Eugene Volokh discusses the notion of “sporting purposes” when it comes to firearms.

He discusses how the San Francisco, California Police Code explicitly delimits firearms based upon “sporting purposes” and denies hollow-point ammo, mentioning many established brands by name. His main point:

Rather, my point is how the ordinance seems to deliberately marginalize defensive purposes for gun ownership. Sporting purposes are labeled legitimate, and other purposes, including defensive ones, are labeled illegitimate.

This is quite true, and even from within the ranks of gun owners you can find a split along these lines.

Why isn’t self-defense a legitimate purpose? I’m not asking this rhetorically, nor am I asking this to those that consider it to be legitimate. I’m asking this specifically to those that think firearms are only legitimate for sporting purposes, or that think firearms are not legitimate under any circumstances. I honestly want to know what and why you think defensive uses of guns are not legitimate.

Furthermore, working to ban hollow point bullets demonstrates ignorance of the topic. Yes I know, they love to refer to them as “cop-killer” bullets, anything to get an emotional rise. Are hollow point bullets more effective at stopping? Yes they are, when compared to “ball” ammunition. Furthermore, hollow point bullets are safer because they are designed to stop within and not continue through. Look at these numbers. If you must defend yourself against a bad guy, you want to ensure to stop the bad guy, not that the bullet might pass through the bad guy and hit an innocent on the other side. When it comes to stopping an attacker, hollow points bullets are more effective in stopping power and safety; there’s no reason not to use them. Can a bad guy use a hollow point to kill a cop? Sure. But hollow points work quite well in the hands of us good guys against bad guys too. They don’t discriminate. 🙂

While I may enjoy sporting activities with my firearms, my primary purpose for having firearms is defensive. I may study all sorts of empty hand martial arts, even weapon-based martial arts (sticks, swords, etc.). But because I know those things, I also understand their limitations. A gun isn’t a be-all-end-all, but it serves a good purpose towards keeping me and my family safe. It goes back to the Boy Scout motto of “Be Prepared”; better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

But hey, if you don’t think defensive purposes are legitimate, then I’ve got a yard sign for you. Are you willing to post that sign?