Firearms Electronic Recordkeeping

An individual opposes the proposed rule for electronic recordkeeping, arguing that it creates the infrastructure for a de facto national firearms registry prohibited by Congress. The commenter expresses concerns over the searchability of records, the risks of third-party cloud hosting, and the lack of a formal cost-benefit analysis regarding privacy and Second Amendment implications.

The commenter supports the proposed electronic recordkeeping as an option for FFLs but opposes making it a mandated requirement due to concerns over data security and privacy. They note that while electronic records would improve business efficiency and space management, they prefer the security of paper records unless specific privacy and storage duration concerns are addressed.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule, arguing that the difficulty of maintaining records serves as a necessary barrier against unauthorized searches. They express concern that this rule is a preliminary step toward creating a centralized, easily searchable gun registry.

An FFL holder opposes the proposed firearms electronic recordkeeping, arguing that it functions as a "back door gun registry" and imposes an unnecessary regulatory burden on small business owners. The commenter expresses distrust in the government's motives and concerns regarding the technical difficulty of compliance.

The commenter, a former FFL holder, opposes the proposed rule because they believe electronic recordkeeping will lead to misuse of information and privacy violations. They argue that paper ledgers were sufficient and cite Supreme Court case law regarding tracking to support their position.

The commenter opposes the proposed firearms electronic recordkeeping, arguing that it creates a national gun registry that could be used for future confiscation. They state they would challenge the proposal in the Supreme Court as a violation of the Second Amendment.