ATF Opens Comment Period on Proposed Ban on Popular Shotguns

Combat shotgun shooting training. Long gun, pump gun and scattergun action course. Shooting range

Following a study released last week by the ATF on the legality of importing shotguns with “non-sporting” features, many shooters and sportsmen expressed outrage. Following the release of that study, the ATF has opened up a 30-day comment period for feedback on its proposed ban on the importation of shotguns with certain “non-sporting features.”

According to the study, despite the fact that popular shooting sports organizations such as USPSA and IPSC have tens of thousands of competitors, the working group conducting the study felt:

…participation in and popularity of practical shooting events as governed by formal rules, such as those of the United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA) and International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC), to determine whether it was appropriate to consider these events a “sporting purpose” under § 925(d)(3). While the number of members reported for USPSA is similar to the membership for other shotgun shooting organizations, the working group ultimately determined that it was not appropriate to use this shotgun study to determine whether practical shooting is “sporting” under § 925(d)(3).

Read more from Jim Shepherd at The Outdoor Wire:

Yesterday afternoon, the ATF released a study regarding the importability of certain shotguns. It might behoove anyone who believes that the United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA), Single Action Shooting Society (SASS) or International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) are sporting communities to chime in on this latest bit of research. It is accepting comments through May 1, 2011.

The ATF report follows—it having researched the “Importability of Certain Shotguns.” In that study, it determined there is a class of… gasp…assault shotguns. OK, it’s not exactly saying “assault weapons” and it’s making a decided distinction between military-style and sporting shotguns. Basically, you might be able to shoot sporting clays with your black shotgun, and that doesn’t mean it is not an inherently evil weapon, which would turn the United States into the “dumping ground for surplus military armaments.”

You can’t make this stuff up.

At the risk of inviting a visit from the Bureau that seems more intent on hassling legal firearms owners than catching criminals who should not have them, it is another bit of trial ballooning to start the inevitable process of regulating firearms based on look.

If a shotgun has no legitimate sporting purpose, it will be subject to stringent importation restrictions, if not an outright ban.

If you’re a practical shooter or compete in 3-gun you might think—correctly—that the Saiga shotguns favored by many competition shooters would be on the no-fly list.

Then, the list expands to cover any one of the usual suspects of “assault type” features: adjustable stocks, rails, extended magazines; you know the drill. You can quite easily convert your Benelli, Beretta, Remington or Browning sporting shotgun into a forbidden class by the simple addition of an extended magazine, adjustable stock or rail capable of holding a foregrip, light or other non-sporting accessory.

Other “non-sporting” features include (but are not limited to):

We’ll give you the web citation so you can read the report for yourself; the concluding paragraph tells the story:

“The purpose of section 925(d)(3) is to provide a limited exception to the general prohibition on the importation of firearms without placing “any undue or unnecessary Federal restrictions or burdens on law-abiding citizens with respect to the acquisition, possession or use of firearms….”51 Our determinations will in no way preclude the importation of true sporting shotguns. While it will certainly prevent the importation of certain shotguns, we believe that those shotguns containing the enumerated features cannot be fairly characterized as “sporting” shotguns under the statute. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the working group that shotguns with any of the characteristics or features listed above not be authorized for importation.”

And as we wrote yesterday, simply because the State of the Union did not include a call for stronger firearms regulations following the shooting of Representative Giffords of Arizona, there is no reason to think there is not an assault on firearms coming. Two pieces of legislation have already been introduced in the House of Representatives and Senate, and we received news yesterday from a source inside the White House saying President Obama will call for increased gun control laws.

That proposal will be made, we are told, within the next two weeks, and will call for an outright ban on all firearm magazines of more than ten rounds. The proposal will also call for a tightening of the NICS system requiring a significant upgrading of the system, especially when it comes to the question of mental instability.

The mainstream media is starting to float trial balloons referencing the purported White House proposal, with several liberal websites and bloggers banging the drum for support. The Brady Center is also starting to make noise, meaning they believe the White House may finally be ready to take a stand—against gun owners.

What are your thoughts on stands being taken against gun owners? Share in the comment section.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (57)

  1. Evidently the BATFE never learned that the 2nd Amendment specifically protects ‘militia’ (Military) weapons. To ban any class or type of firearm because some bureaucrat declares it to be ‘non-sporting’ is a direct affront our Right to keep and bear arms as members of the militia.

  2. I can Understand the concerns by the ATF and other law enforcement agencies who have to go up against these types of guns in the field on a daily basis and most people may have no use for those types of firearms anyway HOWEVER:First I have no idea why a bayonet lug would concern any law enforcement agency since there has been no Rash of Bayonet stabbings that i am aware of and second the biggest problem i have is with the list of states and capacity of shotguns allowed listed above is that what you failed to mention that those limitations on round capacity is for HUNTING ONLY as far as i know (although i could be wrong)and those limitations on round capacity are not for other shooting sports,here in new hampshire there is the three round law for shotguns while HUNTING yes, but not when someone is just at the range shooting at targets or shooting clays or other types of trap style sports which sometimes require constant reloading, so to say that all these states have limitations already is DIS-INFORMATION and in my mind is just another way for the government to say no more guns.The Constitution is very clear on just what the citizens rights are and although We the citizens allow the ATF and other agencies to monitor and control most of these types of things in no way gives them the right to start telling the average citizen what type of firearms they can own ” to a reasonable point”.In 1986 my younger brother Brian was murdered(STABBED) in boston while waiting for a bus for the little bit of money he had in his pocket and his killer was never found or prosecuted and in fact the boston police dept. never even bothered to investigate and actually gave the newspaper the wrong age,address and other wrong info concerning him and in my mind they are a useless agency there and this is comming from me who comes from a long line of family in law enforcement ,Grandfather,father,stepfather,brother daughter ect. so i have a lot of respect for anyone in law enforcement except in the city of boston,but you do not see our family all up in arms trying to ban all KNIVES,people are killed in DWI accidents everyday should we therefore ban all cars and alcohol? I think not,what we need to do is make crimes committed with a firearm to have more serious and mandatory sentences to prevent the same criminals who commit those type of crimes to begin with from ever doing it again since they would or should be locked up or executed under the law for such crimes,It seems to me that these types of “Bans” only come around whenever some politician is shot at by some crazed idiot criminal such as the brady bill when it was put into affect,people had been shot and killed for centuries here but as soon as a politician named brady got shot then all of a sudden the “BRADY BILL”,this is simply telling the average citizen that their lives are worth nothing but that a politicians life is much more important,i also know that gun sales actually increased as a result of that bill so what did it accomplish?Lets use common sense when considering passing these types of laws and inform the people of their true intentions which we all know is to eventually disarm the american public,do the people in washington think we are all stupid?we know exactly what is being attempted here but for once i actually commend the ATF for at least allowing the public to have its say on the matter this time instead of just forging ahead with passing stupid laws that will not deter anything,Please consider this one carefully before attempting to pass it because it makes no sense and in fact if so many states as you say already have such limitations then what is the concern?These are not just my thoughts on the subject but that of many,many law abiding citizens.

  3. BATFE,

  4. Any proposed bill that will alter my right to carry, purchase,use,sale,give away my firearms, weapons, collections,
    and up hold my rights to own,use,display or safeguard my family I will whole heartedly reject too. It is not the right of the ATF to wright LAWs but to uphold them. There are enough law already on the books to keep you busy if you cared to enforce them. Instead you want to come up with new ones to make it easy for you to ban firearms altogeather somewhere down the line.
    It seem that a lot of outside forces are trying to gain control our country by infiltrating our Government so they can pass these and other laws that will make us weaker and weaker untill we have no more wiggle room left and no weapons to fight them back with.
    Watch who you vote for and do a good back ground research of them to insure the have a long American Linage behind them first. We are Americans and have fought to aquire our freedoms and will fight even farther to keep them our freedoms. Be ever aware of the infiltrater of our Government who claim to be Americans but vote to ban or steal our rights away.

  5. After the ATF suppled fully auto ak47’s amoug other weapons to the Mexican drug cartells that ended up in the killing our own law enforcement personal and numours other people,maybe they should have there guns Banned. The 2nd amendment was intended to arm americans against invasion and a over reaching right stealing government. Nothing in the 2nd admendment about clay pidgeons or hunting. This is nothing more then a gun grabing attempt just like the brady bill. Whats next my kids slingshot?

  6. The 2nd amendment does not have limitations, but states that we have to right to bare arms regardless of whether it is for “sporting purpose” or not. This report does not address the real issue. The report seems to just find another way to limit those individuals whom have a legal right to own firearms, or in this case more specifically non-sporting shotguns.

  7. If there is any truth to the recent scandal of the ATF allowing firearms into Mexico and into the hands of drug cartels, they are making themselves look even worse. If I were president, I’d stop all government funding of the ATF. This country has much bigger problems with criminals, illegal immigration, and a massive MASSIVE debt, so going after law-abiding citizens is a waste of time and money. The government has passed and created millions of ‘gun control’ laws that it only disarms good people and the criminals are always going to use (illegal) weapons. The only thing new gun laws do is give lawyers more jobs. Quit messing with the 2nd Amendment! We’re SICK AND TIRED of it!

  8. The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with “sporting purposes”for firearms. It was installed to protect United States citizens from a despotic and out-of-control Federal government which it seems is rapidly approaching as evidenced by the amount of idiotic laws being considered and enacted by overreaching and intrusive Federal agencies such as the ATF. The idea of banning 1897 Winchester shotgun clones because they are equipped with a bayonet lug is just another example of the stupidity running rampant at the Federal level. Get real!! When was the last time someone was bayonetted in this country? Why isn’t the ATF more concerned about security on our wide open borders than the thought of someone sticking a knife on the end of a firearm barrel? I believe that it is due time for our Federal agencies to take a “time out” and have a serious reality check. But I guess that would be difficult when there is an eventual disarmament agenda to fulfill.

  9. Our great country is over $14,000,000,000,000.00 in debt and this government agency is once again showing how useless it can be by not only wasting more tax payer money on these pointless and biased “studies” but also punishing honest law abiding citizens and doing NOTHING to fight true criminals that are a threat to society. I propose the BATF be one of the first agencys to be banned to start saving tax payers money!

  10. any weapon can used for sporting purposes Is the government saying they know that they say what is sport and what is not.
    ATF should go and worry about beer and whisky and Smokes

  11. ah the god ole ATF strikes again, because obviously a cheap chinese knockoff of the M1897 shotgun (with bayonet lug and 5 round capacity) is clearly too dangerous to be allowed into American civilian markets while a mossberg 590a1 SPX (with bayonet lug and 9 round capacity) is not dangerous at all and perfectly acceptable for the civilian market.
    wait… yeah… i tried using the ATF’s logic but losing IQ points that fast hurts.

  12. “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The “militia” as defined by the founding fathers, was not the National Guard or any other government agency, it was the people. What part of “shall not be infringed” does the ATF not understand?

  13. The only ‘sporting purpose’ the Bill of Rights has is if you let the “Liberal”(commie) or BATF Nazi run before you shoot it…

    It’s time to demand the IRS and BATF Nazis be de-funded and shut down, their evil employees be arrested and tried for treason and executed for their crimes against Liberty.

    It will take more than a few election cycles to turn this country around if it can be. It’s time to stop hunkering down for the apocalypse and start thinking Normandy.

    Don’t understand? Start here:

  14. I am tired of features dictating legality of any weapon. If a shooter in CA has terrible aim with a 10 round clip, then an 11 round AR-15 clip won’t help much more. Who uses bayonettes now days anyhow??? This is all an excuse to nitpick until ALL guns are banned. It is one uneducated excuse after another. Anti gun lobyists can’t think of any real reasons to ban a weapon, so fear is generated to stir up a frenzie among beaurocrats who know little to nothing of actual mechanisms. Ignorance and fear = frivolous laws passing to benefit lobbyists (pitching to an emotionally seduced audience). Lastly..50 caliber ban is laughable. Most criminals prefer small calibers for concealment. Compare weight and size of a .50 cal to a .25 auto pistol. You can’t hide a .50; nor do a drive by with one (let alone afford ammunition).

  15. The ATF should study our complex social disorders instead of curbing my assets or challenging my rights.
    To buy American is what we should do more of,however making a law restricting free enterprise is not American.Many decent firearms are made overseas and to deny them sales in America could bankrupt them.That is what is really going on.This another International attempt to fix those who are not the problem.
    I oppose this study also for reasons of “death by a thousand cuts” ideology.The mission is to take one little thing away at a time.Leave us alone.

  16. It is absolutely ridiculous that the ATF has chosen to address the subject of “sporting” vs “non sporting” shotguns. Surely there must be far better uses of time and tax payer money. The fact that this targets imported firearms only shows that such a proposition is another attempt to test the agenda of slowly disarming America. ATF, we SEE what you are doing.

  17. You do all realise that this, in it’s current form, is not “Ban”, right? This study has to do with the importation of arms, not whether a law-abiding citizen can possess a shotgun with any of these *evil* features.

    I’m not saying this to discourage anybody from making their comments to the BATF on this ridiculous study, and proposed regulation changes, but just that those of you that make your comments to the BATF are making arguments that make sense.

    Everybody is quite right that the BATF cannot ban any class or feature of firearm without congressional approval, but it is well within their scope of responsibility to set importation requirements and regulations, all on their own.

    So please, make your statements and arguments with the BATF based on what they’re actually *doing* here. They’re not denying anybody the possession of *anything*, just looking to deny importation of something. Even if they put this into effect, you would still be able to purchase an American built shotgun with any of these features, just not one built overseas.

    At least for now… This is a stepping stone, and a somewhat disturbing one.

  18. What do you guys think?

    Based upon reading the report of the ATF (Study Regarding Importability of Certain Shotguns), I believe the ATF has erred in the following two ways:

    A) Ignoring facts in favor of speculation and omitting facts relevant to a proper determination.

    The ATF’s report cites to prospective military utility of certain features while ignoring the fact that there is no actual military utility for those features. The features discussed in the ATF’s report arguably have military utility when incorporated into rifles, but military bodies have unanimously rejected shotguns incorporating such features.

    The shotguns that are in use by military and police forces are a mix of pump action shotguns like the mossberg 500 series or sporting style autoloaders like the Benelli M4. The “military” features cited in the ATF’s report are almost entirely absent from actual military shotguns. Ironically, these same “military” features appear frequently in firearms used for hunting and “practical shooting” competitions, activities which are the exclusive domain of civilian gun owners.

    The ATF implies that nearly all states impose restrictions on magazine size for hunting. The truth is somewhat different- 3 round limits are imposed by federal law when hunting migratory birds (Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 USC 703 et seq). The state laws cited to by the ATF merely implement the federal restrictions under state law. Outside of this narrow area, most states do not impose magazine size restrictions when hunting with shotguns. High capacity shotguns are particularly suitable for hunting small game that have high bag limits, such as squirrels.

    B) exceeding the scope of authority granted to it by Congress
    ATF will have exceeded its lawful authority if it reinterprets a ban on the importation of surplus military weapons to also encompass a ban on all weapons that are not particularly suitable for hunting, trap or skeet. Note that the ATF makes determinations about “particular [suitability] for sporting purposes” without regard to whether a weapon sought to be imported is actually used in sporting activities.

    The ATF errs because the right to possess firearms is a fundamental right recognized by the Bill of Rights (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)) and such rights may only be subject to narrowly tailored restrictions that effectively serve a compelling governmental interest (United States v. Carolene Products Company, 304 U.S. 144 (1938)). Assuming that Congress had a compelling interest in excluding the importation of surplus military arms, the measures authorized in support of this restriction must be narrowly tailored to serving this purpose. As congressional enactments must be intepreted in a manner consistent with their constitutionality, we must construe Congress’ grant of authority under the “sporting purposes” clause such that it does not permit ATF to ban an impermissibly broad class of weapons from importation.

    ATF’s authority to ban weapons from importation when not “particularly suitable for sporting purposes” should only extend to surplus millitary firearms. Military shotguns do not incorporate the features highlighted for ban in the ATF’s report and the shotguns that would be affected by the ban are newly manufactured shotguns intended for exclusively civilian use. They are not military surplus weapons.

    name/law firm/contact info snipped

  19. I think the best approach is probably going to be distinguishing between the weapons proposed for banning and the “surplus military armaments” congress wanted to exclude. These are all newly manufactured weapons that have never been in use by any military or police forces.

    The shotguns that are in use by military and police forces tend to be pump action shotguns like the mossberg 500 series or sporting style autoloaders like the benelli M4. The simple truth is that militaries aren’t adopting shotguns that incorporate design features from modern rifles. In fact, besides the benelli M4, large capacity, autoloading shotguns have been consistently rejected by the world’s militaries.

    The merely theoretical military utility of such features doesn’t dictate how people actually use the weapons. The vast majority of the weapons proposed for regulation under the ATF’s new ruling are used only for sport- either for hunting or for 3-gun type competitions.

    Also, the ATF appears to not realize that 3 round limits are imposed by federal law (migratory bird treaty act) and that besides hunting migratory birds, most states do not impose magazine size restrictions when hunting with shotguns. A high capacity shotgun is particularly suitable for hunting small game that have high bag limits, such as squirrels.

  20. They need to remove this sporting purposes from the law if the batf and politicians continues to abuse it.
    BATF= Ban Alcohol Tobacco Firearms as a law enforcement agency.

  21. Criminals will use any firearm to commit crimes and that “sporting purpose” connotation means nothing. There are so many firearms smuggled into this country anyway so gun control will never work. Look, if they cannot control drugs, how can they control firearms.

  22. In the second amendment, a “well regulated militia” refers to the standing army. The right to bear arms is to insure that the “militia” doesn’t seize power. Since Australia was disarmed, the Chinese have been measuring for new drapes in Sydney.

  23. Here’s an idea: Let’s stop preaching to the choir, and direct some of this energy at writing the ATF and our congress-critters. It probably wouldn’t hurt if we could dig a bit deeper and support the NRA, the SAF, the GOA, the NSSF, etc.

  24. I would really love to see the studies conducted that shows how many crimes are committed using these “non-sporting” shotguns. I’m no expert, but I’m guessing not a whole lot. I’m all for not letting criminals have any access to them, but when’s the last time a cowboy action shooter went and shot someone for smudging their new shoes. Common people, it’s not the responsible gun owners that we need to worry about. No one’s going to hold up a liquor store with a Saiga.

    I live in rural Minnesota where everyone and their grandmother has guns, and what do you know…ZERO shootings a year. Maybe they could conduct a study on that.

  25. The term “Sporting” the taken from Hitler’s 1938 gun control. Our GCA of 68′, came from the Nazi gun law. Notice how well that worked for the jews.

  26. I did not find anything in the Constitution about sporting and I did not find anything about a BATF either!!!!!

  27. I had to go back to my copy of the Constitution (Purchased at the Library of Congress) to see what part of the 2nd Ammendment mentions the word “Sporting”. Big surprise, just couldn’t find it.

  28. This kind of ban would only effect a law abiding citizen, and simply makes no sense at all. If someone wants a gun in order to commit a crime they’re not going to care about whether or not their gun is legal.

  29. The best way to oppress someone is to start by taking away their means of defending themselves. Of course those whose power hangs by a thread will seek to make more secure their claim. what better way than to disarm the public. then only those in power will have the means of power. Would be a great way to change the rules in your favor. How else do you think Saddam got elected by 100% of the vote so many times? If someone like him here were elected by that margin everyday people would invoke the constitutional right to overthrow the corrupt/oppressive regieme, unless of course they were all forcibly unarmed first.

  30. I wonder if the “survey” is a way of the ATF collecting information on law-abiding Gun-owners to persecute later…Trust the government, it worked well for the Native Americans

  31. The ATF has no interest in sporting guns or sporting hunts, or competitions. Their charge is to control civilian access to firearms explosives, and booze.
    You must read their paper referenced above, and get a laugh at their picture show of good and bad features of a shotgun. Their desire to ban certain weapons has more to do with how they look than in criminal use of such weapons, or the danger they represent. This is a hatchet job by Eric Holder. Next comes “black rifles” , “black pistols” and other items black ( except himself)

  32. It is against the constitution for the ATF to place a ban on any firearm no-matter what the configuration of it is according to the 2nd amendment. The right to bear arms does not state the right to bear of just a particular type style or caliber, it also states the the civilians should have access to any weapon the military is in possession of and we should afforded the option to be just as armed as they are. A restriction on any firearm is illegal.

  33. Laws restricting any type of firearm are unconstitutional. Laws do not stop crime; the purpose of laws is to regulate the punishment of crimes. More gun laws will not magically result in less gun crime.

    If a citizen wants to go target shooting, that is the citizen’s business, not the government’s. There is nothing criminal about using a shotgun with any imaginable features or attachments for target shooting anymore than it would be in self-defense. No amount of attachments of any kind on any firearm magically makes a person a criminal nor magically transforms a law-abiding citizen into a criminal.

    Criminals will commit crimes regardless of how many laws exist or how many more new ones are enacted. What needs to be regulated are criminals, not inanimate objects nor law-abiding citizens, and what needs to be banned is crime, not firearms. Law enforcement doesn’t need to be tangled up in treating law-abiding citizens like criminals – they need to be arresting actual criminals. Laws are not magic spells that make crime vanish – only the diligence of the law-abiding can do that, both in the law enforcement community and in the regular citizenry. Both law enforcement and regular citizens both need to be equipped and supported as much as possible in their efforts to build a safe and prosperous civilization. Only criminals need to be regulated under the law.

    I’ll end with a quote by Thomas Paine which sums up what the attitude of the government needs to be about firearms: “The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside.”

  34. Explanation of the crime rate in Canada is simple, everyone is allowed to carry a firearm, so now when a criminal tries to rob, attack, etc an honest citizen, there is a very good chance that the person may be carrying a firearm, so now criminals have to second guess themselves about trying to mess with anyone. Simple. Of course some criminals are crazy and will do anything but that is just the way things are, keep honest citizens from defending themselves is the wrong thing to do, especially when our police force is dwindling all the time from layoffs. How very sad this country/world is going down this horrible path….

  35. @ Mike 1-31-11, 5:35pm.
    Maybe that’s what they want? It’d be a great chance to get Clinton in office.
    Isn’t this what the Clinton Assault Weapon Ban did? Took away cosmetic features? Is a picatinny rail also going to be considered as ‘non-sporting’? It’d sure be nice for the congress critters to admit that the people who protect them are using features on their firearms that they want to take from us citizens. But then again, maybe that’s what they want?
    Keith Wade may be on to something there too. Rules are not laws. Making law by declaration is the way of tyrants, not of a Constitutional Republic.

  36. Gun Laws only affect people who follow them. Criminals do not follow the law, therefore, what good are the laws to begin with? All these picky little gun rules and such do not affect the criminals who use guns for violence, they buy their gun on the street and use it to commit a crime knowing all the while that they are not following the gun laws made up by the government. The only thing accomplished by creating numerous gun laws that are basically random (I haven’t seen a legitimate one yet) is the difficulty in getting the firearm for legitimate citizens. So in a simpler form, the law abiding citizen must go through the ringer to buy a firearm while the criminal on the street can get one in about 10 minutes with no background check or ID. Makes perfect sense doesn’t it?

  37. The government needs to realize that no matter new regulations they put on firearms they are only hurting the law abiding voters that elected them into office. The bad guys don’t give a damn about the laws and regs and will(as they always have) find ways to get the guns that are banned leaving us the law abiding-tax paying- country loving citizens with our asses out in the wind.

  38. I hope everybody that voted for Obama are now happy. I heard him just yesterday say he would protect the constitution from all enemy, foreign or domestic! these judges can call Obamacare unconstitutional so why not things that go against the second amendment. When they take our guns then they can turn the US in to a slave state.

  39. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
    The 2nd amendment did not say we have the right to bear “sporting arms” if any thing it said the right to bear militia firearms. It was the right to bear arms for self defense not only from neighbor hood thugs, but against oppressive regimes. What better why to be able to defend yourself and family then with the shotguns they wish to ban? Next they will say rifles with handles have no “sporting” uses effectively outlawing the AR and AK platform. This is a back door assault weapons ban bypassing the legislative branch of government through agency regulation. It is sick and disgusting, the ATF should be ashamed of themselves.

  40. The feds only want “sporting” firearms so they will have a “sporting” chance when they come for the rest of our freedoms. An rmed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject.

  41. Did government not learn anything by the “Assult Weapons Ban”… Cosmetic features on a weapon do not make the weapon any deadlier. Restricting lawful, tax paying citizens will not prevent unlawful criminals from getting thier hands on ANY gun, with ANY band features. Criminals do not follow the law!!! Instead of wasting our tax dollars on restricting us GOOD citizens, please spend it on keeping criminals behind bars, stop releasing repeat offenders. Spend more tax dollars on child education, afterschool programs to keep kids entertained. And if you still think guns are the reason why our crime stats are so high, look at Canada… They have virtually no gun laws or restrictions, and thief crime rate is way less than half of ours. Explain that! God bless…

  42. I am not sure why every crime or terrorist threat is seen as an oppurtunity by our government to take away another of our individual rights/liberties. It seems to me that we ought to gain an additional right/liberty every time one of these despicable acts is committed instead of inspring yet more restrictive legislation. (from the terrorist perspective they are winning when we lose our rights!). The fact is that law abiding citizens do not commit crimes. Thugs, terrorists, and drug dealers commit crimes. Passing any sort of legislation is not going to stop the bad guys because they do not respect the rule of law. Why can’t we focus on catching the bad guys instead of becoming a police state?

  43. Self Defense is a right, and this country was founded on freedom. Thee freedoms also include the second amendment to the constitution. First off a firearm is a machine and in some cases pieces of art.Non sporting features shouldn’t matter because it is the owners preference, is it not?

  44. I think we should be able to import any gun from anywhere no matter what it’s used for. It just makes sense, who cares if it has a bayonet lug, it doesn’t change anything on the gun. It shoots the same either way.

  45. ATF,
    I know that you have a serious job but you keep putting regulations on law abiding citizens and you are not an elected body. I do not believe you have the right to pass regulations that effect our constitutional rights. The weapons you seek to regulate are used in a lawful way by us law abiding citizens and yes by criminals who by nature do not follow the law.
    Basically the regulations to put into force puts law abiding citizens in jepardy. Now I know I do not express myself well so I will leave this comment by someone who did.

    “The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles.” – Col. Jeff Cooper

  46. I can’t believe that the democrats are this stupid. Pushing anti-gun legislation *now* is the surest way to keep Obama from being re-elected and the democrats of having any chance of retaking congress.

  47. Well, I certainly have not heard of any reports of any shotgun toting mass murders running amuck in soceity and yet we see this kind of purposed legislation. I am fully ocnvinced that this is just another step in the attempt to rid the liberal pro socialism elitist crowd of the force of the masses that do not want this country to take that turn.

  48. A firearm does not need to have “Sporting Features” to be legal under the Second Amendment. A fire arm can be used for the sole purpose of self defense. If this ban goes into effect, they will use it to determine other weapons as having “Non Sporting Features” such as hand guns, AR-15’s and all other semi automatic weapons. It is a back door to banning most legal weapons.

    Self defense is a basic human right. This right is enumerated in the second amendment.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.

Discover more from The Shooter's Log

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading