A controversial proposed rule by federal firearms regulators paving the way for universal background checks saw more comments than any previous change.
The public comment period for the proposed rule by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives titled "Definition of 'Engaged in the Business' as a Dealer in Firearms" ended at midnight on Thursday, and when the smoke cleared, 318,040 comments were listed. This was far higher than the 211,564 comments received in the agency's 2021 "Stabilizing Braces" rule, 291,249 comments in its "Frame or Receiver" rule, and 193,297 comments in its 2018 "Bump Stock" rule.
At stake in the sweeping multifaceted 31-page rule change is a mushy series of pitfalls that could make anyone who sells a single modern gun without a federal firearms license liable for prosecution as an illegal weapons dealer. Even selling a gun to a relative could be suspect. The rule was proposed in September without consulting the country's firearms industry, while anti-gun groups applauded the efforts.
The proposal saw a significant turnout on both sides of the issue, with firearms industry trade groups and a broad mix of Second Amendment organizations filing official comments slamming the rule as overreaching in several ways.
Likewise, a coalition of 26 attorneys general led by Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen and joined by the Arizona legislature, submitted a nine-page public comment opposing the rule change on a number of points.
"In America, it should be legal for a family member to sell a firearm to another family member without risk of prosecution. But the exception is flawed," the letter from the Knudsen group says. "Reading the exception, one can conclude that if a family member sells another family member a firearm for as little as one dollar more than the original purchase price, that seller could be open to civil, administrative, or criminal liability. That absurdity risks hurting innocent people and chilling law-abiding behavior."
Also submitting public comment were a variety of Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill who have called out the agency for making a not-so-subtle move towards universal background checks.
"The Biden administration will do anything to attack the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens," said U.S. Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), who co-signed the GOP group's comment.
Weighing in on support for the Biden Administration’s new rule is a host of gun control groups large and small. Using cut-and-paste advocacy, the Bloomberg-backed Everytown group channeled 238,000 comments from its supporters to the rule, with the organization's president, John Feinblatt, stressing the group and its members "have been pushing for this common-sense step for years, and now we urge ATF to listen to the people and finalize the rule as written."
Also in support of the rule were 160 Democrat members of Congress led by U.S. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) and U.S. Rep. Robin Kelly (D-IL-02). California Attorney General Rob Bonta, joined by another 19 state AGs as well as the attorney general of the District of Columbia, who filed comment this week as well.
"Unregulated firearms transactions increase the likelihood that individuals who are prohibited from legally acquiring guns will obtain them, posing a threat to communities and contributing to the prevalence of gun-related violence," said Bonta in a statement.
What next?
After ATF considers public feedback and makes any changes because of the comments, providing the agency still wants to proceed, it will publish a final version of the rule to the Federal Register, describing and responding to the comments received. That final rule includes a date for when the change becomes both effective and enforceable, generally 60 to 90 days in the future.
It remains to be seen exactly how that will play out, but any rule pressed into effect is likely to be the target of multiple federal lawsuits as well as potential congressional oversight.
