Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08932
Anonymous AnonymousOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter opposes the proposal to allow sex designation changes on ATF forms, arguing that it creates a dangerous precedent for restricting Second Amendment rights. They express concern that such changes could eventually be used to target other groups or individuals based on various characteristics.
This proposal is a very dangerous one with implications for restricting second amendment rights for many law abiding American citizens. Every American, whether you agree with some states allowing sex designations to be changed or not, should be concerned about the implications here. If the ATF is able to put one group in a catch-22 where they cannot purchase a firearm without committing a felony because of how the document is written, then this opens up the door for the same to be done for other groups in the future. Restricting any group’s ability to purchase firearms is unconstitutional and needs to be seen as such by the ATF or else the second amendment is worth nothing anymore. If this passes, how long until the background check forms are rewritten to exclude other groups? If this is allowed, what is then stopping a democrat from coming into office and then citing this change as a reason to be able to restrict their political opponents’ ability to purchase firearms? Who is to say that name changes would not be targeted next? (Barring anyone who has changed their name for marriage, witness protection, etc from purchasing a firearm) One could argue that this is unrealistic, but the problem is not how likely it is to happen next, the problem is that if this passes it *could* happen next. And the next group to be targeted through these laws could be one that any American citizen from any political party, religion, gender, or race is a part of.
Anyone who is for the second amendment should be against this arbitrary change.
Parties considering this change need to look past just the affect on transgender and intersex individuals (who are law abiding American citizens, by the way) and look at the broader impacts this would have on our country and our laws as well. This proposal is unconstitutional and unpatriotic. The United States of America should continue to take pride in its constitution and its belief in liberty and justice for all. The second we decide that all doesn’t actually include every law abiding American citizen, we have failed our founding fathers, our neighbors, and our children.