Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09163
David WhittakerSupportIndividual
Summary: The commenter supports the proposed action as a "step in the right direction" for allowing certain imports, though they argue the rule should go further to allow more modern sporting rifles. They express frustration with current import restrictions that they believe create a monopoly for U.S. manufacturers.
This is a step in the right direction, but should be going farther. Under the GCA of 1968, guns like the HK91, AUG, and other modern sporting rifles were allowed for import. Even shortly after the GCA, there were AR-180s imported from England and Japan. The only reason the agency got so strict was because in 1989 they received pressure from president Bush to change the import requirements. Most "sporting" competitions use firearms like the AR15 that can't be imported into the United States. Though the ATF ignored "combat sports" many hunters use an AR-15 or AR-10 and many CMP competitions would use guns that are not importable under the ATF interpretation of "sporting purposes". That is one reason the Colt Hbar was exempted from some state bans as that was seen as a sporting firearm. If I thought the ATF would actually listen to me, I could easily make a longer version of this comment, but its unlikely to matter to anyone. Even former ATF employee Rick Vasquez wrote a paper on the 1989 and 1998 treasury studies that likely showed they were an excuse to ban many firearms from import. It is a step in the right direction, but its not enough. Americans should be allowed to have imported rifles that are good and competitive for modern sporting events, but instead the ATF has allowed U.S manufactures to have a monopoly on modern semi automatic rifles and shotguns. That said, this amendment is a good step in the right direction and will help gun manufactures and importers to be able to make better firearms allowing some imports that may be necessary to complete American built semi auto firearms.