Estimated reading time: 4 minutes
The ATF has quietly proposed a rule that could dramatically change how law-abiding Americans buy firearms from licensed dealers. And despite what you’ve probably seen flying around social media, it doesn’t eliminate background checks or create some Wild West free-for-all.
According to Armed Attorneys, the proposal would simply allow certain identity verification steps that currently happen in person to be completed remotely through secure video technology.
If adopted, the rule could let a customer purchase a firearm from an in-state FFL, complete ATF Form 4473 online, verify their identity over a live video call, pass the same NICS background check, and then have the firearm shipped directly to their home.
SEE ALSO: S&W 396 Night Guard Review
That’s a pretty significant shift from today’s process.
The proposal, known as ATF Rule 1140-AB05, was published on May 8, 2026, and is currently open for public comment through Aug. 8.
Armed Attorneys Emily Taylor and Richard Hayes say much of the online outrage surrounding the proposal has been overblown.
“It’s a nothing burger,” Hayes joked while explaining that the rule has actually been public for months and had drawn only a few hundred public comments before suddenly becoming a hot topic over the holiday weekend.
The attorneys point out that the proposal does not eliminate background checks. Buyers would still have to pass the federal NICS system before receiving a firearm.
Table of contents
Potential Benefits
Taylor and Hayes say there are several legitimate upsides. For one, it could make firearm purchases much easier for people living hours away from the nearest gun store.
They also note that some states have effectively restricted access to FFLs through zoning laws. Instead of driving several hours just to complete paperwork, buyers could complete the transfer remotely with any licensed dealer located in their own state.
The proposal could also benefit:
- Rural gun owners
- Disabled Americans with limited mobility
- Customers who simply don’t live near an FFL
For those buyers, removing the requirement to physically appear at the gun counter could eliminate a major hurdle without changing the underlying federal background check process.
But There Are Concerns
Interestingly, some of the biggest concerns discussed by Armed Attorneys didn’t come from gun-control groups.
Taylor questioned whether removing face-to-face interaction also removes one of the firearms community’s own informal safeguards.
Many experienced gun-store employees have refused sales over the years after getting a bad feeling about a customer.
Someone acting erratically, making disturbing comments or displaying obvious warning signs might never trigger a NICS denial, but an experienced dealer can still choose not to complete a sale.
“If the guy comes in sweating and muttering and pacing around… I’d say, ‘Have a nice day,'” Hayes said while discussing private sales.
Taylor also raised practical concerns about firearms being shipped directly to homes, including theft during delivery or so-called “porch pirates.
Politics Enter the Conversation
The proposal has also generated political headlines after reports that Donald Trump Jr. owns roughly a 1% stake in the online retailer GrabAGun.
Taylor and Hayes acknowledged he could financially benefit if online firearm sales increased, but they also noted his ownership interest is relatively small compared to some claims circulating online.
Meanwhile, gun-control organizations have argued the rule could significantly increase firearm sales if finalized.
Nothing Is Final Yet
It’s important to remember that this is only a proposed rule.
The public comment period remains open until Aug. 8, after which the ATF will review comments before deciding whether to move forward.
Whether you love the idea or hate it, it’s one of the more interesting firearm proposals to emerge this year because it isn’t centered on banning guns. It’s about changing how Americans legally buy them.
If the rule survives the process, the local gun counter may not disappear anytime soon. But one day, buying a firearm from an in-state dealer could be as simple as logging onto a secure video call, passing your background check, and waiting for the delivery truck.
What do you think? Is remote firearm purchasing a smart modernization of the process, or does it remove an important layer of safety? Let us know in the comments.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***
is a seasoned outdoorsman, lifelong hunter, and the kind of guy who’d rather track whitetails than scroll social media. As an editor for GunsAmerica, he’s got a sharp eye for spotting both solid gear and bad gun laws. Whether he’s deep in the woods or deep in editorial deadlines, Larry brings a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is approach to firearms, hunting, and the great American tradition of self-reliance. If there’s a hot debate on gun rights or the latest in hunting tech, you can bet Larry’s got an opinion—and it’s probably backed up with both facts and field experience.
Experience:
– Licensed Bowhunter, Hunter, and Trapper – Experienced in ethical hunting and wildlife conservation.
– Concealed Carry Permit Holder (NYS & AZ) – Trained and licensed to carry in multiple states.
– 2A Journalist – Covering firearms legislation, Second Amendment issues, and gun rights for over a decade.
– Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) – Certified to provide emergency medical care in the field.
– Field-Tested Gear Reviewer – Hands-on experience with firearms, optics, and hunting tech.
The problem with this is having a digital record of your purchase. It is bad enough a person has to get permission from the US government to exercise a constitutional right. With things like this the government will have immediate access to what you own. Since all these laws are unconstitutional, they should be removed, but with the antis and unfortunately people in the gun community in too many cases wishing for their own detriment these bad decisions will continue.
“Could significantly increase firearms sales”. I’m not seeing a down side to that…
Stupid ass argument 🤦♂️
“ Meanwhile, gun-control organizations have argued the rule could significantly increase firearm sales if finalized.”
There is a lot of heartburn over guns and purchasing of guns. I don’t have a problem with background checks, however even those have shown some weaknesses in the process. One thing I would like ATF to consider is a plan that does away with 10 day wait and the background checks for a purchaser that has a CURRENT CCW permit. Another would be a 10 day wait for folks that have purchased guns in the past. It does not make since to have a person wait 10 days for a gun purchase when that person has a gun(s) at home……
Considering my local FFL (The only one within an hours drive) charges $75 per transfer, including low price but regulated parts, I welcome it. Courts have taken video testimonies for years. I use ZOOM with my doctors & lawyer frequently. Web security isn’t perfect, but considering the shear amount of confidential paperwork that has walked out guarded doors over the past decade only to be posted openly online, it’s an even trade-off. Biometric security is gaining traction fast, especialy with the growth of AI. & I definately trust it over minimum wage Wal-Mart Willie being in charge of my paperwork.
Why is it limited to in-state FFLs? What difference would that make?
This process already exists for some online dealers selling suppressors. It’s how I have bought suppressors for the last 5 years. The shop sets up an FFL in any state they want to do business in. The 4473 process includes a pass through the local CLEO which can be done electronically if the local CLEO has it set up. The CLEO part of the process tends to take longer than the NFA approval these days. My local CLEO is onboard and has the electronic review set up so I have gotten suppressors in 1-2 weeks to my door from online order.
At least in the areas I have lived access to a local FFL willing to do the transfer has been easy enough that having a firearm delivered to the house doesn’t seem like that much of a short cut and probably would not change my buying habits.
I think it’s a great idea. There are people who work weird hours like I used to. I worked from 5:00 PM to 5:30 AM. I got home around 6:15 AM and got to bed around 7:00 AM. I got up around 11:30 AM to 12:00 PM. By the time I would run a few errands and got ready for work, it would be around 3:00 PM to 4:00 PM. This didn’t leave much time to go to my local FFL to do the background check and fill out paperwork to pick up whatever gun I bought. If the store was very busy, I would have to wait for another day to go. Having it shipped directly to my home would make it so much easier and less stressful, and not worry about being late for work. So yeah, I love this idea.
Dear sir or Madam,
As an experienced gun dealer for 34 years, It concerns me that straw purchases will dramatically increase since really the only way to combat a straw purchase is face to face. ATF has been very strict on this law for years and has constantly put pressure on dealers including myself to turn down these purchases. We turn down sales weekly because of this rule and now they want to implement this? Something don’t sound right. I could go on and on with problems this would cause.
I don’t have a problem with buying a firearm online and completing the background check online. My concern is the delivery. As mentioned in the article porch pirates are a big problem. Depending on where the buyer lives there would also be concerns about weather and animals possibly damaging the firearm. Also, I would require the firearm package to be signed for in person with the proper ID shown and verified by the delivery driver. If you live in a rural area like I do that generally means you have the same delivery drivers. And if you have a delivery driver that’s paying attention to their job, having someone show the proper ID when signing would be a giveaway as to what the person is receiving. And if the delivery person is just a little bit dishonest packages could start disappearing and firearms could wind up in the hands of people that shouldn’t have them. While being able to complete the buying process and background check online might make it easier and more convenient for some people, I’d just as soon have my firearm shipped to my local FFL dealer and pick it up there. If the background check is already completed then all he has to do is verify my ID and do the transfer paperwork. That saves him time as well. No, I see the biggest problem in the delivery process. I do believe most legal firearm owners would agree and wouldn’t mind going to the local FFL dealer to pick up their purchase.
If you ever worked at a gun store you have had a person buy a gun and put it under their chin. Sad, but just the way it is.
I believe this would put smaller FFL’s who don’t possess the technology to do business in this manner at a disadvantage.
This proposal might need modification. I like the dealer having a say in to whom he transfers guns. I like being able to inspect the gun before transfer for defects and operation. The porch pirate problem is significant for an item like this. This might be a good idea for some situations, so I think it should be an optional way to transfer, not a mandatory way.
Sorry… Bad idea. With AI and the amount of fraud that happens on a daily basis revolving around identity theft? All this is going to do is put guns in the hands of more criminals or people that aren’t allowed to have them in the first place.
I, for one, don’t mind the “inconvenience“ of the background check being done at the gun store if it keeps guns in the right hands. I believe this is the burden we bare as responsible gun owners.
i hate buying anything on line….much better when you can see the product and look it over really good.