Defining `Willfully' for Firearms Violations

Mark Houdashelt opposes the proposed rule to define "willfully" for firearms violations, arguing that it would allow gun dealers to avoid prosecution for non-compliance. He suggests that gun shop owners should be held responsible for ensuring their employees know and follow the law to keep the public safe.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule because it creates a loophole that allows gun dealers to avoid license revocation if they can claim ignorance of their employees' violations. They argue that the proposal favors the gun lobby and undermines community safety by making it harder to hold "bad actors" accountable.

Susan Heisner opposes the proposed rule to define "willfully" for firearms violations, arguing that it would allow "shady dealers" to avoid responsibility for breaking the law. She emphasizes that gun shop owners and managers must be held accountable for ensuring their employees follow safety laws to keep the public safe.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule defining "willfully" for firearms violations, arguing that it creates a loophole for firearm dealers. They contend that the rule would allow dealers to avoid license revocation for employee violations because they are not required to provide specific legal training.

Susan Castelli-Hill opposes the proposed rule to define "willfully" for firearms violations, arguing that it would allow dealers to evade responsibility for illegal sales. She advocates for stricter ATF regulation and monitoring of gun dealers to prioritize public safety over industry profit.

A concerned citizen opposes the proposed rule to define "willfully" for firearms violations, arguing that it would allow "shady dealers" to avoid accountability for breaking the law. The commenter suggests that the ATF should instead focus on tightening enforcement and employee training to ensure public safety.