Comment on FR Doc # 2026-09157

Re: Opposition to Proposed Rule – Docket No. ATF-2026-0266 / RIN 1140-AB05 Revising Non-Over-the-Counter Firearms Transaction Requirements 91 FR 25216 (May 8, 2026) I am a licensed Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) operating a retail firearms business. I write in strong opposition to the proposed rule that would expand non-over-the-counter (NOTC) firearm transfers to allow routine remote sales of ordinary firearms without any requirement for affirmative approval or in-person contact with a licensed dealer. Core Objections 1. The proposal undermines the viability of licensed retail dealers. Walk-in sales and local transfers are the economic foundation of most independent FFLs, particularly those serving rural and smaller communities. Allowing large-volume online sellers to complete ordinary firearm transactions remotely and ship directly to the buyer’s residence shifts sales volume away from brick-and-mortar licensees who maintain inventory, trained staff, secure premises, and compliance infrastructure. The result is predictable: fewer local dealers, reduced access to knowledgeable in-person guidance, and consolidation toward a small number of high-volume remote sellers. ATF itself has long recognized the public-safety value of a distributed network of licensed dealers who know their customers and communities. This rule would erode that network. 2. Face-to-face interaction remains the most effective safeguard against prohibited and high-risk transactions. A licensed dealer who meets a buyer in person is uniquely positioned to observe demeanor, detect inconsistencies, identify potential straw-purchase indicators, and exercise the judgment that accompanies physical presence. A video call, however well-intentioned, cannot replicate that capability. The existing limited NOTC pathway already requires fingerprints, photographs, and affirmative government review precisely because remote transactions carry elevated risk. Expanding remote sales to ordinary firearms while eliminating the affirmative-approval step removes the most reliable human screening mechanism without a compensating public-safety benefit. 3. The proposed process substitutes passive notice for meaningful review. Under the existing framework for authorized remote transfers, a government agency must affirmatively approve the application. The proposed rule replaces that requirement with electronic notice to the chief law enforcement officer whose only obligation is to acknowledge receipt. Silence or a mere confirmation of delivery is treated as sufficient. This is not equivalent oversight; it is the absence of oversight. A seven-day waiting period does not cure the lack of affirmative review. 4. The claimed convenience gains are marginal while the costs and risks are real. Buyers still face a waiting period and an additional identification-verification fee (estimated by ATF at approximately $7 and passed through to the purchaser). The time savings relative to visiting a local FFL are modest. Meanwhile, local dealers lose the sale, communities lose a point of contact for safety training and responsible ownership, and the compliance burden and liability exposure for any FFL that chooses to participate in remote sales increase. The rule solves a problem that does not exist for law-abiding purchasers who already have ready access to licensed dealers. 5. The current system is not broken. The in-person transfer process works. It is well-understood by licensees and the public, it incorporates both automated NICS screening and human observation, and it has not been shown to impose an unreasonable burden on lawful commerce. Expanding remote sales of ordinary firearms without affirmative review or physical presence is a solution in search of a problem—and the collateral damage falls directly on the licensed dealers who form the backbone of the regulated firearms market. Requested Action I respectfully urge ATF to withdraw the proposed expansion of NOTC authority for NICS-subject transfers. At minimum, any remote pathway for ordinary firearms should retain the existing requirement of affirmative government approval, robust identity verification that includes biometrics where appropriate, and preservation of the central role of licensed dealers who conduct transfers in person. The Gun Control Act established a system of licensed dealers as the primary point of lawful commerce and the first line of screening. This proposed rule weakens that system. I ask that it not be finalized.