ATF shotgun study

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by laynejc, Apr 8, 2011.

  1. laynejc

    laynejc New Member

    232
    0
    0
    Below is a copy from the NRA's website about the shotgun study, and below that in red is a copy of the email that I sent to the ATF, explaining what sporting purpose large capacity shotgun have for me. feel free to copy my letter and send your own, the NRA has provided an email address for the ATF.

    Deadline Nears On BATFE Shotgun Ban Comments

    Friday, April 08, 2011

    As we reported on Jan. 28, May 1 is the deadline for public comments concerning a shotgun importation ban that has been proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. A working group within the BATFE has recommended that any shotgun (semi-automatic, pump-action or any other) that has any one of 10 specific features should be banned from importation, on the grounds that such shotguns are not “generally recognized as particularly suitable for a readily adaptable to sporting purposes.”


    The features in question are a folding, telescoping, or collapsible stock; a magazine of over five rounds or a drum magazine; a flash suppressor or a muzzle brake that also suppresses flash; an integrated rail system other than on top of the receiver or barrel; a light enhancing device; a forward pistol grip or similar protruding part; an “excessive” weight of over 10 pounds; an “excessive bulk” of over three inches width and/or over four inches depth; a bayonet lug; or “a grenade-launcher mount.”

    The working group considers “sporting purposes” to be limited to hunting, skeet, trap and sporting clays, but not to include practical shotgun matches or recreational target shooting. To have considered practical matches, the working group said, could have led to conclusions that would undercut the BATFE’s 1989 and 1998 bans on the importation of semi-automatic rifles, and its 1993 ban on the importation of various semi-automatic pistols. The working group also indicated a reluctance to accept practical matches because they test defensive firearm skills, which the working group believes are of military and police orientation.


    Since the law conditions a firearm’s ability to be imported on whether it is “generally recognized” as meeting the law’s sporting purpose test, it is important that the BATFE hear from members of the general public. Particularly relevant will be the comments of people who use shotguns equipped with one or more of the features for hunting or any form of competitive or recreational target shooting, and people who adapt such shotguns to a sporting purpose by simple modifications, such as attaching or removing a flashlight, attaching or removing a forward grip, or installing or removing a magazine extension or magazine plug.


    Comments to the BATFE may be submitted by e-mail to shotgunstudy@atf.gov, or by fax to (202) 648-9601, and must be received by May 1, 2011. Faxed comments may not exceed 5 pages. All comments must include name and mailing address.





    Copyright 2011, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
    This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
    11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030 800-392-8683
    Contact Us | Privacy & Security Policy





    Shotguns that hold large capacity are ideal for hunting snow geese during the “extended” season. Snow geese are the only legal waterfowl to hunt at that time and can be taken in ANY number, there is no bag limit so shotguns with large capacity are a great tool to have. When you get a tornado, they just keep coming and coming and coming. A tornado or vortex is when there is a large flock that has committed to landing and spiral in their decent. They can not hear the gunshots over their own squawking and therefore do not fly away as you shoot. The saiga is ideal for this as it is a magazine fed shotgun and reloads are faster since you don’t have to manually place them in the tube one at a time, which can be difficult during the tornado. There maybe other shotguns that are ideal that I am unaware of. Thank you for your time reading this.
     
  2. easterner123

    easterner123 New Member

    348
    0
    0
    F#*k sporting purposes. The second amendment is to protect us from them, its not about goose hunting (although its a pertinent point). Politicians have simply said "sporting purpose" long enough for the general populace to believe it. It disgusts me there are bans at all.
     

  3. pandamonium

    pandamonium New Member

    1,601
    0
    0
    I understand your thoughts in the e-mail, the problem I have, is that we should even FEEL COMPELLED AT ALL TO HAVE TO JUSTIFY A FIREARM WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE!!!!!!!!

    I apologize in advance for the following...

    I am so effing sick of these friggin butt-holes who have a complete and total dis-regard for the Constitution of the United States of America!!! These people should be imprisoned for...something.. I don't know!! I would call it TREASON!!! Destruction of the Country that THOUSANDS have given their lives to protect!!! I wonder if these jerk-offs have even READ the Constitution!! EVER!! I think the if Thomas Jefferson and company were here today, they would probably start another revolution!!! The dumb-***, brainless, mind-controlled sheeple in this country better wake the hell up and get with the friggin program or we are gonna be in some deep sh!t!!! They like socialism?? Move to France then!! Oh wait, they would need someone to subsidize their language lessons. Plus they already have it made HERE!!! They should be ASHAMED to call themselves AMERICANS!! :mad:

    Takes a deep breath....sorry, I had to get that out. I feel a little better now.
     
  4. dunerunner

    dunerunner New Member

    8,411
    3
    0
    They have no constitutional or legal authority to impose this statute or to use the "No Sporting Purpose" phrase to exclude specific firearms from public ownership.

    Getting them to admit it and abide by the 2A is another thing entirely.

    There is no sporting purpose for any firearm other than a deer rifle or shotgun. That leaves a ton of weapons that can be justifiably be excluded using this line of logic (illogic)!

    The BS at BATF needs to stop!
     
  5. laynejc

    laynejc New Member

    232
    0
    0
    AGREED! (with the members here) The BS definately needs to stop. It should be the B.A.T.
     
  6. Tackleberry1

    Tackleberry1 New Member

    6,165
    3
    0
    We are all better off sharing this info with our elected officials and demanding the "sporting purpose" language be stricken from the BATF PERMANENTLY. With conservative control of the House and the strong possibility of Conservatives sweeping the Senate and WH in 2012, we could end this debate shortly.

    TACK
     
  7. alsaqr

    alsaqr Well-Known Member Supporter

    6,272
    381
    83
    The legal authority is the GCA 1968. There is a "sporting purposes" clause in the law. The first guns to be banned from import were the so called "Saturday night specials".

    In 1984 the "sporting purposes" test" was applied to a long gun for the first time. The gun in question was a South African riot control shotgun. In 1986 another shotgun was banned. In 1989 the Bush I administration banned about 40 semi-auto rifles from importation. In the late 90s Clinton banned the import of even more semi-auto guns.

    http://rpc.senate.gov/releases/1998/importban-kf.htm
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2011
  8. dunerunner

    dunerunner New Member

    8,411
    3
    0
    I was saying the GCA of 1968 is unconstitutional and violates the 2A. This guise of protecting us from dangerous products is just one more way for them to grow the government!
     
  9. Ploofy

    Ploofy New Member

    1,197
    0
    0
    I'll be honest. I can understand the Grenade Launcher and Bayonet things, as well as the flash supressor, but the rest is ridiculous.
     
  10. dunerunner

    dunerunner New Member

    8,411
    3
    0
    The founders intended for the citizens to be the military and therefore armed in that manner!
     
  11. Cory2

    Cory2 New Member

    575
    0
    0
    Explain to me how having a grenade launcher or a bayonet or a flash supressor makes a firearm more dangerous. Bear in mind its very very difficult to get an actual grenade for an m203.

    In my opinion there is nothing about any gun that warrants its banning. If someone were to invent a fully automatic 12gauge you could hide in a closed hand that fired heatseaking ammunition with built in AAA i would still be fine with it... But I think I'm more enthusiastic than most about gun rights.
     
  12. jgand72

    jgand72 New Member

    169
    0
    0
    It does annoy me that there are bans at all. I GUESS some may be for safety reasons (grenade launcher, MAYBE). But in reality it is so that the governnemt will ALWAYS have more power over the citizens. In the case, hypothetically, that there was some kind of citizen uprising in America, the citizen's firearms would be inferior to the governments (excluding tanks, jets, etc...).
     
  13. RJMercer

    RJMercer New Member

    519
    0
    0
    We live in a world that is governed solely by the aggressive use of force. Any governing body anywhere in the world wants to have a monopoly on the ability to use any type of force.
    The standard pump action shotgun symbolizes the ability of regular civilians to lay down a layer of effective force against an aggressor. And that scares the crap out of our malevolent masters. They just don't have that full monopoly on violent force they have been pushing for since 1968. This "study" is just the next step to the ultimate goal. This wont stop until we are left with nothing but a sharp stick to defend our lives and our property. Then we can worry about the sharp stick study.
     
  14. gruntpain1775

    gruntpain1775 New Member

    94
    0
    0
    If I were ever elected president, the first thing I would do would be to get rid of the TSA and ATF. TSA first, because I have a deep seated rage against those guys. But the ATF would get gone too. They are nothing more than a relic of Prohibition.
     
  15. wmille01

    wmille01 New Member

    508
    0
    0
    I really don't care I'd rather spend more time in prison for shooting a burgler that I could see because I had a illegally mounted flash light on my saiga 12 with the 75 rd drum then die because I didn't.
     
  16. Bigcountry02

    Bigcountry02 Coffee! If your not shaking, you need another cup Supporter

    7,251
    51
    48
    They (Government) want us to be more like the UK. The criminal has more rights than the victims! :mad:
     
  17. Funtimes

    Funtimes New Member

    2
    0
    0
    I really look forward to whatever lawsuit takes on all these "feel good" "rulings". It's so sad that some agency can just, at a whim, define what is and is not protected by the Second Amendment.

    I do wonder if they are going to end up finding many of these items and devices protected under Miller v. US or not. It would seem that many of these arms can and are connected to use in a militia -- not sure how they will just forgo the previous jurisprudence and dance around it. I do think they will try their hardest though!
     
  18. Ploofy

    Ploofy New Member

    1,197
    0
    0
    A grenade launcher is obviously for killing lots of people. A bayonet is for killing people after you run out of ammo. A flash suppressor is only good for hiding from people, animals would run from the noise, not the flash. While I don't mind weapons made for killing people, you shouldn't be able to take out time square without having to reload. And it's not overly difficult to get a grenade for an m203, I would assume. Maybe difficult to get it LEGALLY, but I'm sure if you crossed the southern border, you could find some for cheap.
     
  19. Trez

    Trez Well-Known Member

    4,497
    152
    63
    What about collectors? Bayonets are a relic from when military guns had limited capacity and more of a weapon of last resort or defense. I asked in another post about bayonets and the forum pretty much agreed that bayonets are obsolete and difficult to use. But I think their neat to have for old mil rifles, and is apart of the history as well. I dont see why you shouldnt be able to have a grenade launcher, its a neat collectible. Ive seen the vids of people shooting the dummy rounds and it looks fun. The laws are already there to punish those who misuse any of this. Now if someone take out a crowd of people with said launcher, i say punish them to the fullest extent of the law, charged with X murders and whatever damages are caused.

    Hate to break it to you but you can get just about anything from across the border. Arms, drugs, medications, and even people!! I guess the governments right, guns should be banned, you know how many cross the border from the US? I know a guy out where i live who will pay $1,000 for any age, make, or model of AK working or not... why? cause he takes them to mexico so they can be made into full auto's. Ive even heard of a machine shop in mexico that can make the machine gun parts kits that can be bought on the internet into fully functional arms. Ive even had a guy offer to sell me a WWII era sten for $2,000 when i worked at a local gas station. But Im not willing to take the risk to buy a illegal gun!!:eek:
    If your willing to buy the grenades from south of the border wouldnt you just buy the launcher there too? Heck you could probably buy the launcher with grenades cheaper than just the launcher here in the states.
    I say lets make car illegal cause somebody MIGHT drink and drive or other wise use the car carelessly........
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2011
  20. Tackleberry1

    Tackleberry1 New Member

    6,165
    3
    0
    Ploofy,

    With all due respect. I think you need to research the history of gun control.:rolleyes:
    The 94 crime bill will give you a good frame of reference for why banning cosmetic features is pointless and only serves to harass the law bidding gun owner and drive up the prices we pay to enjoy our sport. The current BATFE logic regarding shot gun imports has already been done and then un-done regarding self loading rifles and hi cap pistol mags previously banned in 94 then un banned in 04. The BIG deal about this regulatory mishap is that it is attempting to circumvent the legislative process by going around Congress and allowing faceless, unaccountable beauracrats the authority to CRIMINALIZE activities the many of US currently enjoy.:mad:

    If you don't like specific gun features then write to your representative and request they bring a bill before congress to ban it. All of our rep's then vote it up or down. This is how democracy works. It does not work by allowing appointed hacks with personal agenda's the authority to hand down rulings for which they never have to face the voters. That is how REVOLUTIONS occur...IE taxation without representation...Get it...

    TACK