PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 27, 2015
Gun Look-Alike Case Act
Transfers the Department of Commerce's authority to regulate the markings on toy, look-alike, or imitation firearms under the Federal Energy Management Improvement Act of 1988 to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) under the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA).
Amends the CPSIA to prohibit a toy, look-alike, or imitation firearm from being manufactured, entered into commerce, shipped, transported, or received unless it contains, or has affixed to it, a marking approved by the CPSC.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Maintains existing standards that require such firearms, subject to regulatory exceptions, to have a blaze orange plug inserted in their barrels. Sets forth exceptions that: (1) authorize the CPSC to provide for alternative markings or devices, or (2) require former Commerce regulations concerning approved markings to be considered approved by the CPSC in the absence of any CPSC regulations.
Expands the categories of look-alike firearms subject to such marking requirements and regulations to include product cases or covers that have the appearance, shape, or configuration of a firearm.
Repeals Commerce's authorities for approving alternative markings and penalizing violations. Requires violations to instead be treated under the CPSIA.
People & committees
Rep. Engel, Eliot L. [D-NY-16] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3224 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3224 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3224 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3224 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.