Comment on FR Doc # 2026-01141

The proposal does not sufficiently address whether disarming individuals based solely on drug use meets the standard; the standard is thus unclear and subject to challenge. Without a clearer connection to dangerousness, the rule risks further legal challenges. Recent court proceedings have touched on this issue, for example the alcoholic who is currently sober. If the restriction is based on illegal use, then a minor who violated age-limit laws for alcohol would, following that logic, be just as “dangerous” as the illegal user of other drugs. Unless FFLs are aware of blatant and obvious violations, they should not be held responsible. They are already subordinated in evaluation of transferees, by the requirement to submit and abide by results of the “background” check. I am an elderly man, still dealing with a single nonviolent misdemeanor arrest as a minor. These restrictions are administrative denial of my constitutional rights. The assertion that my record shows a danger to the public is asinine, but that is what is being applied to citizens today. This has eroded my respect for the law, and trust in enforcement agencies, so of course I choose to be anonymous.