• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

WAC Gun Show

Bill Starks

State Researcher
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
4,304
Location
Nortonville, KY, USA
imported post

G20-IWB24/7 & deanf +1

The fair is sponsored by a private owner on private property. See: Initiative 172 v. Western Washington Fair Association as a good example. The AG even had some input on it.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Initiative_172_v._Western_Washington_Fair_Association

Look folks, you don't want to disarm or have you gun tied open then don't attend, its as simple as that. You don't like the rules? become a member run for a office position and make some changes.

Like G20 said, I see how folks handle a empty weapon and I damn sure don't want a loose round flying around in a crowd of people because some guy who has years of experience in X position has a ND with a loaded weapon.
 

mrbiggles

Banned
Joined
Oct 31, 2008
Messages
190
Location
, ,
imported post

M1Gunr wrote:
G20-IWB24/7 & deanf +1

The fair is sponsored by a private owner on private property. See: Initiative 172 v. Western Washington Fair Association as a good example. The AG even had some input on it.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Initiative_172_v._Western_Washington_Fair_Association

Look folks, you don't want to disarm or have you gun tied open then don't attend, its as simple as that. You don't like the rules? become a member run for a office position and make some changes.

Like G20 said, I see how folks handle a empty weapon and I damn sure don't want a loose round flying around in a crowd of people because some guy who has years of experience in X position has a ND with a loaded weapon.
i guess you're against carrying in public then too because someone could ND you right in the eyeball.

its funny when so called 2A supports draw lines in the sand, but then get mad when anti-gunners draw lines in the sand as to what we should be allowed to do.
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

M1Gunr wrote:
G20-IWB24/7 & deanf +1

The fair is sponsored by a private owner on private property. See: Initiative 172 v. Western Washington Fair Association as a good example. The AG even had some input on it.
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Initiative_172_v._Western_Washington_Fair_Association

Look folks, you don't want to disarm or have you gun tied open then don't attend, its as simple as that. You don't like the rules? become a member run for a office position and make some changes.

Like G20 said, I see how folks handle a empty weapon and I damn sure don't want a loose round flying around in a crowd of people because some guy who has years of experience in X position has a ND with a loaded weapon.
1. Yep, the reason I posted in the first place was because they are not on the DNP list, which I personally believe needs to be corrected.

2. Nobody should be touching their loaded weapon. It should stay in the holster, period. I would have no problem with a reasonable rule such as that. By the way what you're saying sounds similar to "Only trained LEO's should be allowed to carry guns". Correct me if I'm wrong.

I find it very interesting that in response to people's concern for personal safety an "unnamed" member said that no crime ever happens at a gun show, so there is no need for protection. Sounds like the "It will never happen to me. We live in a good neighborhood." argument.

Keep the responses coming if you'd like. It's interesting hearing both sides of the debate, even though I think that I've made my own personal choice I hope that I can still have an open mind.
 

Bill Starks

State Researcher
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
4,304
Location
Nortonville, KY, USA
imported post

i guess you're against carrying in public then too because someone could ND you right in the eyeball.
Out on the street is a little different than being couped up with hundreds of "experts" handling their weapon.

2. Nobody should be touching their loaded weapon. It should stay in the holster, period. I would have no problem with a reasonable rule such as that. By the way what you're saying sounds similar to "Only trained LEO's should be allowed to carry guns". Correct me if I'm wrong.
Nobody should be touching their weapon but let's look at all the rules that abound; someone, somewhere breaks the rules & someone, somewhere gets hurt because of it. & just because a few gun owners act irresponsibly, does not mean that they all do. BTW: I'm the last guy that wants only LEO's to carry
 

sirpuma

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
905
Location
Deer Park, Washington, USA
imported post

I'm with G20 on this one. I'm a WAC member and very much enjoy the ability to walk in, purchase any firearm and walk out. I also enjoy the magazine and the connection with other members who are buying and selling at other times away from the shows. I don't mind securing my side arm, whether or not I'm OCing. I too have looked down the loaded barrel a couple times. And I've also seen what stupid people do when they get a hold of a loaded gun. I believe the benefits outweigh the restriction.

Marcus
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

sirpuma wrote:
I'm with G20 on this one. I'm a WAC member and very much enjoy the ability to walk in, purchase any firearm and walk out. I also enjoy the magazine and the connection with other members who are buying and selling at other times away from the shows. I don't mind securing my side arm, whether or not I'm OCing. I too have looked down the loaded barrel a couple times. And I've also seen what stupid people do when they get a hold of a loaded gun. I believe the benefits outweigh the restriction.

Marcus
I'm sure that some people feel the same way about certain businesses on the DNP list.
 

grease63s

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
10
Location
Granite Falls, Washington, USA
imported post

I am an on again off again WAC member due tomy schedule preventing me from being able to attend the shows, however I have been attending themsince I was a little boy.

I recall my LEO dad being allowed to carryin the late 80's, but as he was not Puyallup PD assigned to the show, they eventually tried to get him to disarm as well. So he used to just drop the mag and conveniently "forget" to clear the chamber.

After a couple of people had ND's at the shows they went to having the zip ties. I think that was about 1992ish. I have no idea what the safety record is like in theensuing 16 years, but I know they are very effective in helping protect most of our 2A rights here in WA.

I suspect that the argumentmade, is that on the street, whether OC or CCing, there is significantly less weapon handling than goes on at a show.

Interestingly this is the same reason mostranges are not "hot ranges". There is usually a point to clear your gear and not reload until you are on the line. This is especially true for LEO facilities! But I digress.
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

grease63s wrote:
I am an on again off again WAC member due tomy schedule preventing me from being able to attend the shows, however I have been attending themsince I was a little boy.

I recall my LEO dad being allowed to carryin the late 80's, but as he was not Puyallup PD assigned to the show, they eventually tried to get him to disarm as well. So he used to just drop the mag and conveniently "forget" to clear the chamber.

After a couple of people had ND's at the shows they went to having the zip ties. I think that was about 1992ish. I have no idea what the safety record is like in theensuing 16 years, but I know they are very effective in helping protect most of our 2A rights here in WA.

I suspect that the argumentmade, is that on the street, whether OC or CCing, there is significantly less weapon handling than goes on at a show.

Interestingly this is the same reason mostranges are not "hot ranges". There is usually a point to clear your gear and not reload until you are on the line. This is especially true for LEO facilities! But I digress.
Interesting.

The range that I'm a member of allows concealed, and open carry (CRPC). You simply don't touch your weapon unless you are at the firing line. They've been around since 1947, so I'm sure it's not going to change any time soon either.

I was talking to my brother in law about ND's last night. He's an E5 Scout in the Army. He said there are "people" (he didn't call them that:lol:) around him who have ND's all the time, and have to face the consequences. Apparently the WAC isn't the only place where it happens more regularly.

I wonder if they had people at the front door of the WAC asking if you had a gun, and advising you that you were NOT allowed to touch or remove it when those ND's that you are talking about happened.
 

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

Diesel-

The more you write, the more I'm recognizing that you are:

A) Not understanding the property rights of private owners and/or organizations under a leasing agreement.

and

B) Wanting to compare apples to oranges in respect to the WAC vs. other "businesses" on the DNP list.

You stated earlier that you wanted to continue the conversation as far as "academic debate" from this point on, but you fail to see that to have an academic debate, you need premises, backed up with evidence, that prove a valid argument. Up until this point, you have failed to provide any of these things. What you have provided is an opinion, (which you absolutely have a right to) but you fail to recognize the evidence and arguments that others have presented you with.

You can feel free to continue to have the WAC on your own personal DNP list, (along with others on this site who also are in agreement with your opinion) but by failing to address the actual arguments and evidence provided you, you have not made a single valid argument in regards to:

A) The safety policy of the WAC doing their best to prevent ND's at THEIR shows, on THEIR time, in a facility under lease to THEM, with THEIR necks on the line.

B) The somewhat biased outlook that you seem to have in regards to the WAC being "anti-gun" for enforcing their safety policy.

C) The property rights of the Puyallup Fairgrounds and Monroe Fairgrounds in leasing their facilities to the WAC, and the rights of the WAC to enact policies that will prevent them (the WAC) from being liablefor anyproperty damage, injuries and/or deaths that could resultfrom them not doing "enough" in their power in preventing such instances from occuring.

You may continue to "blow smoke" as you wish, and I'm sure you will continue to, but as far as keeping this discussion open as some sort of an "academic debate," you have not produced one valid point worth responding to. Please provide us with some piece of evidence to back up your claims.
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

G20-IWB24/7 wrote:
Diesel-

The more you write, the more I'm recognizing that you are:

A) Not understanding the property rights of private owners and/or organizations under a leasing agreement.

and

B) Wanting to compare apples to oranges in respect to the WAC vs. other "businesses" on the DNP list.

You stated earlier that you wanted to continue the conversation as far as "academic debate" from this point on, but you fail to see that to have an academic debate, you need premises, backed up with evidence, that prove a valid argument. Up until this point, you have failed to provide any of these things. What you have provided is an opinion, (which you absolutely have a right to) but you fail to recognize the evidence and arguments that others have presented you with.

You can feel free to continue to have the WAC on your own personal DNP list, (along with others on this site who also are in agreement with your opinion) but by failing to address the actual arguments and evidence provided you, you have not made a single valid argument in regards to:

A) The safety policy of the WAC doing their best to prevent ND's at THEIR shows, on THEIR time, in a facility under lease to THEM, with THEIR necks on the line.

B) The somewhat biased outlook that you seem to have in regards to the WAC being "anti-gun" for enforcing their safety policy.

C) The property rights of the Puyallup Fairgrounds and Monroe Fairgrounds in leasing their facilities to the WAC, and the rights of the WAC to enact policies that will prevent them (the WAC) from being liablefor anyproperty damage, injuries and/or deaths that could resultfrom them not doing "enough" in their power in preventing such instances from occuring.

You may continue to "blow smoke" as you wish, and I'm sure you will continue to, but as far as keeping this discussion open as some sort of an "academic debate," you have not produced one valid point worth responding to. Please provide us with some piece of evidence to back up your claims.
I think you might be going a little overboard here.

I don't believe that you understand my point. Call it what you want, they don't allow concealed or open carry of a loaded firearm. You can try to justify it if you feel that is necessary; that's your prerogative. You asked for "evidence". What evidence beyond the "no loaded guns" policy is required to make my point (that they are not allowed)?

I'm not sure why you think I'm trying to deny the fact that they are legally capable of banning loaded firearms, most of your arguments are related to the fact that they are exercising their rights. I am not denying this, I am simply disagreeing with their choice.

I apologize for ruffling your feathers, you are obviously a strong proponent of organizations/businesses that ban guns (or at least one ;)); that is your right, but can you please try to maintain a modicum of respect in your address?
 

justanothermember

New member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
2
Location
, ,
imported post

Hello All,

I have been reading the blogs on this website for some time now, but I haven’t ever felt the need to reply until today. Here are a couple of things that have stood out for me:
  1. Wow! It seems that some members of this organization receive special benefits including training in the art of mind reading, how else can you explain the assumptions following your statement, "The more you write, the more I'm recognizing that you are"
  2. What's going on with all the "You don't need to have a gun for protection at a gun show, crime doesn't happen there" talk. Aren't we all for 2A? I think it’s time to revisit this old article: http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/ragingagain.PDF
  3. If someone wants to talk about their personal experience with an organization of which they are not a member, then let them. Does that not fall under "human rights Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is also recognized by the international human rights law in the ICCPR"?
  4. I personally like to know what type of organization I am signing up for. That includes knowing the positive and negative things. As of right now it seems to me that this organization's "members" are doing more damage than good for their organizations reputation by discriminating against someone's honestly expressed opinion
As far as my personal experience with this organization, well keep reading. I went to the Gun Show this past Saturday. As a female, I already feel intimidated going there because it's dominated by males, but what makes it worse is when the males running the event are irrational.

When I attend events I am not familiar with, I always try to make myself familiar with rules and regulations; this includes reading all the signs the organization has gone through the trouble of putting up. As soon as I paid for my entrance ticket I walked to the entrance where two gentlemen were sitting at a table covered with signs stating the rules and regulations. As soon as I walked in I began reading these signs.

It did not take long for one of the men managing the front door to ask me, while I was obviously reading the sign, if I was carrying a gun. I turned around and politely answered that I was not carrying a gun. I turned back around to continue reading the sign, and at this point the same man, raised his voice and said "Ma'am, are you carrying a gun and a camera?" I replied in a calm voice "No, I am not carrying a gun, but I am not sure about a camera according to what I have read so far on this sign." This time, the man replied by yelling "Ma'am, are you carrying a gun and a camera?" At this point I had said that I was not carrying a gun two times, but I for the third time replied calmly "No I am not carrying a gun." The only thing that I continued to add to my calm reply was, "I wanted to continue reading your sign with the rules before I confirmed I was carrying a camera because I have a cell phone which has a camera built in." He replied by yelling "Well then, don't use it."

Now I am very confused to why I was getting yelled at when I replied every time and politely to what he was asking me. The other thing that I am still pondering is if he didn't want to wait on me reading the sign, then why did they put it up?
 

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

justanothermember wrote:
Wow! It seems that some members of this organization receive special benefits including training in the art of mind reading, how else can you explain the assumptions following your statement, "The more you write, the more I'm recognizing that you are"

First of all, welcome to the boards.

Secondly, wouldn't the "art of mind reading" be if I was able to gather an opinion on Mr. Diesel's stance WITHOUT reading the "more" than he is "writing?"
 

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

diesel556 wrote:
...you are obviously a strong proponent of organizations/businesses that ban guns (or at least one ;))...

Right. You're absolutely right. I'm an undercover Brady Campaigner. You got me! Congrats!

I guess it comes down to this:

I believe that the safety policy that requires all firearms be unloaded and actions tied open is one that makes it a safer (both physically and legally) environment to buy guns and ammo and shoot the breeze with the others at the WAC show. I have witnessed "experienced" hands be totally stupid with a loaded firearm. I believe that if you put aseveral thousand people who all like guns, and all want to handle their guns in one room, and tell them it OK to have ammunition in their guns, inevitably, there will be many more ND's than if the actions were tied open. You disagree with that statement. Again, that's fine with me.

I have a question for you, though. Have you ever looked down the muzzle of a loaded weapon, when you should not have had to??? If yes, how did you feel about it? If no, then I hope you never have to.
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

G20-IWB24/7 wrote:
diesel556 wrote:
...you are obviously a strong proponent of organizations/businesses that ban guns (or at least one ;))...

Right. You're absolutely right. I'm an undercover Brady Campaigner. You got me! Congrats!

I guess it comes down to this:

I believe that the safety policy that requires all firearms be unloaded and actions tied open is one that makes it a safer (both physically and legally) environment to buy guns and ammo and shoot the breeze with the others at the WAC show. I have witnessed "experienced" hands be totally stupid with a loaded firearm. I believe that if you put aseveral thousand people who all like guns, and all want to handle their guns in one room, and tell them it OK to have ammunition in their guns, inevitably, there will be many more ND's than if the actions were tied open. You disagree with that statement. Again, that's fine with me.

I have a question for you, though. Have you ever looked down the muzzle of a loaded weapon, when you should not have had to??? If yes, how did you feel about it? If no, then I hope you never have to.
Good point, I haven't ignored it. I think Dave Workman (among others) said something similar in the other thread I read. I don't disagree that it's a difficult problem, and I understand your point of view.

I wish that they had tried a less restrictive measure to promote safety before banning loaded weapons outright (assuming they didn't). For example, why can't the zip ties be used to secure the loaded weapon to the holster? I would feel much safer knowing that random people wouldn't be pointing their loaded weapons at me, yet if the absolute need arose I would be able to break the zip tie security. The current zip tie security is reportedly even easier to break by simply racking the slide (according to member posts).

I have had loaded weapons pointed at me. The last time it happened was only 2 weeks ago while shooting at a popular spot off the Tinkham Rd. exit on I-90. I agree that it's always a disconcerting experience.

It sounds like more than a few people believe that there is no middle ground where both ND's can be prevented/minimized, and loaded weapon carry permitted. I don't feel comfortable going to a location where I am unable to defend myself, regardless of how "safe" forum members regard it to be.
 

justanothermember

New member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
2
Location
, ,
imported post

Talking about looking down a barrel. Does WAC have a policy on handling guns when looking at them during the show? I must have passed at least 3 people who "accidentally" let me see how shiny the inside of the barrel was.:?
 

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

diesel556 wrote:
It sounds like more than a few people believe that there is no middle ground where both ND's can be prevented/minimized, and loaded weapon carry permitted. I don't feel comfortable going to a location where I am unable to defend myself, regardless of how "safe" forum members regard it to be.

Playing the devil's advocate here, but I guess the middle ground you speak of would come down to the whole "concealed means concealed." I guess, that if someone wanted to patronize a DNP business that did not allow open carry, the only way they would kick you out was if that person was "caught" carrying a handgun. So, if you must still go there, conceal. The Tacoma Mall is a "no firearms allowed" building (all Simon Malls are) but I've never been there without a gun, I just have never OC'd there.

So, I guess you CANhypothetically have your middle ground. Underneath your jacket orin your pocket. I can't think thatthere aren't members and non-members ofWAC alike, that discretely "sneak" a carry gun into the shows. I'm not advocating anything here, justpointing outthat I imagine it does happen.
 

diesel556

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
714
Location
Seattle-ish, Washington, USA
imported post

G20-IWB24/7 wrote:
diesel556 wrote:
It sounds like more than a few people believe that there is no middle ground where both ND's can be prevented/minimized, and loaded weapon carry permitted. I don't feel comfortable going to a location where I am unable to defend myself, regardless of how "safe" forum members regard it to be.

Playing the devil's advocate here, but I guess the middle ground you speak of would come down to the whole "concealed means concealed." I guess, that if someone wanted to patronize a DNP business that did not allow open carry, the only way they would kick you out was if that person was "caught" carrying a handgun. So, if you must still go there, conceal. The Tacoma Mall is a "no firearms allowed" building (all Simon Malls are) but I've never been there without a gun, I just have never OC'd there.

So, I guess you CANhypothetically have your middle ground. Underneath your jacket orin your pocket. I can't think thatthere aren't members and non-members ofWAC alike, that discretely "sneak" a carry gun into the shows. I'm not advocating anything here, justpointing outthat I imagine it does happen.
I'd say that's a fair assumption considering a few forum member's just about admitted as much in other threads IIRC, and I don't fault them for it.

I also acknowledge that carrying concealed is a "workaround" in this type of situation. I would of course prefer not to have to resort to such methods if at all possible (and don't intend to for the WAC).

It's interesting to think that all of the WAC threads, and the DNP list, etc. might not exist at all if everyone would simply carry concealed.
 

Boyd

New member
Joined
Nov 30, 2006
Messages
13
Location
, ,
imported post

diesel556 wrote:
Doug Huffman wrote:
Is this different from NRA 'members' being disarmed at their antional klanvention?
Interesting. I was thinking about attending the banquet in Spokane. The organizer's stated that OC would be allowed. I'm guessing this isn't being run by the NRA if banning guns is their policy. Is there an organization that truly supports gun rights? I was looking at signing up to "Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership".

44Brent wrote:
HUSH.... Greg Nickels might find out about WAC's policy and use it to justify his proposed illegal ban on carry of guns on city property. You wouldn't want Nickels calling WAC directors hypocrites, would you?
:shock: Actually I would like for everyone to call the WAC directors hypocrites, and for them to be put on the DNP list. Squeaky wheel and all that.

M1Gunr wrote:
Even as a member you are NOT allowed to carry a loaded weapon into the facility. You can't carry in a loaded magazine either (however a empty magazine & loose rounds are ok). You weapon will be zip tied with the action open. The zip ties are flimsy and if you need to try out a holster or some other accessory you can break the tie just be sure to put on back on.
I saw that after reading the other thread. Disappointing.

Kildars wrote:
Man i was about to register for the wac too. I guess not now. I wonder though the fair ground isn't their property do they even have a right to tell you to disarm?
I did mention that to them (which made them angry), but I believe there are other cases of private organizations on public property banning guns. The fact that it is being used for a private event changes things I guess.

I don't know if it is foolish or not, but I kind of wish there was a law banning discrimination against lawful gun owner's.
Man he almost had it on that last one.

Doug's ad hominem meant meant "national convention". Your Spokane Banquet is run by a local committee that doesn't face the legal harrassment that a gathering the size of say, a national convention or a state wide WAC show does.


Boyd one of 9 target vounteers and not a hypocrite Kneeland
 

Boyd

New member
Joined
Nov 30, 2006
Messages
13
Location
, ,
imported post

"I wish that they had tried a less restrictive measure to promote safety before banning loaded weapons outright (assuming they didn't)."

Did you know that WAC is probably the second largest single producer of NRA Home Firearm Safety Classes in this state? And not one of our students pays a -dime- for the opportunity. So, when you boycott WAC that's (only) ONE of the things you're boycotting. We've been getting ~35 students per class and could almost double that if there were enough instructors volunteering. -Boyd Kneeland
http://www.washingtonarmscollectors.org/education.htm
 
Top