Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 4/28/2011 9:00:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2011 9:12:10 AM EDT by thebomber]
From time to time I am a paid consultant to a legal firm that specializes in national firearms related cases. I got a request today asking to read the ATF study then provide input on it so that the law firm can complete their comments.

Since this is an important issue, I ask that if you don't have serious input, that you don't respond in this thread. My input is due in the AM.

Bomber

ETA
If you are familiar with the issue and have valuable imput please post it up.
Link Posted: 4/28/2011 9:08:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/28/2011 9:13:36 AM EDT by Bladeswitcher]
I'm sorry, was there a question in your post? What exactly are you looking for from us?

Here's my 2 cents: I think the whole sporting purpose thing is bad law/policy. The 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with sporting purposes. The reason the 2nd Amendment exists is because the founders believed the government could not be trusted and they wanted to assure the people always had a way to resist. Based on that understanding (and on MIller), it is precisely evil black rifles (and shotguns) that should have constitutional protection. It stands to reason then that the ONLY acceptable conclusion of the ATF "study" should be that all sporting purpose BS should be tossed out as unconstitutional. Anything short of that is contrary to the intent of the founders and inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent.

Short of that, at the very least, Saigas and other evil and/or military-style shotguns should meet the UNCONSTITUTIONAL "sporting purposes" standard because of the fact that thousands upon thousands of Americans compete in sports that use these sorts of weapons. They are most certainly sporting guns. But agan, the whole sporting purposes BS needs to go away NOW.
Link Posted: 4/28/2011 9:15:05 AM EDT
Address the sporting clause in relation to what constitutes a sport.

The features aren't related to what's appropriate to sporting. In fact the ATF has decided what does and does not constitute a sport based on features of firearms. Its been a while since I read the study, however I believe even it speaks about how combat oriented sports have overtaken traditional" shooting sports" numbers and participation wise.
Link Posted: 4/28/2011 9:45:43 AM EDT
Thanks for reminding me that I need to submit my comments.

My work blocks my personal email account. I have some stuff there that I'll send you once I get home from work.
Link Posted: 5/2/2011 5:41:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/2/2011 5:43:56 PM EDT by TANGOCHASER]
Sporting clause is the issue at hand. ATF is refusing to accept/acknowledge that Saiga shotguns are used in shooting competitions. They view the sportin clause has a duck hunting clause. And yes, this whole "study" is an attempt to ban the Saiga shotguns.

Sporting issue won't go away till it's repealed so use it against the ATF. Do a search for all the shooting sports shotguns are used in and include those the Saiga are used in. Show them the vast sporting uses for shotguns.
Link Posted: 5/2/2011 5:46:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TANGOCHASER:
Sporting clause is the issue at hand. ATF is refusing to accept/acknowledge that Saiga shotguns are used in shooting competitions. They view the sportin clause has a duck hunting clause. And yes, this whole "study" is an attempt to ban the Saiga shotguns.

Sporting issue won't go away till it's repealed so use it against the ATF. Do a search for all the shooting sports shotguns are used in and include those the Saiga are used in. Show them the vast sporting uses for shotguns.


Not to be contrary, but nothing in this study would affect the Saiga. I've read through the features, and I've read Mark Barnes commentary on this, and I can't see anywhere that would affect the saiga. This has more effect on the 1897 trenchgun replicas than the Saiga.
Top Top