Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08930

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this proposed rule. As a member of the public who has followed the regulatory changes surrounding firearms with attached stabilizing braces, I support the ATF’s decision to rescind the 2023 rule’s expanded definition and return to the statutory language as written by Congress. The prior rule created significant confusion for lawful gun owners, manufacturers, and even regulators, as evidenced by the extensive litigation and conflicting court decisions. The vacatur of the 2023 rule by multiple courts highlights that the multi-factor framework used to classify firearms with stabilizing braces was not applied consistently or predictably. A regulatory system that can result in different legal outcomes for nearly identical configurations depending on subjective factors does not provide the clarity required for compliance. Returning to the statutory definition of “rifle” without additional regulatory expansion improves legal certainty and restores consistency. It also reduces the risk that individuals who are attempting to comply with the law will inadvertently violate complex or unclear criteria. At the same time, I encourage ATF to ensure that any future classification determinations are transparent, consistent, and grounded in clear, objective standards. Case-by-case determinations may be appropriate, but they should be guided by publicly understandable criteria so that lawful gun owners can reasonably know what is and is not regulated. Thank you for considering my comment on this important issue.