Effect of Heller on the "Sporting Purpose" gun import laws?

[femoralis]

The issue of Heller v. D.C. and machineguns has been extensively discussed. However, I have not noticed any discussion related the import ban. If we get a favorable ruling, that the Second protects firearms ownership for self defense, might the sporting purpose test for gun importation be eventually overturned as unconstitional?

The sporting purpose test bans some firearms made for self-defense, such as subcompact pistols. Those are not exotic, nor uncommonly owned in the USA. Many shotguns made for self-defense are banned as well (all that hold more than 5 rnds).

What do you think? The law is federal, and covers guns commonly owned and used for self-defense in the USA. This could make it a good target.

 

[alan]

If memory serves, the GCA'68 makes mention of the following: "And the Secretary or His Delegate shall promulgate regulations ...".

This "sporting purposes test", is a "regulation" isn't it, "promulgated by The Secretary or His Delegate", another example of The Congress seemingly allowing law by bureaucratic decree.

In the words of former Clinton apparachnick, now Member of The House Rahm Imanuel, "Stroke of the pen, law of the land, kinda cool".

I do not see how a ruling in Heller might bear on this sort of thing, possibly others do.

 

[NG VI]

hoohoohooohooohooo, that would be one of the best laws to dispose of like a rabid skunk, imagine if we could start getting all those wonderful "non sporting" foreign guns back... no more serrated G 27 triggers, no more weird hybrids to meet import requirements, one major piece less of foolish regulations o meet.

 

[csmkersh]

"Lord" Benson, as SecTrea, almost banned all 12 guage shotguns in his haste to outlaw StreetSweepers. He would have also outlawed all muzzleloaders 50 caliber or larger. Someone took a 2x4, got his undevided attention, and he rewrote his "rules."
​

 

[esq_stu]

The "sporting purpose" requirement is about importation of foreign made guns and guns made of foreign made parts.

If an AK47 is not considered sporting enough, one cannot import one. If one is made here, it has to have no more than 10 parts from a list (in the law).

I think the importation of guns is something that can be regulated fairly freely by Congress, since it does not directly impact the right to keep and bear arms. Congress can regulate the importation of anything it wants to regulate, except perhaps the things the President has the right to import as Commander-in-Chief.

So Heller would not have any effect on the sporting purpose requirement. On the other hand, if a law was passed that said you cannot own any gun that does not meet a sporting purpose requirement, that will not survive Heller.

In fact, from the oral arguments, it seemed like the test of whether a gun was appropriate was whether the gun would be used by the military. Military weapons are preferred. There was lots of discussion about machine guns - whether the fact that they are military (because most soldiers carry them - select fire M16 variants are machine guns under ATF rules) means they would be HARDER to regulate.

At least that's my take on it.

 

[Henry Bowman]

I believe that the "sporting purpose" clause is evil and should be repealed, but also believe that Congress has far greater lattitude under both the Commerce clause and the 2A to control what is or is not imported.

 

[xjchief]

Demand FREE TRADE!!!!

If we can ship millions of tons of useless consumer goods in from china, why not a few toys too? This import ban is keeping millions of guns from good homes in the US.

 

[Zoogster]

why not a few toys too?

They might have lead on them.

Oh wait, that is not such a bad thing with those toys!

 

[Gifted]

"Sporting purposes" is not valid to regulate guns. Thus, even an import ban as such would fail. The argument-- does it matter if it's made here or made somewhere else? Banning from countries like China due to human rights violations would make sense, but then you'd have to ban importing everything else too.

If we get strict scrutiny, they have to demonstrate a government need to ban imports, and since we'd be allowed to make the exact same gun here at home, the law would fail miserably. Some sources claim that the import ban was to protect domestic sporting manufacturers from competition from cheap surplus Mausers and such. It made little sense to begin with, and makes even less sense now.

 

[DrewH]

If memory serves, the GCA'68 makes mention of the following: "And the Secretary or His Delegate shall promulgate regulations ...".

No, the sporting test is law. It is not a very long or clear law, and has lots of rules and regulations implementing it, but it is law.

Here is the law:

925

(d) The Attorney General shall authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof if the firearm or ammunition—
(1) is being imported or brought in for scientific or research purposes, or is for use in connection with competition or training pursuant to chapter 401 of title 10;
(2) is an unserviceable firearm, other than a machinegun as defined in section 5845(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (not readily restorable to firing condition), imported or brought in as a curio or museum piece;
(3) is of a type that does not fall within the definition of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes, excluding surplus military firearms, except in any case where the Attorney General has not authorized the importation of the firearm pursuant to this paragraph, it shall be unlawful to import any frame, receiver, or barrel of such firearm which would be prohibited if assembled; or
(4) was previously taken out of the United States or a possession by the person who is bringing in the firearm or ammunition.

And the ban on assembling non-sporting firearms from imported parts:

922

(r) It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925 (d)(3) of this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to—
(1) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(2) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney General.

 

[alan]

DrewH:

It appears that my memory did not reach back as far as I thought it did. though possibly the sections you mentioned were added post 1968. No matter, I stand corrected.

The foregoing aside, it remains, at least to me, that sporting purposes being undefined, as are suitable for or adaptable to, is more than a little troubling. Of course, there are a number of things that I personally find "troubling", not the least of them being the Statement of Intent, as I recall it anyhow, that was/is part of GCA'68.

Another is the fact that "gun controkl" as usually offered, seems always and only to adversley impact on the law abiding, they being those who essentially bother nobody. Strange aren't, the actions of The Congress, not to mention state and local legislative bodies.

 

[Robert Hairless]

I am in awe of those who believe that the Constitution only protects firearms in use by the military and allows only the importation of those firearms that have no military use.

I'd give a lot to be able to think that way.

 

[Kharn]

IIRC, Sporting Purposes came into law to help protect Remington, Winchester, etc, from imported surplus weapons that were being used for hunting.

The 2A protects a lot of weapons, but Congress also has the right to regulate international commerce, I think it'd be declared constitutional.

Kharn

 

[MechAg94]

Considering we don't know what Heller will say yet, we can't know what effect it will have. I doubt it will have any effect.

Heller probably won't be the ground breaking ruling gun owners want so don't get your hopes up.

 

[Jdude]

Well, if'n military arms are protected and imports are not, I'll send my cz back just as soon as I gets me a '60.

 

[femoralis]

Another reason '68 was passed was fear of urban blacks arming themselves for riots with cheap mail-order guns.

 

[MAKster]

The sporting purpose test was enacted to ban the importation of small, cheap .22 and .25 cailber handguns from Europe. Those guns are where the term "Saturday Night Special" came from. The Lorcin, Bryco, Jennings companies came into existence because guns of this size could no longer be imported.

 

[LawBot5000]

Whether we can kill sporting purposes depends if the scrutiny level for the 2nd amendment allow challenges for overbreadth. If it does, we get to go after things like:
-DC's "machine gun ban" that bans a lot of clearly protected weapons
-sporting purposes test, that bans a lot of clearly protected weapons
-the CA assault weapons ban that bans a lot of clearly protected weapons.

You get the picture.