NSSF is the trade association for America's firearms industry.
Our mission: To promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports.
NSSF is the trade association for America's firearms industry.
It's mission: To promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports.
Search NSSF


Safety
-
Shooting
-
Hunting
-
Research
-
Government
-
News
-
Blog
-

NSSF Addresses ATF Study on the Importability of Shotguns

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) is currently reviewing the recently released study by ATF on the importability of shotguns. NSSF will be submitting comments to ATF by the May 1, 2011 deadline.  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 safe and responsible participation in new and evolving sporting events does not result in injury.  The possession of firearms in the hands of law abiding Americans for any lawful purpose, including but not limited to sports shooting, does not cause crime.

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.





Both comments and pings are currently closed.

6 Responses to “NSSF Addresses ATF Study on the Importability of Shotguns”

  1. Lyle

    The concept of a sporting purposes test is ridiculous. The second amendment was never about sport. If anything it’s the other way around– many of the shooting sports were started as a means of getting more Americans familiar with the keeping and bearing of arms for the security of themselves and of the state. As far as I’m concerned the whole GCA of ’68 should be repealed in its entirety, but getting rid of sporting purposes would be a good start.

    The very idea that we’d have a federal bureau dedicated to limiting a constitutionally enumerated right is an affront to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

  2. Johnny K.

    I have Saiga 12 guage (with 5,10 and 20 round mags/drum) and use it for home defense, shooting clays and 3 gun competition… allowing us to keep a firearm just on “sporting issues” seems stupid… if it’s useful for any purpose (self defense, hunting, clays, competition) it’s good enough for me and all the rest of Americans!
    how many of these Saiga or other “evil” shotguns are reported as used in actual crimes? I haven’t heard of any… thugs mainly use easy to conceal handguns… try concealing an almost 4 foot long Saiga… it’s a beast of a gun.

  3. ATD

    the Saiga 12, all Saigas for that matter, are imported with 5 round or smaller magazines. No bayonet lugs, pistol grips, “high” capacity magazines, or other such “evil” parts. The only thing they have is a detachable magazine. What we do with them after they get here is our business. So long as we maintain a barrel length of 18″ and don’t convert them to full auto, they need have no concern over what I am doing with my shotgun.

  4. Paul Wood

    The Second Amendment specifically informs us the RIGHT to keep and bear arms is not merely for sport or recreation nor is it subject to the whim of ANY government servant. These rights are not to be begged for nor denied. Turkey blasters, muskets and bambi busters are not viable arms capable of fulfilling the “necessary” requirements in that amendment. Therefore a viable standard for such RIGHTS must include arms capable of application beyond mere sporting use. A strong well armed society is a necessity to guarantee the requirements set out in Article II and to ensure the other constitutional provisions and rights remain intact. If the Second Amendment is properly maintained and protected, the full implementation of it’s capacity need never be used. If we lose it or allow it to be infringed upon and limited to a mere sport, it’s protective capacity against tyranny or any other threat to liberty
    is neutered. Paul Wood, Deputy Sheriff, Investigator (ret)

  5. Someothername

    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.

  6. Someothername

    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 …