It is not within the providence of the government and invasion of Constitutional rights to restrict the prospective buyers. There can be required disclosures and laws as to when sellers have liabilitry or immunity. But imposing limitations on individuals becomes an invasion of personal rights.

Respected Regulators, Leveraged and inverse ETFs help me hedge my portfolio and I would really appreciate if you don't impose any rules such as passing a test before investing in such ETFs. Investors understand the risks these risks since the information is widely available. I would really appreciate if you let investors choose what works best for them. Thank you!

It is the responsibility of the investor, not the regulators to evaluate market risk. Predetermining these risk and who is qualified to take such risk is a slippery slope. Shall we regulate risk for public companies with historically high PE ratios? it is the investors responsibility to way risk and loss. Investors are not children, they need to take responsibility to for their actions. The regulation of or restriction of trading a public asset will not negate irresponsibility, it will just allow for such irresponsibility to occur under a different context or asset.

The use of leveraged and inverse funds are no riskier than any other investment vehicle. It is all about asset allocation. Leveraged and inverse funds also help to balance and protect my portfolio. As a retail investor, trading options and utilizing leveraged and inverse funds are virtually the only ways to protect my portfolio from market declines or a bear market. This proposed regulation appears to be another tool used to prevent poor and middle class citizens from participating and benefiting from the markets allowing only the wealthy to get wealthier.

I shouldn't have to go through any special process like passing a test before I can invest in public securities, like leveraged and inverse funds. I am capable of understanding leveraged and inverse funds and their risks. I do not need these measures imposed on you.

You as an individual has to be responsible for your investments. I dont need the government telling me in what I can or cannot invest. Or you all voting on this think you are superior to me? And remember, we VOTE. Thank you

I stand firmly oppossed to these proposed regulations. These regulations are not of safety to investors. No, these regulations are about removing investors out of the playing and therefore creating exclusivity to those who qualify under the the rubrick of an elite few.

The types of investments that could potentially be impacted by SEC Proposed Rule #S7-24-15 is lengthy and diverse, including Leveraged and Inverse Funds, and can legitimately be incorporated as part of a comprehensive investment strategy. These are publicly traded instruments and I am an experienced, educated, and informed investor. I should NOT need to jump through additional hoops to be "allowed" to invest MY money in strategies that I believe best protect my total investment pool and enhance my likelihood of growing my investment.

Maybe it should be illegal to borrow money for leveraged or inverse trading but otherwise I see no need to stop it.

Dear Sirs. If you remove the ability for mature adults to invest in these "overly complex" vehicles, than you should also make craps and roulette illegal at gambling establishments. To me it's insulting that you believe the majority of investors (such as myself) do not do due diligence before putting money into any non-traditional investment portfolio. Thank You!