Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08921

Comment on ATF Proposed Rule ATF-2026-0012 I appreciate the opportunity to comment on ATF’s proposed rule regarding component definitions under the Arms Export Control Act. While I support clearer and more consistent definitions in federal regulations, I do not believe this proposed rule goes far enough. Re-wording or harmonizing terminology may reduce some confusion, but it does not address the larger problem: lawful American consumers, collectors, competitive shooters, hunters, firearms businesses, and ammunition buyers continue to face unnecessary restrictions on the importation of firearms, firearm parts, barrels, receivers, magazines, and ammunition. The United States already has extensive laws governing who may possess firearms, who may import them, and how firearms and ammunition may be sold. Responsible importers, dealers, and consumers are willing to comply with clear rules. The issue is that many existing import restrictions do not appear to improve public safety in any meaningful way. Instead, they limit lawful commerce, reduce consumer choice, increase prices, and make it harder for Americans to access historically significant firearms, sporting arms, replacement parts, and affordable ammunition. ATF should prioritize substantive reform rather than merely revising definitions. In particular, ATF and the Department of Justice should work toward lifting or narrowing import restrictions that prevent the lawful importation of firearms and ammunition that are otherwise legal to own and sell in the United States. If a firearm, part, or type of ammunition can be lawfully manufactured, sold, possessed, and used domestically, then there should be a strong presumption that it can also be lawfully imported. I am especially concerned that import restrictions often harm ordinary people more than they affect criminals. Law-abiding buyers are the ones who experience higher costs, limited availability, and reduced access to replacement parts and ammunition. Collectors and small businesses are also burdened by rules that are unclear, outdated, or broader than necessary. For these reasons, I urge ATF not to treat this proposed rule as sufficient reform. Clarifying definitions may be useful, but the agency should also pursue meaningful changes that expand lawful importation, reduce unnecessary barriers, and respect the rights and interests of lawful firearms owners, importers, and consumers. Thank you for considering my comment.