Revising Non-Over-the-Counter Firearms Transaction Requirements

A small home-based Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) supports the proposed rule for non-over-the-counter firearm transactions as it provides more freedom and convenience for dealers and purchasers. However, the commenter expresses concern regarding how the rule interacts with state-specific point-of-contact requirements, particularly in Virginia, and requests further clarification and coordination with states.

The commenter, representing a small firearm business, opposes the proposed revision because it removes the face-to-face interaction necessary to vet transactions and prevent straw purchases. They argue the change will create regulatory confusion in certain states and negatively impact foot traffic and sales.

The General Board of Church and Society of the United Methodist Church opposes the proposed rule, arguing that online firearm transactions remove the ability of Federal Firearm Licensees to identify suspicious behavior and straw purchasers. They state that the policy puts communities at risk and contradicts their mission to promote peace and safety.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule because they believe it removes the personal oversight provided by local shops and replaces rigorous background checks with less stringent requirements for direct shipping. They request that the rule be amended to strike the direct-shipping provisions for standard firearms.

The commenter, representing a federally licensed firearms retailer and shooting range, opposes the proposal to allow direct shipping of firearms to purchasers without an in-person transfer. They argue that face-to-face interactions allow for professional judgment and identity verification that remote systems cannot replicate, and they express concern that the rule would disproportionately harm small local businesses.

Megan Eaton, owner of Fletcher Arms, opposes the proposed rule because she believes remote identity verification cannot replicate the fraud safeguards of in-person transactions. She argues the rule increases fraud risks, reduces oversight, and will disproportionately harm small firearms dealers by shifting sales to large online retailers.

The commenter opposes the proposed rule because they believe it favors large online sellers over small local gun shops. They argue that the new system lacks sufficient oversight compared to current NFA requirements and request the removal of provisions allowing direct shipping of standard firearms.

A local firearms dealer in Ohio opposes the proposed rule, arguing that it favors large online retailers over local businesses and undermines safety by allowing remote transactions that are harder to monitor for straw purchases. The commenter requests that the direct-shipping provisions for standard firearms be struck from the final rule.