[The KG9 Kid]

There's a lot of philosophizing about Heller cluttering the RKBA sites around the web, but I seem to notice more about 'strict scrutiny' than I see about 'sporting purposes'.

We've always maintained that the Second Amendment is not about duck hunting. The BATFE arbitrarily invents policy with no oversight other than some administrative opinion (unelected and unaccountable) in regards to 'sporting purposes'. Right now, they can just decide whether you go to prison or not on a whim. They write one opinion, send out a useless letter, and then raid a location anyway for reasons that contradict their non-binding little opinions. They need to have this power taken from them in no uncertain terms.

It will change everything.

[kitchen]

Are you aware that any Mauser with a "thumb cut" has recently been administratively decreed to be unimportable? This is patently absurd on two counts: 1) the "thumb cut" is actually the tertiary gas relief in the event of a pierced primer or case split; and 2) from day one a great many "sporting" rifles were built from the standard models which included same, not conversions from previous military issue.

[ctdonath2]

The “sporting purpose” issue is encompassed by the “strict scrutiny” principle. The standards defining “sporting purpose” do not meet “strict scrutiny”, thus they will (on subsequent suit) fall. The upside is that import restrictions and other stupid limitations will be eliminated; the downside is the BATFE could throw a fit and declare all shotguns NFA “destructive devices” (bore >0.50”) as they could not use the “sporting purpose” clause for exemption thereto.