Originally Posted by CrazyPhuD
So here's the rub...how do you define what a valid sporting use is? I have absolutely zero desire to hunt, I don't kill things it's not in me. For the same reason I have almost zero interest in self defense. Outside of a threat to loved ones I don't know if I could shoot someone even if only to defend myself. The personal cost would be massive for me.
That said shooting is fun, I love target shooting and other shooting sports. One fun competition is 3-gun shooting. It's generally timed and involves rapid target shooting on the move with pistol, shotgun, rifle(hence 3-gun). Many of those same 'evil' looking features have valid uses in this sporting shooting competition. Because I don't hunt or I don't believe in self defense, does that make my choice of shooting sports a second class citizen? Why do I not have the freedom to choose my tools of my sport?
It's funny the ATF actually freaked during the recent importation of the VEPR-12 shotgun because it had a folding stock(welded open) which they felt made it a non-sporting firearm. What's funny is that shotgun was designed for 3-gun competitions and that folding stock was there for that sport. By removing the folding stock the ATF actually made the shotgun LESS sporting.
I hadn't considered the sport of it, or maybe I was lumping it in with "hunting". Either way, I simply think that not everyone has the right to own a gun.
Sure, you can't say that everyone who commits a crime with a gun is mentally unstable or has a history of being in trouble. You also won't stop people who want guns from getting them. IMO, those are not valid enough reasons to go without regulations. I think the government has an obligation to protect its citizens as much as citizens have the right to defend themselves.
That last part wasn't necessarily geared toward you as much as it's just me sharing what's on my mind.