Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08917

I support the proposed rule under RIN 1140-AA84 clarifying that a person who maintains direct control and possession of a firearm or ammunition while traveling aboard a common or contract carrier has not “delivered” or “caused to be delivered” that firearm or ammunition to the carrier under 18 U.S.C. 922(e). This proposed rule properly aligns the regulation with the ordinary meaning of the term “deliver,” longstanding principles of statutory interpretation, and the practical realities of modern transportation. A person carrying a firearm on their person or within their immediate control while riding a bus, train, taxi, rideshare, or similar transportation service has not voluntarily transferred custody of that firearm to the carrier. Clarifying this distinction improves consistency, fairness, and public understanding of the law. I also support the proposed clarification that municipal transit systems, rideshares, taxis, limousines, and similar services are not “common or contract carriers” for purposes of section 922(e) where there is no practical mechanism for passengers to provide written notice or transfer custody of firearms to the operator. Applying section 922(e) to those situations would create confusion and potential criminal liability for ordinary travelers despite no actual transfer of possession occurring. The proposed rule appropriately recognizes that other federal, state, and local laws governing firearm possession and transportation remain in effect. This proposal does not eliminate existing restrictions on carrying firearms where prohibited by law; it simply clarifies the scope of section 922(e) and reduces the risk of inadvertent violations caused by ambiguous interpretations. Finally, I believe the proposed rule better reflects congressional intent and the majority of relevant case law, which historically focused on situations involving checked baggage or relinquished custody rather than continuous personal possession. For these reasons, I encourage ATF to finalize the rule as proposed. Thank you for considering my comment.