Comment on FR Doc # 2026-01141

Forrest Mele-KeanSupportIndividual
Summary: The commenter supports the ATF's interim final rule because it provides much-needed clarity by separating "addicted" from "unlawful user" and emphasizing ongoing use without a prescription. They suggest the rule could be improved by explicitly excluding remote past use, providing clear guidance examples for FFLs, and committing to transparency through aggregate data reporting.
I support the ATF’s interim final rule revising the definition of “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance” for purposes of federal fire prohibitions. The current standard has been confusing in practice, and that confusion creates two problems at once: uneven enforcement and unclear expectations for lawful gun owners and licensed dealers. The ATF’s updated approach, which is separating “addicted” from “unlawful user” and emphasizing regular, ongoing use without a lawful prescription (or use substantially different from what is prescribed), moves the rule toward a clearer, more workable line [1]. This clarity is important because this prohibition is tied to background checks and eligibility determinations under 18 U.S.C. § 922.[2] However, the final rule would be stronger if the ATF clearly explained how recent and ongoing the drug use has to be to count under this definition. In other words, the rule should make explicit that remote or one-time past use is not enough by itself, and that the relevant evidence should point to current or continuing use. The ATF should also publish a brief set of examples, or a short guidance document for the public and FFLs explaining how lawful prescriptions are treated and what “substantially different from that prescribed” means in common situations. Finally, the ATF should commit to transparency after implementation by reporting aggregate data on denials and enforcement actions under this category. That would help determine whether the updated definition is being applied consistently and whether it improves public safety without creating unnecessary ambiguity. [1] Footnotes: [1] Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. (2026, January 22). Revising definition of “unlawful user of or addicted to controlled substance” (Interim final rule; request for comments). Federal Register. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/01/22/2026-01141/revising-definition-of-unlawful-user-of-or-addicted-to-controlled-substance [2] Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 18 U.S.C. § 922 — Unlawful acts. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

View on Regulations.gov