Regulations Defining Engaged in the Business as a Dealer in Firearms

The National Firearms Act Trade and Collectors Association (NFATCA) supports the proposed rule to clarify the definition of "engaged in the business" as a dealer in firearms. They argue that the rule aligns with existing statutes and protects individuals from being criminalized for enhancing personal collections.

Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation oppose the proposed rule, arguing that it fails to sufficiently walk back the unlawful legal theories of the previous "Biden rule." They contend that the NPRM still allows for the criminalization of private gun owners by maintaining atextual interpretations regarding "engaged in the business" and "former licensee inventory."

The commenter, a private individual who occasionally sells firearms from a personal collection, opposes the proposed rule because it preserves legal theories they believe were rejected by the courts. They urge the ATF to rescind the rule entirely and instead issue a new rule that strictly follows the plain statutory language of federal law.

The commenter, a private firearm collector, opposes the proposed rule because it preserves legal theories they believe were already rejected by the courts. They argue that the rule still unfairly targets law-abiding individuals by allowing personal collection activities to be used as evidence of unlicensed dealing.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it deregulates firearm sales and removes enforcement tools used to identify unlicensed dealers. They express concern that this will make it easier for prohibited individuals to obtain weapons and facilitate firearms trafficking.

The commenter, an individual who recently administered a firearm estate, opposes the proposed rule because it preserves legal theories they believe were already rejected by the courts. They argue the rule could unfairly expose innocent individuals to prosecution and urge the ATF to rescind the previous framework entirely in favor of a rule that follows plain statutory language.

Felix De La Garza, a private individual, opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it preserves legal theories already rejected by federal courts. He urges the ATF to rescind the existing framework entirely and issue a new rule that strictly follows the plain statutory language of federal law.

An individual opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it preserves legal theories already rejected by federal courts. The commenter requests that the ATF rescind the "Engaged in the Business" framework entirely and issue a new rule that strictly follows the plain statutory language of federal law.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it constitutes agency overreach that infringes on Second Amendment rights and property rights by attempting to force universal background checks on individual-to-individual transfers. They argue that the rule arbitrarily targets legitimate collecting behaviors, such as networking and trading items to enhance a collection, and suggest the agency should instead establish clear sales thresholds.

The commenter, identifying as a private firearm collector, opposes the proposed rule because it preserves legal theories they believe were already rejected by the courts. They argue that the rule still allows for the prosecution of individuals for routine personal activities and urge the ATF to rescind the framework entirely in favor of a rule that follows plain statutory language.