Please accept this statement as my opposition to proposed SEC Rule #S7-24-15. I do not need a regulator to decide on my behalf what is deemed to be an appropriate investment. No regulator will ever be able to be as discerning as I am about what I should do with my own money. Sincerely, Matthew A. Lester

I do not support SEC Proposed Rule S7-24-15. I should have the right to determine what public investments are right for me without going thru a special process like passing a test. I am capable understanding the risks involved with these securities. Leverage and inverse funds are an important to my investment strategies. I use them to hedge and seek higher returns as a limited portion of my entire portfolio. I urge this proposed rule to be defeated.

I should and do have the right to choose my public investments. NOT some financial institution or broker or government restrictions. There should be NO restrictions, tests, or special processes to obtain leveraged inverse funds. NO RESTISTRIONS OR IMPOSED LIMITATIONS due to some new regulations. The leveraged and Inverse funds are part of my portfoilio and I don't see the need to take these trading abilities away or regulating against individuals. Individual investors DO NOT NEED LIMITATIONS on their investments. of any kind or nor any REGULATIONS.

These funds, although risky on the surface, can help reduce risks and increase diversification of portfolio using smaller amount of investment in each specific fund. Individuals alone or individuals with their advisors should be able to determine their risk tolerance and therefore type of investments. A risk seeking individual can lose same amount of money by investing in futures, cryptocurrencies, and other high risk investments. Employers limit the risk of investments in 401k or 403b.

leverages and short ets serve the small investor as a useful abd efficient tool to hedge risks. these options were not available until the advent of etfs. the rights of the small investor to benefit from these tools needs to be preserved.

In this highly manipulated market designed to enable the already extremely rich, though 40% of the market's new money the last two years is from peons and plebiscites like myself, it is no surprise to me that the absurd, obscure policies of this abusive regulatory body would do anything other than take advantage of it.

A few years back I started a new business and my economic training had me scared to death that the FED stimulative policies were going to drive the US economy off a cliff. The drive still occurring. So, I used Pro Shares to hedge against the long position I took in starting a company. Yes, I lost some money because the FED kept stimulating the economy but so what, the hedge helped me sleep.

There are too many restrictions at the present time. There is no need to create more of them for the sake of political posturing.

I do not appreciate regulators trying to restrict opportunities to advance ones wealth in life by telling them they must have knowledge, be certified, or already have wealth. This restricts people already at a disadvantage. Very similar to telling blacks and people of color that the must be able to read in order to vote. This considered rule is a straight discrimination.

I oppose restrictions to my right to invest in leveraged and inverse Exchange Traded Funds. There are already risk notification requirements for these investments. By their nature of being a fund, leveraged and inverse funds can be safer than using account margin or short selling. Leveraged and inverse vehicles allow me to participate in markets as I see fit. I do not want additional measures imposed on me.