Look-alike firearms Rule Changes


Important!!!

Take Action Now! 📢

Step 1: Click the link in description to visit the government comment website.

Step 2: Leave a respectful comment urging the Consumer Product Safety Commission to stop the "fast track"

You can copy and paste the text in the description use that for your comment. 👇

https://www.regulations.gov/document/CPSC-2023-0021-0001

The undersigned opposes the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s proposed Direct Final Rule in Docket No. CPSC-2023-0021. As written, the effect of the Commission’s proposed rule would have significant and unnecessary economic impact on the undersigned and all in the air-soft industry. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (AFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612 does apply and requires the Commission to prepare an analysis under 5 U.S.C. 603, 604. Without comment from the industry, the proposed Direct Final Rule would be inappropriate and unacceptable without changes.

The Commission’s stated basis for the Direct Final Rule Process is that the new 16 CFR Part 1272 contains no substantive changes from regulations in effect now for more than 30 years. The reason for the new 16 CFR Part 1272 is that recent federal legislation has transferred oversight and enforcement of the regulation from the Department of Commerce to the Commission. Because the Consumer Product Safety Act requires certain certifications for products subject to regulations enforced by the Commission (see Supplementary Information, Paragraph G in the docket entry), the new, proposed 16 CFR Part 1272 would unnecessarily impact the air-soft industry negatively, substantively and financially.

The subject regulation was enabled by 15 U.S.C. § 5001 which imposes certain marking requirements on “look-alike firearms.” Look-alike firearms include “air-soft guns firing nonmetallic projectiles.” 15 U.S.C. § 5001 (c). While the undersigned have long complied with this statute and 16 CRR Part 1272, there has been no requirement for any general product certifications (GCC). Now, apparently, there would be such a requirement. See Supplementary Information, Paragraph G in the docket entry.

Because the Commission states in the subject docket entry that the Commission would be requiring GCCs for air-soft guns, the undersigned and the industry request an opportunity to comment under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). See generally, 5 U.S.C. 551-559. The undersigned and the industry request that opportunity to address whether GCCs for air-soft guns under 16 CFR Part 1272 is necessary. It is readily apparent upon visual examination whether an air-soft gun complies with 16 CRR Part 1272 marking requirements. GCCs are not necessary.

The undersigned believe the Commission is also required to conduct a flexibility analysis under 5 U.S.C. 603, 504. Many in the industry are small businesses.

The undersigned also state that they and others in the industry are not equipped to provide GCCs for their air-soft products, in the near future, particularly those that would comply with the legal requirements. See, e.g., 15 U.S.C. 2063 (g). Many of their air-soft products are in transit, in inventory, with distributors, and in retail stores.

Accordingly, the undersigned request the Commission withdraw the proposed direct final rule. The undersigned appreciate and understand the Commission’s approach and requests the Commission consider excepting air-soft guns from any requirement for GCCs.

Thank you for your consideration.
 
I don't see this thread as being political, it's about potential US law/rule changes. I believe the conversation can be had without making it political in context.

What surprised me most is how little the users of AGN have picked up on this. I watched the YT video and after having played airsoft for a bunch of years in the past I could see where the concern comes from. Airsoft's goal is to make the experience as real as possible, thus airsoft pistols and rifles look, feel and in many ways operate like the real thing. I believe the term at play is "replica firearms" of which there are many which are CO2 based pistols in the airgun world along with a few CO2 replica rifles. It would suck, as the interviewed guy says, if airsoft was reduced down to running around with rainbow clown guns.

I am a bit confused how this applies to airguns in general though. The majority of our airguns do look like real guns and would likely be confused as such be a regular person not knowing any different. But that doesn't make it a 'replica firearm'.

I feel like I am missing something here, yet I am not educated enough on the topic to know what.
 
Don't hate me .... Personally feel there should NOT be ANY "Toy" guns that are NOT REAL FIREARMS taking on the same looks.
It's stupid, unreasonable & Irresponsible to make toys that looks like tools of WAR :cautious:
I agree, but for a different reason than most people worry about. Yes, fun-guns made to look like real firearms make the gun-haters freak out. I don’t refute that that IS a problem.

The reason I decided to never buy a replica gun is purely self-protective: Namely, if I were to practice using a (for example) BB revolver that looks just like the model it was intended to imitate, some nutcase with a real firearm who thinks I am about to shoot him/her could take a shot at me, even in the harmless scenario of me practicing on my own property shooting away from where anybody else could enter without my permission. The nutcase would not notice the little detail about the gun that distinguishes it from the real thing, because he would already have to be very close to see it.

Kids “playing” with lookalikes, in a place where some other kid has snuck a real firearm in... :oops:
 
I have mixed feelings on it. Having raised 6 kids and knowing my 6 grandkids I see issues. They know it is not real, but the point that it looks pretty real is what attracts them to it. No matter how much education I provide my Air Soft plastic 12 gr plastic bb pistols that we play airsoft with can get them shot by people who don't know. Night games could turn lethal quickly if a neighbor makes a noise complaint when the teens are playing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jetpopt
Commented. Thank for the heads up. As always don't want responsible people or companies penalized for people that aren't. The changing public requires that the responsible people adjust their behavior to account for the new environment. As an example today we can't play paintball in the same places as we did in 1990. We have to be further from view of traffic and residential areas.
 
Toys that look like real guns have been around for as long as we have been a nation. (longer) The toy guns looking real hasn't changed anything it's the people who have changed. Like an onion you can all peel this down and know exactly why there might be an issue but it's not pc to talk about.
Yes, the culture in the US has changed. I had a cap gun as a kid. From a distance, the (pre-fluorescent-marked) silver METAL revolver looked like a real PB version. Nobody got in trouble using those that I know of, BUT a big difference is that in those days, hardly any young kids used real handguns. If you saw a kid with a silver handgun, it was assumed to be a cap gun.

Even the bright-marked replicas can be mistaken for a PB gun from a distance. It has happened. Sometimes people find out in time that it is a “toy.” But not always.
 
Part (b) under Applicability, stood out to me.

View attachment 362702
I think this altered quote is apropos:

First they came for the cap guns, and I did not speak out, because I didn’t use cap guns, then they came for the Airsoft guns and I did not speak out, when they came for the Airguns there were too few left to speak out.

It will not stop with Airsoft guns… make no mistake. Give a little to the crocodile and it will swallow you whole.

-Marty
 
Motörhead I don’t hate you or anyone else but completely disagree with you and I’ll leave it at that. I’m also noting that several in this thread are referring to air guns as not real guns. I thinks it’s important to say that Airguns are real guns but as we all know, they don’t use gun powder. That’s an important distinction on many levels except apparently in New Jersey.

Rick H.
 
As kids me and my brother were not allowed to have toy guns. There were plenty of firearms in the house, but playing with toys guns was out. This was during the Vietnam war, so factoring in the news of the time, I totally get it today.
We would not allow any toy guns in the house. I didn't want the kids to get the idea they could play with guns as we had firearms.
 
Hey, I’m just the messenger.
Thought some members would find that section of the regulation interesting.
Lol, I’m not trying to shoot the messenger, and yes, this rule does not target air guns specifically as you pointed out. That said, in MA we have legislation that pertains to “imitation” fire arms and every few years they try to expand it to encompass air guns too. The point I’m trying to make is that these things start out in the periphery, get normalized and then expanded. Airguns, although not toys and not strictly meant to imitate fire arms are sold frequently in styles that mimic fire arms and this legislation/rule/policy gains this government agency a beachhead on our shores…

-Marty
 
  • Like
Reactions: Farmplinker2