Legal Issues

NSSF Responds to ATF “Sporting Use” Shotgun Study

National Shooting Sports Foundation Logo

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) responded today to the ATF study on the “sporting use” of imported shotguns. The NSSF supports various shooting sports organizations such as the United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA) and the Single Action Shooting Society, both of which regularly hold competitions in which shotguns affected by the ATF proposed guidelines are regularly used by competitors.

From their response:

NSSF’s initial reaction to the study is that if the shooting public deems a certain activity to be “sporting” through participation, even if that sport is new and seems unconventional to the uninitiated, NSSF does not believe the federal government should say that the firearms law abiding citizens use to participate in that shooting sport activity are neither “particularly suitable for nor readily adaptable to generally recognized sporting purposes” pursuant to the Gun Control Act of 1968. Many new sport shooting disciplines have arisen since 1968 and have enjoyed significant participation. The federal government ought not to be making subjective decisions about what lawful shooting activities it considers a sport.

The Supreme Court’s decisions in Heller and McDonald make clear that the exercise of the fundamental individual right to keep and bear arms for self defense protected by the Second Amendment does not hinge on whether one will use the firearm to participate in an activity the government deems to be sufficiently sporting. The shotguns this study would ban from importation are also suitable for self protection, including home defense.

NSSF believes the time has come for Congress to re-examine the so-called “sporting purpose” test as a criteria for importing a firearm into the United States.

Read the full article at NSSF.org

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 (4)

  1. Helló, én szeretem a blog. Van valami, amit tehetünk, hogy kapni, mint egy előfizetést vagy valamilyen dolog? Sajnálom, nem vagyok ismeri RSS?

  2. Third Amendment:
    No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

    Got that?

    “without the consent of the Owner”

    If an armed militia soldier holds a family member who went for a walk outside the house hostage, that’s duress, not consent.

    SO

    Second Amendment:
    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.

    I’m not seeing sports here … I don’t like sports anyway, but that has nothing to do with our rights.

  3. Thank you

    I do not hunt and kill animals for sport
    I do not compete in shooting events competitions
    I don’t watch sports on TV, and have no interest in sports.
    I have a gun to defend myself and my family
    Who cares if a self-defense tool can also be used in a sport or not?
    Second Amendment as it relates to third Amendment is about consent and being forced under duress to do something by a government’s militia.
    If a person’s family member was held captive by the militia, your consent wouldn’t be genuine.
    So, it’s about a person’s right to protect themselves and family wherever they go, not just inside the home.

    What the heck has that got to do with sports?
    In other words, infringing upon “shall not be infringed” by bringing up what kind of ball they use in football versus tennis really is a joke.

  4. It was pretty clear in the BATFE write-up that they interpret “sporting purpose” to be hunting and make a specific point against competitive shooting as being a “sporting purpose.” They will probably ban import and someone (or many) will end up making them in the U.S. for x2 the price. No bill to overturn the decision will survive due to Democrat control of the Senate and the Oval Office. Good luck with the court system. End of story.

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

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

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.