guns-980.jpg
What ultimately people see is a black scary gun and they're frightened by the black scary gun and they want to know why you would need a black scary gun," said John Rodabaugh, president of the Washington Arms Collectors. (AP Photo/File)

Firearm enthusiasts fear ban on 'black scary guns'

BY Brandi Kruse  on January 19, 2013 @ 3:40 pm (Updated: 5:45 am - 1/21/13 )

"They're trying to get their AR-15's, their 47's and all that. All the big guns," said a man standing in line outside the Puyallup Fair Grounds Saturday.

He was one of hundreds of people waiting to get inside a gun show hosted by the Washington Arms Collectors, a two-day event which brought in an estimated 10,000 attendees.

"They're scared that Obama's going to get rid of the second amendment," he said of show-goers.

Although non-members could attend, only registered WAC members were allowed to purchase firearms at the event. Those individuals have undergone necessary background checks, according to President John Rodabaugh.

Mike, who ran a booth selling specialty ammo and survival gear, said "panic" over the current gun control debate has led to a "buying frenzy."

"(Lawmakers) are going to use this opportunity, this tragedy, to push through their agenda," he said, speaking of the Dec. 14 mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.

Rodabaugh said guns and gun owners have been unfairly targeted in the wake of the shooting.

"There's a lot of response to fear that the government is going to enact Draconian measures on law-abiding citizens who have done nothing wrong," he said.

The current debate over gun control has centered around a ban on certain assault-style weapons to help prevent tragedies like the Sandy Hook shooting and the massacre at an Aurora, Colo., movie theatre on July 20, 2012.

"Telling 80-million gun owners that they can't own this gun because it looks scarier than this gun isn't going to do that," he said. "What ultimately people see is a black scary gun and they're frightened by the black scary gun and they want to know why you would need a black scary gun."

The gun show kicked off while "Gun Appreciation Day" rallies were taking place around the country, including one in Olympia that brought in an estimated 2,000 participants. Some supporters brought copies of the constitution to show their support for the Second Amendment.

Brandi Kruse, KIRO Radio Reporter
Brandi Kruse is a reporter for KIRO Radio who is as spontaneous and adventurous in her free time as she is on the job. Brandi arrived at KIRO Radio in March 2011 and has already collected three regional Edward R. Murrow awards for her reporting.
More Local News
Top Stories

  • Ban Lifted
    Washington state leaders hail vote to allow openly gay Boy Scouts

  • There's a Zone for That
    Mapping out a plan for marijuana growers and sellers

  • Face The Music
    Backup singers get the spotlight in highlight of SIFF music series
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (134)


  • Add A Comment

  • Saltchucker wrote...
    Hey Brandi....
    January 19, 2013 4:08 pm
    ...why no mention that every member of the Washington Arm Collectors has thier background check done as a part of membership? Only members can purchase at the show, thus no "gun show loophole". Important fact left out there...are you trying to scare the populace?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Hey Saltcucker
    January 19, 2013 6:14 pm
    Why no mention of how the WAC does their background check? Do they do one upon transfer of a weapon? If you are a member and become not eligible to possess a weapon do they revoke your ability like the state does?

    A one time background check does in fact make a loophole. It merely says you are legal at one point in time.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Drool
    January 20, 2013 9:09 am
    That one-time background check becomes universal in this state with the issuance of a CCL. If you are deemed ineligible by the state to purchase a firearm, your ability to do so with WAC goes away.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Yeah but...
    January 20, 2013 9:30 am
    The state yanks your permit. (It's a CPL, by the way). WAC does no such thing because they don't know when a person becomes ineligible.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • 2112 wrote...
    Drool
    January 20, 2013 12:16 pm
    And how do you know this?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    2112
    January 21, 2013 7:55 am
    WAC members know this. Although not currently a member I have been off and on.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Drool
    January 20, 2013 4:54 pm
    We're both wrong. The state uses CCW. I suppose to quibble about it would be as petty as correcting someone's spelling. The WAC, like a licensed dealer, has no way of knowing that the state has yanked your rights until the CPL/CCL/CCW reaches the expiration data and is not renewed. The point is all moot and only offends the Guns-Are_Icky crowd anyway as one would be hard pressed to find any members of the WAC in a criminal lineup. They're pretty upstanding citizens, especially when compared to those lefties that bust out Starbuck's windows because they can't find a job with their liberal arts degrees.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Cigarillo, No You're Wrong.
    January 21, 2013 7:14 am
    When I pull out my piece of paper issued by the state, it says "State of Washington License to Carry Concealed Pistol. It is commonly abbreviated CPL for concelaed Pistol License. It is called that because it DOES NOT give you permission to carry a concealed long gun (rifle, shotgun).

    I have been licensed to carry for 32 years.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Drool
    January 21, 2013 9:03 am
    I stand corrected. CCW is the broader category that a CPL falls within. But why bit about rifles? Is there anything in the RCW's about that, or did anyone feel a need for nabbing the guy stiff legging it into a bar with the butt of a rifle sticking out the top of his pants? Would that fall under open carry?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Cigarillo
    January 21, 2013 10:19 am
    One is not allowed to carry a loaded long gun in a vehicle. The genesis of that rule is to prevent "road hunting" which is not considered a sporting way of bagging a deer.

    Actually a 16 inch barreled weapon (the legal minimum for a stocked weapon) with a folding stock is quite concealable.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Drool
    January 21, 2013 10:58 am
    Holy crap! You're right. I was just keeping the gun attached to the handlebars of the ATV unloaded as a safety precaution. It's good to know what the man can nick me for.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Seattle is a cesspool wrote...
    Drool...
    January 21, 2013 6:52 am
    Come over here so I can show you my big black scary. You kind need to find a weak stool, short rope, and a tall ceiling. Leave my planet you piece of dump.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Cesspool
    January 21, 2013 8:43 pm
    Please go back to playing with your poop.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • londot wrote...
    However
    January 21, 2013 6:00 am
    We oustiders who do not belong to WAC have a background check each and every time we buy a firearm. I bought 2 guns one week from each and had a full background run each time. Does WAC do that? I'm also a NRA member!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Sixgun_Symphony wrote...
    Background check?
    January 20, 2013 1:03 pm
    What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand? If a felon can not be trusted, then he is not reformed and should not be let out of prison. If he is reformed, then he should be released and his rights restored. As far as the lunatics, we need to take them off the street and put them back into sanitariums. It would have the added benefit of solving much of the homeless problem.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • 2112 wrote...
    Yes, they are trying to scare the public
    January 20, 2013 12:17 pm
    Just like the mantra is if your healthcare is not Gov't funded, it sucks and you overpaid.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Sixgun_Symphony wrote...
    Background check?
    January 20, 2013 12:58 pm
    What part of "shall not be infringed" do people not understand?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • darthclown wrote...
    It's in the fouth paragraph...
    January 21, 2013 9:11 am
    "Although non-members could attend, only registered WAC members were allowed to purchase firearms at the event. Those individuals have undergone necessary background checks, according to President John Rodabaugh." Reading comprehension?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    "Those individuals have undergone necessary background checks"
    January 21, 2013 10:21 am
    Once. If they become ineligible after that how does the WAC find out?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Jeff Schroeder wrote...
    My Grandpa used to say...
    January 21, 2013 9:18 am
    "The bigger the Gun, the smaller the Mans ----- "
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    @jeff Schroeder....
    January 21, 2013 9:32 am
    "The bigger the Gun, the smaller the Mans ----- " Truck, right? Oh wait, it's the bigger the gun (or truck), the smaller the mans -----.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Jeff
    January 21, 2013 9:33 pm
    How dare you use such urban myth to try and so severely limit my choice of firearms.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    To the gun grabbing Progressives a gun show itself is an affront
    January 19, 2013 4:37 pm
    .
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Sixgun_Symphony wrote...
    reply
    January 20, 2013 1:04 pm
    Progressive = liberal = socialist = communist
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • dlstewart500 wrote...
    Sixgun = NoBrain
    January 20, 2013 1:32 pm
    I can't abide useless people. Conservitive = Ignorant and horribly mean spirited. Can you prove my statment wrong?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Seattle is a cesspool wrote...
    dlstewart500
    January 21, 2013 6:54 am
    Please swallow another load from your boyfriend and get back to work.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • MadManx wrote...
    Re
    January 21, 2013 8:11 am
    "mean spirited". you wuss.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Jeff Schroeder wrote...
    You are proof
    January 21, 2013 12:55 pm
    Darwin was way off track...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • monkeyal wrote...
    'National Service Day' as proclaimed by
    January 19, 2013 4:54 pm
    prez44 could not have been better illustrated by anything else but hundreds of thousands to millions of Americans attending gun shows and gun rights rallies in all 50 state capitols plus one in D.C. The nationwide pictures are amazing and heartwarming.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • flipper wrote...
    Monkey Boy...
    January 21, 2013 10:35 am
    Um...while some have to be told that a specific day is a day of service, there's lots of us who embrace service to others as a daily part of our lives and don't need Obama to tell us when to perform service to others.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • deltta wrote...
    Saltchucker
    January 19, 2013 4:59 pm
    Maybe Brandi doesn't feel the need to do any reaearch when it comes to this sort of thing? Anyone want to guess how long the WAC has been doing background checks?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • deltta wrote...
    Anyone wanna sell an "S"?
    January 19, 2013 5:00 pm
    ...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    "Obama's going to get rid of the Second Amendment." Yes he can -
    January 19, 2013 5:18 pm
    xcrap find you a RBR-90 mm M79?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • deltta wrote...
    CH
    January 19, 2013 5:52 pm
    Here's something to do between bonghits....Look up what it takes to amend the bill of rights.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Newton wrote...
    Brandi you did a great job of reporting this.
    January 19, 2013 6:48 pm
    Glad to see such a Great turn out. I feel alot safer with good people buying lots of guns to keep us safe. The second admendment shall not be infringed upon for good reason like right now!.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    Brandi you did a great job of reporting this
    January 19, 2013 8:08 pm
    I second that. Saltchucker is correct that you can't purchase a gun at a WAC gunshow without being a member, and when you apply to be a member you must pass a background check...but I don't believe you intentionally left that out of the story in some effort to obscure that fact.

    There were reallies across the nation not to mention gun shows...anyone notice not a single person was shot at any? I thought the progressives said more weapons made it dangerous.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    5 people were shot
    January 19, 2013 11:10 pm
    at the gun shows.http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/19/us/north-carolina-gun-show-shooting/index.html
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    Ron_Spins
    January 20, 2013 1:46 am
    I stand corrected...there appear to have been 2 accidents (not intentional shootings) where 4 people were slightly injured 3 with birdshot...was that Dick Cheney?!(from what your link seems to indicate). Now can you find the statistics for sewing clubs and how many injuries may have occurred? The point being you had likely at least half a million folks attend protests and shows nationwide and you had 4 non-life threatening injuries.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    rational
    January 20, 2013 9:26 am
    In your world comparing shooting to sewing club injuries is RATIONAL?Lets look at that Cheney shooting,If you were breaking the speed limit and lost control of the vehicle on a curve would it truly be an accident? After all you were driving and you decided to speed and physics took over Correct?Cheney had a loaded shotgun saw his target and pulled the trigger he hit what the gun was AIMED at.I would only refer to it as an accident IF the gun fired without Cheney pulling the trigger or if someone had bumped into him and altered his aim
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • po_guy wrote...
    Not bad stats!!!
    January 21, 2013 8:15 am
    Considering that at Black Friday Walmart Ops there are more injuries than that!!!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    rational "Brandi you did a great job reporting this"???
    January 20, 2013 9:19 am
    No she did not,why didn't she ask the promoters how they arrived at a 20,000 figure when previous years attendance was in 2500 range?The promoters were simply hyping the event and Brandi gladly went along.In years past Reporters actually asked questions now all they do is find a cause they and their employers agree with and use their propaganda tool to promote it
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • deltta wrote...
    101
    January 20, 2013 3:38 pm
    Puyallup show uses turnstyles. I would think they are basing the 20k figure on fact.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    deltta
    January 20, 2013 9:31 pm
    But the 10,000 (not 20 k my bad) was only a projection it was not based on any turnstile count
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    ..or not
    January 21, 2013 11:01 am
    The NRA membership numbers appear to be bogus.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    Definition executive order -
    January 19, 2013 7:15 pm
    government order: a rule or order that is issued by the executive branch of the government and has the status of a law. Executive orders have the full force of law. "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution Executive orders are directives from the president without input from the legislative or judiciary branches of government. Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. **Executive Orders Issued by President George W. Bush ** http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/orders/ Put that in my pipe and I will smoke it!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • deltta wrote...
    CH
    January 19, 2013 7:43 pm
    What makes you think an executive order can eliminate a constitutional amendment? You need to try harder....
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    CH
    January 19, 2013 7:46 pm
    Executive orders have the full force of law. "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1

    BS...that section only discusses the required qualifications of the president and the oath taken to become president. Most of that section has been superceeded by the 12th, 20th and 25th ammendments. Here's a link for you...

    http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A2Sec1.html

    There is nothing that makes the president a dictator as you claim.

    And appealing to the progressive and treasonous president Bush to support the progressive and treasonous activities of president Obama does not advance your position.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Whidbeyboy wrote...
    Typical
    January 20, 2013 12:00 am
    More propaganda about how the Giv is going to take away all our guns. It just won't happen. Maybe an assalt weapons ban that won;t stop idiots from killing others, but we really don't need these types of guns IMO. They are not good for anything but killing other people and are not good for house defense unles you don't care about the people in the other room or your neighbors. Remember when he was first elected the paraniod gun lovers went crazy buying guns. With this economy you'd think guns would be down on our priorities.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    Whidbeyboy
    January 20, 2013 1:59 am
    I wonder if you see the irony in your mocking people who think Obama and the democrats want to take away guns while at the same time democrats say they want to take away guns.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • wsualumn wrote...
    YEP Rational
    January 20, 2013 6:50 am
    Obama and The Dems wanted to take away guns so badly that Obama signed a bill expanding gun rights during his first term. The bill allowed people to a concealed gun into national parks and on Amtrack.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    wsualumn
    January 20, 2013 9:19 am
    Apparently you're not paying attention to what is happening now. For example, look up dem gov Cuomo who said confiscation could be an option, or forced sale to the government (which is just another version of confiscation). You have to expand your reading beyond the treason media (formerly MSM).
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Gar57 wrote...
    "treason media"? Really?
    January 20, 2013 10:54 am
    Is this what this "discussion" has evolved to? Any information that doesn't support your viewpoint becomes "treasonous"-and then a quick 360 to claim it is Obama that is creating tyranny and fascism? Gundamentalists continue to amaze me! Nothing but self-involved paranoid little pri*cks who like to scream about BS.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    Gar57
    January 21, 2013 5:10 pm
    Any information that doesn't support your viewpoint becomes "treasonous...

    Absolutely not. Words have definitions...look them up.

    As for your rant about Obama, tyranny and fascism, again, look up the definition of words. I do realize the problem is the left considers the meanings of words to be transitory, and to an extent that is true, just not in the time frame leftists view them. Even the term "liberal" doesn't mean what it used to mean. Folks who call themselves liberals now are what used to be called progressives...until they ran that term into the ditch and changed to liberal to avoid the stimatism their views had attached to progressive.

    Tyranny: arbitrary or unrestrained exercise of power; despotic abuse of authority.

    Fascism: Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as among its integral parts: nationalism, militarism, anti-communism, totalitarianism, statism, dictatorship, economic planning (including corporatism and autarky), populism, collectivism, autocracy and opposition to classic political and economic liberalism.

    Obama is not entirely unreststrained, but with the use and threatened use of presidential decrees with the intent to circumvent our governmental processes he's not far away from it. As for the fascism piece, he's right in there with statism, collectivism and opposition to classical political and economic liberalism.

    Progressivism is ultimately a fascist movement, although apparently very few proponents have their eyes open to see it.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HikerACE wrote...
    wsu
    January 20, 2013 6:50 pm
    The only reason he signed it was because it was attached to the feel good credit card law.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    rational
    January 20, 2013 9:28 am
    Its NOT just Dems who want some controls put on guns GOPers who want to get elected next general election are jumping on board also
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Newton wrote...
    Glady CH.
    January 19, 2013 7:47 pm
    This is not an excutive order if it was Obama would be impeached Immediately. A judge already said if a change to the gun laws is sought then an impeachment procedures will start Immeadiately. What was signed was only a suggestion. They are testing the Waters to find a away around the second admendment. NDAA is also on very shakey grounds, its only an interpretation of what someone thinks it should be. Very thin line. Never the less very scary times for all.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • hpitantso wrote...
    What if?
    January 19, 2013 11:55 pm
    Crips and Bloods,Bikers, young blacks, whites,latino,and asian,gangs have used these shows to arm themselfs for years.This means street money is in who's pocket? So called or " NRA Members" who oppose the urban vote,and call in banning certain assault-style weapons,clips and required background check,the birthers should shame of them self they find the need to check out this President's but not Ron Reagan when he took stand and acted upon it.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • hpitantso wrote...
    Words copied and paste from story,"Gun appreciation day"
    January 20, 2013 12:18 am
    Some gun enthusiasts, been unfairly targeted,"buying frenzy.", want to buy their AR-15's, their 47's,"panic" they're scared,they're frightened.Oh Happy Day?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    hpitantso
    January 20, 2013 2:00 am
    Of course the treason media has to use loaded words...it's part of the Alinsky playbook.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Rational "of course the treason media has to use loaded words"
    January 20, 2013 9:33 am
    And the term "treason media" is not "LOADED" also,I guess "Loaded words" are not just the property of the media huh? Try listening to the Faux channel and count how many "loaded words" are used in a 60 second interval while at the same time "loaded words" move across the bottom of the screen
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • rational wrote...
    messiah101
    January 21, 2013 5:12 pm
    See my post to Gar57. Also, it's rather ironic that you are recommending I should watch Fox news...if I did that you'd discount what I write as being from Fox news. Hypocrite much? BTW, I don't watch Fox or any other TV for news or pretty much anything else. My TV is generally a monitor for my son's Xbox.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }