Revising Non-Over-the-Counter Firearms Transaction Requirements

A firearms dealer opposes the proposed rule allowing direct shipping of guns, arguing it will harm small local shops and increase the risk of straw purchases. The commenter expresses concern over the lack of oversight in web checks and the new costs imposed on buyers.

A local gun shop owner in Ohio opposes the proposed rule, arguing that direct shipping will harm small businesses and increase the risk of straw purchases. The commenter contends that face-to-face transactions are necessary for proper screening, safety education, and preventing illegal sales.

A firearm dealer in South Carolina opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it will harm small local shops and increase the risk of straw purchases by removing face-to-face interactions. The commenter requests the removal of provisions for direct shipping of standard firearms to protect local businesses.

The commenter, a small gun store owner in Miami, AZ, opposes the proposed revision because it would eliminate in-person sales and safety instructions. They argue that online direct-to-door purchases remove human judgment from the transaction and would threaten the survival of small businesses.

An FFL dealer with over 40 years of experience opposes the proposed revisions, arguing that they will facilitate straw purchases and criminal activity while creating a monopoly for large retailers. The commenter asserts that the current system is effective and that the proposed changes would undermine existing law enforcement cooperation.

The commenter opposes the proposed revision to non-over-the-counter firearms transaction requirements, arguing that in-person interaction is necessary for store owners to verify identities and prevent fraudulent purchases.

A Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) opposes the proposed rule, arguing that removing in-person safeguards weakens the current system for preventing illegal firearm purchases. The commenter expresses concerns that shifting responsibility to delivery personnel increases security risks, such as theft and fraudulent transactions, and urges the ATF to preserve existing requirements.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule because they believe it increases the risk of straw purchases and public safety threats. They argue that requiring transfers through gun shops provides a necessary layer of scrutiny that direct delivery lacks.

A small business owner in the firearms sales industry opposes the proposed policy, arguing it will increase straw purchases and liability. The commenter claims the rule will harm small businesses, endanger public safety, and lead to further restrictions on law-abiding firearm owners.