I certainly won't hold it against a company for not selling things to a state where it's illegal to own those things.



Agreed, moreless.


I most definitely won't hold it against a company who sponsors this site.


Would that extend to a person who is a member of this site? I guess I think even a sponsor could be a shitbird.
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 12:58:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By KA3B:
Why does CavVet hate TAPCO?



Im not sure it is pure HATE....

I think he just Dislikes them a LOT! ( I think you can find the story in the Armory, or at Fal Files still)
Link Posted: 12/19/2003 8:55:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CavVet:
<snip>


I most definitely won't hold it against a company who sponsors this site.


Would that extend to a person who is a member of this site? I guess I think even a sponsor could be a shitbird.



If you choose not to sell things to someone in a state where it is illegal to own those things, I will not hold it against you, if that is what you are asking.

I myself will not send high capacity ammunition feeding devices to California. I hope you don't hold that against me.
Link Posted: 12/20/2003 3:39:04 AM EDT
I have no problem (see above "I agree") with any company obeying state & local laws. To do otherwise would be foolish. The TAPCO issue in my regards is one from the archives and the way they handled business in some specific dealings.
Top Top