Sporting Purpose Test

I don't think .gov should be who determines a firearms purpose or suitability.

You can find the pistol requirements here: http://www.glockfaq.com/models.htm Scroll down a ways, or search for '75 points' to find it on that page.

I'm not aware of any real testing or rules for rifles and shotguns.

There's no "test" it's just whatever mood they are in at the time.

Just about any firearm ever made could be used in some form of competitive shooting.

The only one codified in law (that being constitional or not is another matter) are the regs mentioned above that apply (AFAIK) only to the importation of handguns into the US under the GCA of 1968.

In general, a pistol get a score based on features deemed to nudge it toward sporting use (barrel length, etc.). This is how some models of pistol of obvious high quality can't be imported (such as a Walther PPK) can't be imported.

So, as in the Walther case, you get the guns made HERE in a a factoryunder license or mod them to fit the reg (PPK-S, if memory serves).

But, like 'cop killer bullet', the term get's batted around like it means something entirely different.
And no, it has no place under the 2nd amdmt---but some will swear it does.

I think the rules is that any gun that is actually fun to shoot must have no sporting purpose. LOL

But, like 'cop killer bullet', the term get's batted around like it means something entirely different.
And no, it has no place under the 2nd amdmt---but some will swear it does.

Click to expand...

Many of the founding fathers believed that having an armed populous that the government feared was a good thing. With armor protection, the government no longer fears the people. The 2nd Amendment (spelled out and given its proper noun capitalization) does protect the arms necessary to provide for the security of a free state to the people, not to the government.

The whole "metal or alloy" frame thing makes that a rather antiquated chart.

The "sporting purposes" language is declared in the 1968 Gun Control Act and several amendments to that act; but what actually constitutes "sporting purposes" is mostly up to internal ATF regulations.

There are some exceptions, such as the 922(r) ban which has been codified by Congress in 1994 (not a banner year for 2A rights) as "not sporting."

I think the sporting thing to do with that agency would be to pull the financial plug and laugh while the public trough feeders squeal and whine.

The sporting puposes standards means whatever the sturmtruppen, thug bastards of the Waffen BATFEces arbitrarily says they mean.

ATF decides how the sporting purpose qualifications are. Back in 1998, the ATF used a "narrow" definition which at the time they were evaluating post ban imported AWs. FYI, the "narrow' definition used was hunting only.

Yes I think that could be imported, just make sure barrel length is legal.

How would you structure a case to go after this unconstitutional law?

How would you structure a case to go after this unconstitutional law?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't at this point. Instead you lay the groundwork with very narrowly focused cases with good plaintiffs before you start trying the harder cases (like this one).

Before I came back for any federal laws, I would first want to broaden the class of weapons protected by the Second Amendment. The best way to do that is by attacking the various stupid state laws on the subject. However, that requires we win on incorporation.

Before I came back for any federal laws, I would first want to broaden the class of weapons protected by the Second Amendment.

Click to expand...

+1. We've already won on the individual nature of the amendment. And we've lost (in some minds, including mine) on restrictions. Now it is about defining and fighting over the restrictions - almost all of which are at the state or local level.

Lessee......BATFE and "standards".......What's wrong with the juxtaposition ? Other than the obvious oxymoron, that is.... >MW

I was just wondering if anybody had a link or something of the actual test the ATF uses to determine "sporting suitability"?

Click to expand...

I think they flip a coin... heads is sporting, tails is nonsporting.

Alot of ATF decisions seem to be made with no rhyme or reason.

Probably the last federal firearms law to ever be stricken would be the sporting purposes test on imported firearms. The United State Government like every other country has extraordinary power when it comes to the importation of goods into the country. There are all sorts of bans and restrictions on importing agricultural products and fresh foods for example.

The federal government has almost unrestricted power to regulate what can and cannot be imported into the country, and that includes firearms.

I think this one will have to wait for a more accommodating congress.