Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08911

To the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives: Re: Docket No. ATF-2026-0232; ATF No. 2025R-04P; RIN 1140-AA91 Update to Proscribed Countries for Import Restrictions I am submitting this public comment in support of removing outdated country-based import restrictions that prevent law-abiding United States citizens from purchasing otherwise lawful firearms and ammunition based solely on their country of origin. The Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. That right should not be limited by broad, outdated, politically driven import bans that deny American citizens access to lawful arms simply because they were manufactured in a disfavored country, especially when the firearms themselves are legal to possess and purchase under federal law. If an individual buyer is not prohibited, and the firearm is otherwise lawful, the default should be lawful commerce, not categorical denial. I support the portion of this proposal that removes the outdated list of former Soviet countries from which ATF currently denies applications to permanently import most firearms and ammunition. These blanket restrictions punish American citizens, collectors, sportsmen, and lawful firearms businesses for foreign-policy decisions that are often decades old and no longer reflect present conditions. Import policy should be clear, narrow, current, and tied to legitimate statutory authority, not left as a museum of old geopolitical grudges. There is also a serious fairness and consistency problem. The federal government has repeatedly armed foreign governments, factions, and non-state actors when it believed doing so served a foreign-policy goal, even when those decisions later proved dangerous or morally questionable. During the Iran-Contra affair, U.S. officials were involved in weapons sales to Iran while proceeds were diverted to support the Contras in Nicaragua. In the 1980s, the United States also supplied Afghan Mujahideen fighters with weapons, including Stinger missiles, during the Soviet-Afghan war. Regardless of how those actions were justified at the time, they show that the federal government has claimed broad discretion to move weapons across borders for policy objectives, even in unstable regions and even where long-term consequences were uncertain. Against that backdrop, it is unreasonable to maintain sweeping import restrictions that burden ordinary Americans, licensed importers, collectors, and lawful firearm owners who are simply trying to purchase legal firearms through regulated commercial channels. A citizen buying a lawful imported firearm through a licensed dealer, subject to federal background checks and all applicable laws, should not be treated more restrictively than foreign-policy actors operating under broad executive discretion. I urge ATF and the Department of Justice to finalize the proposed changes and remove outdated country-based prohibitions wherever they are not clearly required by statute or current, specific national-security findings. Import restrictions should be limited, transparent, and subject to regular review. They should not be used as a backdoor limitation on the Second Amendment rights of U.S. citizens or as a way to restrict access to lawful firearms based on broad country-of-origin categories. The final rule should permit the importation of lawful firearms and ammunition from countries that are not currently subject to specific, legally justified restrictions. It should also make clear that future restrictions must be based on current evidence, clear legal authority, and narrow tailoring rather than old blanket bans. Thank you for considering my comment.