Revising Non-Over-the-Counter Firearms Transaction Requirements

A small business owner and licensed firearms dealer opposes the proposed rule, arguing it would harm local retailers by shifting business to large online sellers. The commenter contends that remote identity verification is not a substitute for in-person transactions and that the rule imposes extra costs on consumers without sufficient justification.

A firearms dealer in North Carolina opposes the proposed rule, arguing that video calls cannot replace in-person judgment and that the rule will harm small shops while favoring large online retailers. The commenter requests the removal of provisions for direct shipping of standard firearms to maintain the role of local dealers.

A firearms dealer opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it will harm local gun shops and fails to prevent straw purchases as effectively as in-person transactions. The commenter requests that the direct-shipping requirements for standard guns be removed from the rule.

A Florida firearms dealer opposes the proposed requirements, arguing that remote transactions lack the necessary oversight to assess a buyer's mental state. The commenter also expresses concern that the change will disadvantage small, local shops in favor of large, out-of-state online retailers.

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 local firearms shop owner in Utah opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it favors large online retailers over small local stores. The commenter expresses concern that video calls are insufficient for verifying identities and requests that the direct shipping rules for standard firearms be removed.

The commenter opposes the proposed rules allowing direct shipping of standard firearms to homes, arguing that the current in-person system is safer and more effective. They express concern that the new rules will harm local gun shops and impose unnecessary fees on families.

Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. supports the proposed rule to modernize firearms transactions through remote identity verification, citing benefits for consumer convenience and operational efficiency. The company requests specific clarifications regarding reliance on third-party credential service providers and the ability to implement these systems across multiple licensed facilities under common ownership.

A small firearms business owner opposes the rule, arguing that it undermines the role of Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) as a "last line of defense." The commenter contends that person-to-person interaction is necessary to verify buyers, which cannot be achieved through email.

Richard Sprague of Sprague’s Sports, a long-standing firearms dealer, requests that the ATF provide specific clarifications and model SOPs regarding the proposed non-over-the-counter transaction rules. He expresses concern over security risks associated with remote drop-offs and the potential competitive disadvantage for small FFLs compared to large retailers.