search
top

More on ATF Shotgun Study

Michael Bane thinks this might be the start of other shotgun rulings. It’s certainly possible, but the root problem is how to interpret the sporting purposes clause. Congress wrote a bad law, which is bound to lead to poor interpretations of it. ATF’s assertion, at it’s core, is that there would be hardly anything that wouldn’t be importable if IPSC and IDPA were considered to have a sporting purpose, and thus it would render meaningless something Congress clearly intended to have meaning.

There’s two thinks I think we need to advocate here. One is that the sporting purposes clause be eliminated. The second is that destructive devices are increased to any firearm firing fixed ammunition with a bore diameter of greater than one inch. This is hardly radical, since the UK allows shotguns up to two inches, and doesn’t have any overall restriction on bore size. At the very least, we should demand any shotgun be legal outright, not under exception.

3 Responses to “More on ATF Shotgun Study”

  1. “The second is that destructive devices are increased to any firearm firing fixed ammunition with a bore diameter of greater than one inch.”

    Much I like the prospect of owning a 20mm or 25mm cannon, I don’t see this clause getting much traction.

  2. Arnie says:

    I concur, espescially re the “sporting purposes” standard. There is simply no such requirement in the 2A, and I am getting sick of the left wing ignorami who think there is!

  3. Maxpwr says:

    Won’t this pretty much end Tom Knapp’s career? I believe he uses imported shotguns with magazine capacity over 5 rounds.

top