I find it amazing that a body that regulates, would try to take up a proposition that is clearly covered in statutory law.  This is such a regulatory overreach, it's nothing short of amazing.  Imagine a state or a locality that approved, by regulation, the ownership of military grade heavy weapons, offensive missiles, etc.  (I.E.:  "Ownership is fine with us, you don't have tell those who do not approve and we won't disclose your non-compliance with existing law.)  This is exactly what your department is attempting to do.

How about this, as a proposal: There are voting rights and gun rights and both require a certain level of responsibility.  Why don't we apply the same standards to voter ID checks and verification that we apply to constitutionally protected gun purchases and ownership? 

Think about this:  Does it make sense to allow the criminally insane the right to vote?  If we're going to allow felons and illegals the right to vote, why don't we give them guns as well.  That's doesn’t make any sense does it?  In the bottom line, those who are irresponsible are going to vote irresponsibly.  If they can't have a gun, they shouldn't get a vote.  That's an excellent standard we can all live with.