Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09163
glen parshallSupportIndividual
Summary: The commenter supports the proposed rule because they believe the "sporting purposes" requirement is an unnecessary expense and an infringement on Second Amendment rights. They argue that firearms have many legal uses beyond hunting and that the current regulations act as an extra tax on gun owners.
Yet another 'rule' that has done nothing but add expense to acquiring a firearm.
The Second Amendment was not written about deer hunting. While that is ONE use for firearms, there are many other legal and lawfuluses. The so-called 'sporting purposes' ruling is absolutely ridiculous and amounts to nothing more than an extra tax on our God Given rights!
I support this proposed change