You plan to prevent or restrict investors from buying a broad range of public securities including the leveraged and inverse funds offered by ProShares. If these regulations are adopted, they could prevent or restrict investors ability to buy the funds. This is ridiculous, my ability to freely invest should not be restricted. I oppose limitations on my ability to buy any kind of Funds. YOU FINRA regulators do not have the authority to judge somebody's ABILITY. It is the investors right to freely access the entirety of the public securities markets without arbitrary restrictions.

I'm responisble for my own trading dicisions. I should be able to choose the public investments that are right for me and your family. Public investments should be available to all of the public, not just the privileged.

It should be up to individual investors as to whether they what type of investment they chose without the proposed "red tape" despite known volatility. Many publicly traded companies have gone bankrupt or experienced huge fluctuations in stock prices and in those cases shareholders are not protected. Overall, investors should never have a concentration in any investment and no one should invest more than they can afford to lose in volatile funds. Investors may lose their total investment, however they should be given the opportunity for the possible huge gains as well.

Comments: I do not support taking rights away from retail investors when they are already being screwed by mega investment companies.

To Whom This May Concern, I do not agree with SEC Proposed Rule #S7-24-15. I believe that I should have the ability to choose what investments are appropriate for myself. I am capable of appropriately educating myself without having to pass "tests" imposed on me. Leverage and inverse funds are very important to my investment strategy. In fact, I followed a very regimented investment program that is designed to capitalize on leverage and inverse funds. This investment program minimizes risk while maximizing the chance of substantial gain.

I do not agree with what you are trying to regulate. It is my right as a free investor to invest my money how I see fit without and "road blocks" or "speed bumps".

I should have the right to choose my own investments and not have that decided by a regulator. Having access to a variety of categories is important. My best ETF this year is an inverse fund The risks are duly noted. I am appalled that you would want investors to test.

People have the right to take risks on investments they choose to willingly participate. This is a tremendous overreach of freedom to do with one's money as they please. By this proposed rule's logic by FINRA, no one should be allowed to gamble without an approval process and testing (as well as cooling-off period) on how the gamble-based game they are about to play works and what the mathematical odds are of winning.

Please do not limit my ability to trade.

As a retail investor who does my own homework, I don’t need more regulation from a nongovernmental organization. Using inverse ETFs when I deem them appropriate has helped my retirement funds gain 9% YTD, whereas commonly traded ETFs like SPY, QQQ, and TLT are down 12-20% YTD. Perhaps you’d first like to explain to the Fed that inflation is not “transitory”? Or perhaps explain to them the dangers to our financial system caused by modern monetary theory, unlimited printing of money out of thin air, or the risks of destroying the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency?