Department of the Treasury Study on the Sporting Suitability of Modified Semiautomatic Assault Rifles (ATF, 1998) — excerpts
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 14, 1997, the President and the Secretary of the Treasury ordered a review
of the importation of certain modified versions of semiautomatic assault rifles into the
United States.1 The decision to conduct this review stemmed in part from concerns
expressed by members of Congress and others that the rifles being imported were
essentially the same as semiautomatic assault rifles previously determined to be
nonimportable in a 1989 decision by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
(ATF). The decision also stemmed from the fact that nearly 10 years had passed since
the last comprehensive review of the importation of rifles, and many new rifles had been
developed during this time.
Under 18 U.S.C. section 925(d)(3), the Secretary shall approve applications for
importation only when the firearms are generally recognized as particularly suitable for
or readily adaptable to sporting purposes (the “sporting purposes test”). In 1989, ATF
denied applications to import a series of semiautomatic versions of automatic-fire
military assault rifles. When ATF examined these semiautomatic assault rifles, it found
that the rifles, while no longer machineguns, still had a military configuration that was
designed for killing and disabling the enemy and that distinguished the rifles from
traditional sporting rifles. This distinctively military configuration served as the basis for
ATF’s finding that the rifles were not considered sporting rifles under the statute.
The military configuration identified by ATF incorporated eight physical features:
ability to accept a detachable magazine, folding/telescoping stocks, separate pistol grips,
ability to accept a bayonet, flash suppressors, bipods, grenade launchers, and night sights.
In 1989, ATF took the position that any of these military configuration features, other
than the ability to accept a detachable magazine, would make a semiautomatic rifle not
importable.
Subsequent to the 1989 decision, certain semiautomatic assault rifles that failed the
1989 sporting purposes test were modified to remove all of the military configuration
features other than the ability to accept a detachable magazine. Significantly, most of
these modified rifles not only still had the ability to accept a detachable magazine but,
more specifically, still had the ability to accept a detachable large capacity magazine that
1
The President and the Secretary directed that all pending and future applications for importation of
these rifles not be acted upon until completion of the review. They also ordered that outstanding
permits for importation of the rifles be suspended for the duration of the review period. The existence
of applications to import 1 million new rifles and outstanding permits for nearly 600,000 other rifles
threatened to defeat the purpose of the expedited review unless the Department of the Treasury
deferred action on additional applications and temporarily suspended the outstanding permits. (See
exhibit 1 for a copy of the November 14, 1997, memorandum directing this review.)
The rifles that are the subject of this review are referred to in this report as “study rifles.”
2
was originally designed and produced for the military assault rifles from which they were
derived. These magazines are referred to in this report as “large capacity military
magazines.” Study rifles with the ability to accept such magazines are referred to in this
report as “large capacity military magazine rifles,” or “LCMM rifles.” It appears that
only one study rifle, the VEPR caliber .308 (an AK47 variant), is not an LCMM rifle.
Based on the standard developed in 1989, these modified rifles were found to meet the
sporting purposes test. Accordingly, the study rifles were approved for import into the
United States.
These modified rifles are the subject of the present review. Like the rifles banned in
1989, the study rifles are semiautomatic rifles based on AK47, FN-FAL, HK91 and 93,
Uzi, and SIG SG550 military assault rifles. While there are at least 59 specific model
designations of the study rifles, they all fall within the basic designs listed above. There
are at least 39 models based on the AK47 design, 8 on the FN-FAL design, 7 on the
HK91 and 93 designs, 3 on the Uzi design, and 2 on the SIG SG550 design (see exhibit 2
for a list of the models). Illustrations of some of the study rifles are included in exhibit 3
of this report.
This review takes another look at the entire matter to determine whether the modified
rifles approved for importation since 1989 are generally recognized as particularly
suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.2 We have explored the statutory
history of the sporting purposes test and prior administrative and judicial interpretations;
reexamined the basic tenets of the 1989 decision; analyzed the physical features of the
study rifles, as well as information from a wide variety of sources relating to the rifles’
use and suitability for sporting purposes; and assessed changes in law that might have
bearing on the treatment of the rifles.
This review has led us to conclude that the basic finding of the 1989 decision remains
valid and that military-style semiautomatic rifles are not importable under the sporting
purposes standard. Accordingly, we believe that the Department of the Treasury
correctly has been denying the importation of rifles that had any of the distinctly military
configuration features identified in 1989, other than the ability to accept a detachable
magazine. Our review, however, did result in a finding that the ability to accept a
detachable large capacity magazine originally designed and produced for a military
assault weapon should be added to the list of disqualifying military configuration features
identified in 1989.
Several important changes have occurred since 1989 that have led us to reevaluate the
importance of this feature in the sporting purposes test. Most significantly, by passing
the 1994 bans on semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding
2
The study was carried out by a working group composed of ATF and Treasury representatives. The
working group’s activities and findings were overseen by a steering committee composed of ATF and
Treasury officials.
3
devices, Congress sent a strong signal that firearms with the ability to expel large
amounts of ammunition quickly are not sporting; rather, firearms with this ability have
military purposes and are a crime problem. Specifically, Congress found that these
magazines served “combat-functional ends” and were attractive to criminals because they
“make it possible to fire a large number of rounds without reloading, then to reload
quickly when those rounds are spent.”3 Moreover, we did not find any evidence that the
ability to accept a detachable large capacity military magazine serves any sporting
purpose. Accordingly, we found that the ability to accept such a magazine is a critical
factor in the sporting purposes test, which must be given the same weight as the other
military configuration features identified in 1989.
In addition, the information we collected on the use and suitability of LCMM rifles for
hunting and organized competitive target shooting demonstrated that the rifles are not
especially suitable for sporting purposes. Although our review of this information
indicated that, with certain exceptions, the LCMM rifles sometimes are used for hunting,
their actual use in hunting is limited. There are even some general restrictions and
prohibitions on the use of semiautomatic rifles for hunting game. Similarly, although the
LCMM rifles usually may be used, with certain exceptions, and sometimes are used for
organized competitive target shooting, their suitability for this activity is limited. In fact,
there are some restrictions and prohibitions on their use.
Furthermore, the information we gathered demonstrated that the LCMM rifles are
attractive to certain criminals. We identified specific examples of the LCMM rifles’
being used in violent crime and gun trafficking. In addition, we found some disturbing
trends involving the LCMM rifles, including a rapid and continuing increase in crime gun
trace requests after 1991 and a rapid “time to crime.” Their ability to accept large
capacity military magazines likely plays a role in their appeal to these criminals.
After weighing all the information collected, we found that the LCMM rifles are not
generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes
and are therefore not importable. However, this decision will in no way preclude the
importation of true sporting firearms.
3
H. Rep. No. 103-489, at 18-19.
16
DEFINING THE TYPE OF WEAPON UNDER REVIEW
Section 925 (d) (3) provides that the Secretary shall authorize the importation of a firearm
if it is of a “type” that meets the sporting purposes test. Given this statutory mandate, we
had to determine whether the study rifles suspended from importation fell within one type
of firearm. Our review of the study rifles demonstrated that all were derived from
semiautomatic assault rifles that failed to meet the sporting purposes test in 1989 but were
later found to be importable when certain military features were removed.
Within this group, we determined that virtually all of the study rifles shared another
important feature: The ability to accept a detachable large capacity magazine (e.g., more
than 10 rounds) that was originally designed and produced for one of the following
military assault rifles: AK47, FN-FAL, HK91 or 93, SIG SG550, or Uzi. (This is the only
military configuration feature cited in the 1989 study that remains with any of the study
rifles).
We determined that all of the study rifles that shared both of these characteristics fell
within a type of firearm which, for the purposes of this report, we call “large capacity
military magazine rifles” or “LCMM rifles.” It appears that only one study rifle, the
VEPR caliber .308--which is based on the AK47 design--does not fall within this type
because it does not have the ability to accept a large capacity military magazine.
SCOPE OF "SPORTING PURPOSES"
As in the 1989 study, we had to determine the scope of "sporting purposes" as used in
section 925(d)(3). Looking to the statute, its legislative history, the work of the Firearms
Evaluation Panel (see exhibit 6), and prior ATF interpretations, we determined sporting
purposes should be given a narrow reading, incorporating only the traditional sports of
hunting and organized competitive target shooting (rather than a broader interpretation
that could include virtually any lawful activity or competition.)
In terms of the statute itself, the structure of the importation provisions suggests a
somewhat narrow interpretation. Firearms are prohibited from importation (section
922(l)), with four specific exceptions (section 925(d)). A broad interpretation permitting
a firearm to be imported because someone may wish to use it in some lawful shooting
activity would render the general prohibition of section 922(l) meaningless.
Similarly, as discussed in the "Background" section, the legislative history of the GCA
indicates that the term sporting purposes narrowly refers to the traditional sports of
hunting and organized competitive target shooting. There is nothing in the history to
indicate that it was intended to recognize every conceivable type of activity or competition
that might employ a firearm.
17
In addition, the FEP specifically addressed the informal shooting activity of "plinking"
(shooting at randomly selected targets such as bottles and cans) and determined that it was
not a legitimate sporting purpose under the statute. The panel found that, "while many
persons participate in this type of activity and much ammunition was expended in such
endeavors, it was primarily a pastime and could not be considered a sport for the purposes
of importation. . . ." (See exhibit 6.)
Finally, the 1989 report determined that the term sporting purposes should be given a
narrow reading incorporating the traditional rifle sports of hunting and organized
competitive target shooting. In addition, the report determined that the statute's reference
to sporting purposes was intended to stand in contrast with military and law enforcement
applications. This is consistent with ATF’s interpretation in the context of the Striker-12
shotgun and the USAS-12 shotgun. It is also supported by the court’s decision in Gilbert
Equipment Co. v. Higgins.
We received some comments urging us to find "practical shooting" is a sport for the
purposes of section 925(d)(3).48 Further, we received information showing that practical
shooting is gaining in popularity in the United States and is governed by an organization
that has sponsored national events since 1989. It also has an international organization.
While some may consider practical shooting a sport, by its very nature it is closer to
police/combat-style competition and is not comparable to the more traditional types of
sports, such as hunting and organized competitive target shooting. Therefore, we are not
convinced that practical shooting does, in fact, constitute a sporting purpose under section
925(d)(3).49 However, even if we were to assume for the sake of argument that practical
shooting is a sport for the purposes of the statute, we still would have to decide whether a
firearm that could be used in practical shooting meets the sporting purposes test. In other
words, it still would need to be determined whether the firearm is of a type that is
generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to practical shooting
and other sporting purposes.50 Moreover, the legislative history makes clear that the use
of a military weapon in a practical shooting competition would not make that weapon
48
Practical shooting involves moving, identifying, and engaging multiple targets and delivering a num ber of
shots rapidly. In doing this, practical shooting participants test their defensive skills as they encounter
props, including walls and barricades, with full or partial targets, "no-shoots," steel reaction targets,
movers, and others to challenge them.
49
As noted earlier, ATF has taken the position that police/combat-style competitions do not constitute a
“sporting purpose.” This position was upheld in Gilbert Equipment Co., 709 F. Supp. at 1077.
50
Our findings on the use and suitability of the LCMM rifles in practical shooting competitions are contained
in the “Suitability for Sporting Purposes” section of this report.
18
sporting: “if a military weapon is used in a special sporting event, it does not become a
sporting weapon. It is a military weapon used in a special sporting event.”51 While none
of the LCMM rifles are military weapons, they still retain the military feature of the ability
to accept a large capacity military magazine.
51
114 Cong. Rec. 27461-462 (1968) (Sen. Dodd).
36
DETERMINATION
In 1989, ATF determined that the type of rifle defined as a semiautomatic assault rifle
was not generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting
purposes. Accordingly, ATF found that semiautomatic assault rifles were not importable
into the United States. This finding was based, in large part, on ATF’s determination that
semiautomatic assault rifles contain certain general characteristics that are common to the
modern military assault rifle. These characteristics were designed for killing and
disabling the enemy and distinguish the rifles from traditional sporting rifles. One of
these characteristics is a military configuration, which incorporates eight physical
features: Ability to accept a detachable magazine, folding/telescoping stocks, separate
pistol grips, ability to accept a bayonet, flash suppressors, bipods, grenade launchers, and
night sights. In 1989, ATF decided that any of these military configuration features,
other than the ability to accept a detachable magazine, would make a semiautomatic
assault rifle not importable.
Certain semiautomatic assault rifles that failed the 1989 sporting purposes test were
modified to remove all of the military configuration features, except for the ability to
accept a detachable magazine. Significantly, most of these modified rifles not only still
have the ability to accept a detachable magazine but, more specifically, still have the
ability to accept a large capacity military magazine. It appears that only one of the
current study rifles, the VEPR caliber .308 (an AK47 variant), does not have the ability to
accept a large capacity military magazine and, therefore, is not an LCMM rifle. Based on
the standard developed in 1989, these modified rifles were found not to fall within the
semiautomatic assault rifle type and were found to meet the sporting purposes test.
Accordingly, these rifles were approved for import into the United States.
Members of Congress and others have expressed concerns that these modified
semiautomatic assault rifles are essentially the same as the semiautomatic assault rifles
determined to be not importable in 1989. In response to such concerns, the present study
reviewed the current application of the sporting purposes test to the study rifles to
determine whether the statute is being applied correctly and to ensure that the current use
of the study rifles is consistent with the statute’s criteria for importability.
Our review took another look at the entire matter. We reexamined the basic tenets of the
1989 study, conducted a new analysis of the physical features of the rifles, surveyed a
wide variety of sources to acquire updated information relating to use and suitability, and
assessed changes in law that might have bearing on the treatment of the study rifles.
This review has led us to conclude that the basic finding of the 1989 decision remains
valid and that military-style semiautomatic rifles are not importable under the sporting
purposes standard. Accordingly, we believe that the Department of the Treasury
correctly has been denying the importation of rifles that had any of the distinctly military
37
configuration features identified in 1989, other than the ability to accept a detachable
magazine. Our review, however, did result in a finding that the ability to accept a
detachable large capacity magazine originally designed and produced for a military
assault weapon should be added to the list of disqualifying military configuration features
identified in 1989.
Several important changes have occurred since 1989 that have led us to reevaluate the
importance of this feature in the sporting purposes test. Most significantly, by passing
the 1994 bans on semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding
devices, Congress sent a strong signal that firearms with the ability to expel large
amounts of ammunition quickly are not sporting; rather, firearms with this ability have
military purposes and are a crime problem. The House Report to the 1994 law
emphasizes that the ability to accept a large capacity magazine “serve[s] specific,
combat-functional ends.”81 Moreover, this ability plays a role in increasing a firearm’s
“capability for lethality,” creating “more wounds, more serious, in more victims.”82
Furthermore, the House Report noted semiautomatic assault weapons with this ability are
the “weapons of choice among drug dealers, criminal gangs, hate groups, and mentally
deranged persons bent on mass murder.”83
Moreover, we did not find any evidence that the ability to accept a detachable large
capacity military magazine serves any sporting purpose. The House Report to the 1994
law notes that, while most of the weapons covered by the assault weapon ban come
equipped with detachable large capacity magazines, hunting rifles and shotguns typically
have much smaller magazine capabilities, from 3 to 5 rounds.84 Similarly, we found that
a number of States limit magazine capacity for hunting to 5 to 6 rounds. We simply
found no information showing that the ability to accept a detachable large capacity
military magazine has any purpose in hunting or organized competitive target shooting.
Accordingly, we find that the ability to accept a detachable large capacity military
magazine is a critical factor in the sporting purposes test that must be given the same
weight as the other military configuration features identified in 1989.
The information we collected on the use and suitability of the LCMM rifles for hunting
and organized competitive target shooting demonstrated that the rifles are not especially
suitable for sporting purposes. Although our study found that the LCMM rifles, as a
type, may sometimes be used for hunting, we found no evidence that they are commonly
used for hunting. In fact, some of the rifles are unsuitable for certain types of hunting.
81
H. Rep. No. 103-489, at 18.
82
H. Rep. No. 103-489, at 19.
83
H. Rep. No. 103-489, at 13.
84
H. Rep. No. 103-489, at 19 (footnote omitted).
38
The information we collected also demonstrated that although the LCMM rifles, as a
type, may be used for organized competitive target shooting, their suitability for these
competitions is limited. There are even some restrictions or prohibitions on their use for
certain types of competitions. In addition, we believe that all rifles which are fairly
typed as LCMM rifles should be treated the same. Therefore, the fact that there may be
some evidence that a particular rifle of this type is used or recommended for sporting
purposes should not control its importability. Rather, all findings as to suitability of
LCMM rifles as a whole should govern each rifle within this type. The findings as a
whole simply did not satisfy the standard set forth in section 925(d)(3).
Finally, the information we gathered demonstrates that the LCMM rifles are attractive to
certain criminals. We find that the LCMM rifles’ ability to accept a detachable large
capacity military magazine likely plays a role in their appeal to these criminals. In
enacting the 1994 bans on semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition
feeding devices, Congress recognized the appeal large magazine capacity has to the
criminal element.
Weighing all this information, the LCMM rifles, as a type, are not generally recognized
as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes. As ATF found in
conducting its 1989 study, although some of the issues we confronted were difficult to
resolve, in the end we believe the ultimate conclusion is clear and compelling. The
ability of all of the LCMM rifles to accept a detachable large capacity military magazine
gives them the capability to expel large amounts of ammunition quickly; this serves a
function in combat and crime, but serves no sporting purpose. Given the high standard
set forth in section 925(d)(3) and the Secretary’s discretion in applying the sporting
purposes test, this conclusion was clear.
This decision will in no way preclude the importation of true sporting firearms. It will
prevent only the importation of firearms that cannot fairly be characterized as sporting
rifles.
Individual importers with existing permits for, and applications to import involving, the
LCMM rifles will be notified of this determination in writing. Each of these importers
will be given an opportunity to respond and present additional information and
arguments. Final action will be taken on permits and applications only after an affected
importer has an opportunity to makes its case.
Exhibit 2
STUDY RIFLE MODELS
AK47 Variants:
MAK90*
314*
56V*
89*
EXP56A*
SLG74
NHM90*
NHM90-2*
NHM91*
SA85M
SA93
A93
AKS 762
VEPR
caliber .308
FN-FAL Variants:
SA2000
ARM
MISR
MISTR
SA85M
Mini PSL
ROMAK 1
ROMAK 2
ROMAK 4
Hunter rifle
386S
PS/K
VEPR caliber
7.62 x 39mm
Saiga rifle
Galil Sporter
Haddar
Haddar II
WUM 1
WUM 2
SLR95
SLR96
SLR97
SLG94
SLG95
SLG96
L1A1 Sporter
FAL Sporter
FZSA
SAR4800
X FAL
C3
C3A
LAR Sporter
HK Variants:
Uzi Variants:
SIG SG550 Variants:
BT96
Centurian 2000
SR9
PSG1
MSG90
G3SA
SAR8
Officers 9*
320 carbine*
Uzi Sporter
SG550-1
SG550-2
•
These models were manufactured in China and have not been imported since the 1994
embargo on the importation of firearms from China.