To require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to prescribe rules requiring distinctive markings on toy and look-alike firearms.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 14, 2008
Requires the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to promulgate a final consumer product safety rule providing for a distinctive marking or device for any toy, look-alike, or imitation firearm to distinguish the look-alike firearm from a firearm.
Includes in the term "look-alike firearm" any imitation of any original firearm manufactured, designed, and produced since 1898, including toy guns, water guns, replica nonguns, and air-soft guns firing nonmetallic projectiles. Excludes any nonfiring replica of a firearm developed before 1898, or traditional BB, paint-ball, or pellet-firing air guns that expel a projectile through the force of air pressure.
Declares that this Act supersedes any state or local law relating to markings, identification, or sale of toy, look-alike, and imitation firearms. Prohibits any state or political subdivision from prohibiting the sale or manufacturer of any look-alike, nonfiring to or collector replica of an antique firearm developed prior to 1898 or prohibiting the sale (other than prohibiting the sale to minors) of traditional BB, paint ball, or pellet-firing air guns. Declares that this paragraph does not apply to any provision of state or local law enacted before January 30, 1955, that prohibits the sale of any toy or imitation firearm unless its exterior surface is brightly colored.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 16, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.5471 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.5471 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.5471 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.5471 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.