Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09158

Why a National Firearms Registry is Illegal, Unconstitutional, and Immoral Introduction The proposed rule in the Federal Register (2026-09158) on Firearms Electronic Record-Keeping allows Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to maintain records electronically. While presented as modernization, centralized electronic records risk enabling a de facto national registry, which violates federal law, the U.S. Constitution, and moral principles rooted in historical precedents of government abuse. Illegal Under Federal Law The Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA) explicitly prohibits the establishment of a national firearms registry. Specifically, 18 U.S.C. § 926(a)(3) states that no such system shall be established. ATF is barred from centralizing or computerizing records in a way that creates a registry. Recent reports indicate ATF has amassed hundreds of millions of records, potentially violating this. [References: FOPA 1986, GOA reports on ATF OBRIS database] Unconstitutional The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms. A national registry infringes on this by enabling government tracking and potential confiscation, as affirmed in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which emphasize individual rights and historical tradition. Registration lacks historical analogue in the Founding era for ordinary firearms and burdens the core right. Immoral Based on Historical Abuses Gun registries have repeatedly facilitated disarmament and tyranny: - Nazi Germany: Post-1933, registration lists enabled confiscation from Jews and opponents, aiding the Holocaust. - Australia (1996): National Firearms Agreement led to mandatory registration and buyback/confiscation of semi-automatics. - United Kingdom: Registration preceded strict controls and confiscations. - Canada: Recent attempts at handgun freeze and registry have faced resistance due to confiscation fears. - Other examples: Venezuela, Soviet Union, where registries preceded disarmament of citizens. These demonstrate registries as tools for authoritarian control, eroding trust and enabling abuses against law-abiding citizens. Conclusion Opposing a national registry upholds the rule of law, constitutional liberties, and prevents repetition of history's darkest chapters. Citizens should comment against expansions risking centralization.