I have no objection to making toys readily identifiable.

This one's for Ileus, with a thank you for validating my decision for placing you on ignore.

It does a pretty good job of answering your question.

As repeatedly pointed out below, most of what you are referring to as a "toy gun" is not actually a toy gun.

...to the most efficient tool for self-defense, can differentiate between a toy and a gun?

... and then logging out to see their posts so that you can respond? Perhaps you should ponder the meaning of "ignore."

BTW I use ignore also but I use the old fashioned one. I just don't read what I don't want to read.

I believe that you have stated several times that you would never post here again.

I believe you are a typical gun grabber. Not too good on your word.

I recall saying I wonder why I bother because so many 'typical gun humpers' suffer so badly from cranial rectal inversion.

Because you have nothing to add but insult you too are now on my ignore list.

Many states such as Ohio even have "Open Carry" laws. At least two occurrences, the Man who had picked up a BB gun in the Dayton area Walmart, and the Boy in the park in Cleveland were killed by Police seconds after the Police came up behind them.

And how many people have been killed because the Police saw something in the citizens hand that turned out to be a cell phone or a wallet?

Maybe you are asking the wrong question?

(I would add that many of these now dead people may have had a slightly darker skin color.)

Seriously though the article doesn't say why.
Perhaps you could research that issue and get back to us. You seem more in touch with the NRA than I am.

Actual *toys* do generally look very un-firearmlike, unless you pair them with a $1.99 can of black spray paint, as anyone who intends to carry one to use in a crime already does. And it's hard to make a rational case that armed robbers should be discouraged from using painted toys, as opposed to actual weapons.

Airsoft replicas, as opposed to toys, are intended to replicate the weight/feel/function of an actual firearm for safe indoor training in lieu of actual guns.

BB guns and pellet rifles are actual *weapons*, just not firearms, and are generally treated like weapons, even though the media often conflates them with toys. They are not.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/340195/benjamin-armada-magpul-edition-pcp-air-rifle-22-caliber-pellet-black-synthetic-stock-matte-barrel-with-4-16x-56mm-scope-matte-and-bipod

That's a .22 with a muzzle velocity of 1000 ft/sec, comparable to a short-case rimfire firearm.

This one is a .50, suitable for hunting hogs and coyotes:

http://www.pyramydair.com/s/m/Dragon_Claw_Dual_Tank_Air_Rifle/2500

Airsoft is intended to be non-lethal. At 400fps and firing a 6mm plastic ball I doubt that it can be made to be lethal. It is designed to be used in games shooting at other gamesters. It is a fucking toy. And I didn't see a single .50 cal or 9mm or any kind of break barrel in the mix.

Deflect much?



I asked a serious question of people who claim to be experts why pro gun organizations would oppose making non-lethal toys look like non-lethal toys instead of near exact copies of real firearms. Care to weigh in on that or ya' just gonna follow the gunner dogma of deflect, deny, attack and second amendment?

I ask yet again, for what reason would gun advocacy groups oppose making non lethal toys not look like non lethal toys.

Answer the damn question.

why do gun advocacy groups oppose making toy guns distinguishable from real guns.

Why don't you actually listen for the first time instead of repeatedly asking the same inane question again. Not all airguns are children's toys.

This is a masturbatory exercise for him...ie he enjoys being obtuse.

As an aside, if somebody put a fucking pellet gun to my head, I wouldn't think it was a toy.

15 U.S. Code § 5001 - Penalties for entering into commerce of imitation firearms

Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)

(a) Acts prohibited

It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, enter into commerce, ship, transport, or receive any toy, look-alike, or imitation firearm unless such firearm contains, or has affixed to it, a marking approved by the Secretary of Commerce, as provided in subsection (b).

(b) Distinctive marking or device; exception; waiver; adjustments and changes

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) or (3), each toy, look-alike, or imitation firearm shall have as an integral part, permanently affixed, a blaze orange plug inserted in the barrel of such toy, look-alike, or imitation firearm. Such plug shall be recessed no more than 6 millimeters from the muzzle end of the barrel of such firearm.

(2) The Secretary of Commerce may provide for an alternate marking or device for any toy, look-alike, or imitation firearm not capable of being marked as provided in paragraph (1) and may waive the requirement of any such marking or device for any toy, look-alike, or imitation firearm that will only be used in the theatrical, movie or television industry.

(3) The Secretary is authorized to make adjustments and changes in the marking system provided for by this section, after consulting with interested persons.

(c) “Look-alike firearm” defined

For purposes of this section, the term “look-alike firearm” means any imitation of any original firearm which was manufactured, designed, and produced since 1898, including and limited to toy guns, water guns, replica nonguns, and air-soft guns firing nonmetallic projectiles. Such term does not include any look-alike, nonfiring, collector replica of an antique firearm developed prior to 1898, or traditional B–B, paint-ball, or pellet-firing air guns that expel a projectile through the force of air pressure.

(d) Study and report

The Director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics is authorized and directed to conduct a study of the criminal misuse of toy, look-alike and imitation firearms, including studying police reports of such incidences and shall report on such incidences relative to marked and unmarked firearms.
(c) [1] Technical evaluation of marking systems

The Director of [2] National Institute of Justice is authorized and directed to conduct a technical evaluation of the marking systems provided for in subsection (b) to determine their effectiveness in police combat situations. The Director shall begin the study within 3 months after November 5, 1988, and such study shall be completed within 9 months after November 5, 1988.

(f) Effective date

This section shall become effective on the date 6 months after November 5, 1988, and shall apply to toy, look-alike, and imitation firearms manufactured or entered into commerce after November 5, 1988.

(g) Preemption of State or local laws or ordinances; exceptionsThe provisions of this section shall supersede any provision of State or local laws or ordinances which provide for markings or identification inconsistent with provisions of this section provided that no State shall—

(i) prohibit the sale or manufacture of any look-alike, nonfiring, collector replica of an antique firearm developed prior to 1898, or

(ii) prohibit the sale (other than prohibiting the sale to minors) of traditional B–B, paint ball, or pellet-firing air guns that expel a projectile through the force of air pressure.

(Pub. L. 100–615, § 4, Nov. 5, 1988, 102 Stat. 3190.)

So this doesn't exist?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/shopping?q=tbn:ANd9GcSc3JLMsRkz3ZrBZx0xv-Frs_tw4WKMIsJaUQRWI_c7oV2zoPCpcJoVzWBHmw&usqp=CAEhttps://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/shopping?q=tbn:ANd9GcSc3JLMsRkz3ZrBZx0xv-Frs_tw4WKMIsJaUQRWI_c7oV2zoPCpcJoVzWBHmw&usqp=CAE

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=inexpensive+replica+guns&tbm=shop&spd=8951492158896024965

Or the hundreds of other replicas just like it?

But then what would I expect from someone who thinks a 300 fps Daisy Red Rider is equivalent to a $400 gas charged .50 caliber hunting rifle and doesn't do his own research but plagiarizes Kang's work.

in accordance with the law. Looks like an area of the law that could be tightened.

two theatre houses in DC have FFLs to receive props. If they are going through the hassle.......
I see getting a replica of a classic rifle for the study to hang in the study or den (not of a fan of the term "man cave&quot or over the fireplace, but a fake Glock 19? No.

replicas made for collectors (popular in Japan and a handful of other nations where collecting actual firearms is hard), and inexpensive movie props (much cheaper than blank-firing guns, and you can dub in muzzle flashes in post-processing).

15 USC 5001 covers all toys, but exempts both non-toys (like training replicas and collectibles) and actual weapons (e.g. airguns).

And yes, a Daisy Red Ryder is not a toy; it is a .177 caliber air rifle firing a projectile capable of causing serious injury if misused. They are trainers for real guns, and should be treated the respect afforded real guns, even if the consequences of an accident are sublethal. My son had one when he was younger, and I kept it in the safe and ensured he followed the Four Rules as if it were a .22.

As to *criminals* painting toys to look real or buying realistic looking replicas in order to carry out crimes, we could bring our murder rate down if we convinced more criminals to use nonfiring replicas, no? Yes, it presents an occupational hazard that the criminal using one for robberies might get himself shot in the belief that it was real, but if a career criminal is going to commit armed robbery then I'd much rather they do it with a fake gun than with a knife or an actual firearm. Not many innocent people a year are murdered with nonfiring replicas or Airsofts, and even the suicides-by-cop via replicas are a tiny fraction of suicides by firearms, falls, hanging, or blades, no?

The people who called 911 told dispatch it was likely fake, but that info wasn't passed to the responding officers. The officer who shot the child had previously been "deemed an emotionally unstable recruit and unfit for duty", says Wikipedia, and fired two seconds after arriving on-scene.

So, no, that case doesn't demonstrate that Red Ryders and other .177 air weapons, adult training replicas, and movie props need to be made to look like toys.

Some fuckwit Mall-Wart employee left them out in public reach

and said that Crawford was loading a rifle with ammunition, was pointing a gun at children, and was about to commit a robbery or mass shooting. Even though from the 911 transcript synced with the store surveillance video, it is clear the caller knew or should have known that this wasn't true.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/30/opinion/williams-crawford-walmart-killing/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/25/mass-shooting-hysteria-and-the-death-of-john-crawford/?utm_term=.f14e4882ce3a

Going on the false information provided to them, the police shot him as soon as they rounded a distant corner.

If you look at that surveillance video, the air rifle (not a toy, an actual Crossman MK-177 pellet rifle, .177 caliber) was on the opposite side of Crawford from the officer(s) who shot him (he was holding it by his right side, and they shot him from his left side), so they weren't going off what they saw in any case; they were going off what the 911 caller falsely told them. So even if you passed a law requiring actual pellet rifles to have orange tips as if they were toys, it wouldn't have affected this tragedy, either.

I figure if anyone can explain why the NRA (and other groups) oppose making toy guns (and to be painfully over exacting, other non lethal gun like devices) easily distinguishable from real guns.

Last edited Mon Jan 2, 2017, 10:31 PM - Edit history (1)

I have to apologize for the delayed response. I was quite fortunate to spend the last few days ringing in the New Year with friends and family out of state. It was a good time. I look forward to a happy and successful 2017, and wish the same to you..flamin'. While I disagree with the content of almost every post you make, I do enjoy reading your thoughtful input.

I'll caveat this with I don't/can't speak for the NRA or any other group. I speak for Kang Colby and that's it. My opinions are my own and aren't necessarily shared by anyone else.

You know, I often post about how bleak things were for us pro-rights guys and gals for decades, stretching back to the late 1960s and peaking in the early 2000s when our ship finally started to turn. I'm not going to rehash all of that today. But the "toy gun" debate is surely an oldie but goodie. When discussions of toy gun legislation started to make headlines, many of us pro-rights folks were dealing with GCA '68 pre-FOPA, talks of AWBs, the impending Brady Act which was first proposed in 1987 before passing in the 90s, machine gun bans, discussion of national handgun bans, George H.W. Bush's import ban on a multitude of semi-automatic rifles. Needless to say, there wasn't much time in the day to fret about 6mm orange tips on toy guns, including airsoft.

Going back to this country's founding, toy guns were almost always intended to look like real firearms. Cast iron, wood, springs, and advertising in comic books and on the radio lauding the toy guns for looking "just like a real gun". Toy guns were intended to look real. Some of the best examples come from the 1960s, but I like the 1920s-late 50s era toy guns, specifically cap guns.

While gun controllers have been fiddling with toy gun restrictions dating back over sixty years, the major piece of federal legislation came in 1988 and was signed by Ronald Reagan, and sponsored by (at the time) NRA ally, Bob Dole. Bob originally proposed the idea as part of the Undetectable Firearms Act but it was later added to the Federal Energy Management Act of 1988 as an amendment requiring orange tips. To my knowledge, no major firearm lobbying organization opposed the amendment.

The law applies to: "look-alike firearms" meaning any imitation of any original firearm which was manufactured, designed, and produced since 1898, including and limited to toy guns, water guns, replica nonguns, and air-soft guns firing nonmetallic projectiles. Such term does not include any look-alike, nonfiring, collector replica of an antique firearm developed prior to 1898, or traditional B-B, paint-ball, or pellet-firing air guns that expel a projectile through the force of air pressure.

So, you are probably wondering where does that leave air guns that expel metallic objects and paint balls. Those aren't toys. BB/pellet guns can cause serious injury or death if misused. NSSF and NRA offered input and opposition on state level legislation mandating color schemes for BB/pellet guns due to potential public safety issues. The concern being that coloring BB guns like toys may inadvertently signify a lack of harm associated with misuse. In any event, Bob Dole's amendment required a study be conducted on the efficacy of orange tips which found that law enforcement failed to recognize the blaze orange identifiers 96% of the time. In other words, this is just a feel good idea with little public safety merit.

Per NSSF, coloring requirements on BB/pellet guns may do more harm than good:

So the law says Airsoft has to have a 1/2 inch orange stub on the barrel tip. I knew this and think it comes under the NASCAR decal rule; if it doesn't look straight from 50 feet at 50 mph, it ain't straight. If this tiny orange tip can't be seen during a standoff, possibly in the dark, when adrenaline is flowing and tensions are high it doesn't help.

As for the NSSF's and the NRA's concerns about painted air guns being treated as toys please explain why they both promote this:

Now about BB and pellet guns. I searched Pyramidair for pistols. The muzzle velocity for these look alike guns ranges from just under 300 fps to just over 400 fps. The strong ones might penetrate a police uniform and break the skin at 20 feet. Yet they are lumped in with the most powerful break barrels like the one I own.

The concern of police departments is that 83 (reported) shootings of people with nonlethal imitation guns is too many when a simple fix would save these lives. I've seen nothing in this thread to explain the opposition to marking such toys and bb/pellet guns as what they are: toys. Now, if there should be a carve out for high performance non firearms it is worth discussing. The problem with that is that if that door is opened and it is admitted that these high performance air guns can be as deadly as firearms, the question changes to "Why not regulate these guns like conventional firearms?"

You can't really have it both ways and look like reason applies to your position; either they are 'real' guns and should be regulated like conventional firearms or they aren't and should be treated as such.

You have to keep in mind that you and I have philosophical differences on the matter of guns. I'm going to offer a pro gun rights opinion, and you tend to argue the case for firearm restrictions. This issue aside, you and I would probably be good buddies and would probably agree on most other important issues. I have a few friends who favor gun control, one or two of which hate guns.


That Crickett rifle is marketed to adults. Specifically parents or grandparents. A guy walks into the gun shop, sees the Crickett and thinks about it being a good opportunity to spend some time outdoors with his daughter while also enjoying fond memories of learning to shoot with an old single shot or break action with his father. The kind of memories you cherish for a life time.

The gun company doesn't run ads on cereal boxes, look at their website....very boring yet responsible.

Of the forty or so people killed by police while in possession of an "imitation firearm", how many were actively attacking the police, engaged in violent crime, or setting up a suicide by cop? Probably damn near all of them...exceptions being cases like Rice and Crawford. Crawford's death was the byproduct of a swatting troll and law enforcement negligence.

A 13 year old kid was shot a week or so ago in Baltimore, he decided to car jack a retired LEO with an imitation firearm and got LEOSA'd. Sad, sure....but why the hell is a 13 year old out jacking cars? That's what I would like to fix.

I agree with you on the NASCAR comment. But I can't think of a scenario where LEO would be able to immediately ID the object, citing the people who have been shot and killed for holding a phone or reaching for a wallet. There is always spray paint too.

Is that a supportable position? If you think so . . .

We differ on the marketing of 'my first rifle' but that's a red herring. Your point was that brightly colored toy guns would lead to treating real guns as toys as justification for not marking toys as toys. The Cricket proves you wrong.

I do not hate guns. You know I own rather a lot of them and have expended enough rounds to put three through a playing card at 100 yards from muscle memory. I DO want to prevent senseless death and injury when possible. Toy guns seem like a no brainer yet the industry resists. I'm trying to understand why.

I am on record as wishing to ban the import, manufacture, sale or transfer of any semi auto gun with a removable magazine. That is because since the '70s when the gun industry co-opted the NRA and began the fear mongering campaign we currently see the lethality of weaponry on the streets has increased dramatically. I'd like to limit that lethality to revolvers and bolt action/pump guns that must be loaded through conventional means.

The Pentagon is currently taking submissions for a new sidearm. It must be more reliable, more accurate and more lethal than the current Baretta. All good things in a combat situation, not so much in civilian hands. As soon as it is adopted it will become the gun dejure for the gunner public and marketed as such much like the AR. Emergency rooms nationwide will contend with the increased lethality.

should be less lethal (needing more shots to put a home invader down), less accurate (see previous), and less reliable? That doesn't go well with your previous paragraph's wish for civilians to have revolvers only. One of my most accurate pistols is a 6" 686 S&W .357 magnum, that can cut the x-ring out of a target at 15 yds. Put full house 125 JHP's, or one of the new "wonder" bullets in it, and it will be more lethal than a 9mm FMJ (Beretta mil load) by far.

about the lethality of the Beretta. The Beretta would come under the "assault weapon" ban, as it has a so-called high capacity magazine (over 10 rounds). Therefore, I assumed you were talking about the ballistics of the round, since the Beretta already passes muster on the capacity side. And, for speed shooting with a wheelgun, I refer you to to Jerry Miculek (sp?). Shoots 8 rds out of a 8-shot revolver in under 2 seconds, I believe, and reloads and shoots 8 more under 6 seconds, total. If someone really WANTS to do something, like shoot up a night club, or get their hands on an illegal weapon, they will usually find a way.

Not one shooter in 100,000 can match that.

they could work up to something near that. Like I said, if someone wants to do something, they'll find a way. Back in the day, I could rattle a cylinder full off pretty quick, wasn't timed, tho.

can you or Jerry shoot 100 people with a S&W in a night club. If not go away with the idiocy you spout.

3??? I could use a single shot muzzle loader and shoot that often in that amount of time. Sufficient???

ETA: Thanks for the idiocy comment. Thought we were having an intellectual discussion. I guess that's not possible with some.

in a crowded venue while reloading 16 times. Loughner couldn't reload even once. I know that having a gun makes some men feel like Superman but face it, Superman you ain't.

Now run along and practice reloading in 2 seconds.

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2017, 11:37 AM - Edit history (1)

to people you have discussions with? I can reload in about 4 seconds, thank you very much. It's called a speed loader. Carries 6 rounds in a plastic, spring loaded holder with a convenient handhold. I may not be Superman, but for you to say it can't be done, because you say it can't be done, is, and I'll use the term you have used toward me TWICE, idiotic. So there. Phhhht.

BTW, how many times did the Pulse shooter reload? He had plenty of time...

ETA: From your own profile page.

"I can put up with a lot of shit from people who are passionate but not from people who are intentionally ignorant and too stubborn to see an opposing viewpoint regardless of validity and facts. "

Goose, meet gander.

Was of the Dragoon model, manufactured in the USA. I would regard his insults very lightly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=199560

for quite some time now. Just want to see how much line he takes out.

stakes out a preposterous position and continues to defend it. You chose EXACTLY the right quote to describe this thread, so bye bye.

Did I make your ignore list? By quoting you?

on the end of a gun that doesn't work, just to make it longer? They sell pipe at the hardware store. Must have some effect, then, to justify it. (Maybe all the Youtube videos of silencers in operation are just being faked.)

as with all rifles put together, even though modern-looking rifles are more popular than revolvers among gun enthusiasts.

And before the gun-control lobby discovered how eeeee-villlll protruding rifle handgrips are, they were all about outlawing revolvers while protecting rifles (including AR-15's), because "rifles and shotguns aren't the problem; they aren't concealable". --Pete Shields, former head of Handgun Control, Inc., later the Brady Campaign.

Methinks there is a disconnect in your logic.

because it doesn't accomplish much, if anything. Back when it became required to have a bright orange muzzle on toy guns, one of the results was that people with ill intent started painting real guns to match toy guns, hoping to create a delay in response from law enforcement and placing them at increased risk.

Personally, I'm not a fan of "toy" guns at all. My kids were never allowed to "play" with guns. Guns are not toys. Airsoft, BB and pellet guns can be used effectively for training, but I see no need for kids to have ready access to them without adult supervision, and certainly not in an environment where kids playing could be misconstrued to cause alarm and a law enforcement reaction. Like many things in life, a small amount of common sense could save a lot of grief.

Why are you asking about toys in the GC&RKBA group?
I don't happen to think your question belongs here but if you manage to suggest some relevance, I'll do my best to answer. I was going to alert for SOP but I thought maybe there might be something relevant.

Happy New Year

those I have on ignore. I log off to monitor this thread because it's only fair to see what the comments are since I asked for them.

You said you'd answer my question if I told you why this belongs in the gungeon's SOP.

The SOP says this group is for discussion of gun control and gun politics among other things. The OP meets both of those requirements as it references possible legislation concerning toy GUNS and the politics of the gun rights advocacy groups opposing that legislation.

Your turn.

I did come to believe I was on ignore but I'm not offended as it's a DU feature.

I do have to honestly say that I don't KNOW why the NRA and GOA oppose making (by legislation) toys look like toys and not real guns. I have your OP that says they do but I don't interest myself in news or views which derive from either group.

I conjecture that this may have to do with the source you sited considering some items as toys which the two pro-gun groups do not. As I said, I've not studied the issue; I don't buy or own toy guns, real guns or even imaginary guns.

As I said before, I don't consider a toy gun to be a gun. I agree they're possibly deadly but they're not guns. I still don't see the reason for discussing them in this group but at least you're discussing something and the word gun is involved.

Peace

P.S. - As a rhetorical preponderance, your answer left me wondering why you're reading my replies and answering while you keep me on ignore. I have accepted that some there are those contradictions I won't ever understand.

...for the purpose of playing along in the game of "these weapons look like guns but aren't and should be regulated like toys and if they were (and he says they are) what business does the NRA, etc. have in being against them marked like toys" nonsense.
:where's the calliope smilie: Is the circus in town?

Against the culture war being waged on gun owners.

I think it is a misguided attempt myself, I am personally opposed to realistic toy guns for kids.

was mentioned, save the "no comment" reported.

In any case, ask them, (or the GOA, which seemed close enough to the NRA, for the Post).

The title of the CBS article is almost irresponsible, including "fake or toy guns." There is NOTHING fake or toy-like about modern air guns (an industrial sector which is increasingly dominated by Europeans), esp. those designed for short-range U.S. big-game hunting. Even the Post references these weapons as "...that look real, but are not." Frankly, I'm neutral on changing the appearance on actual toy guns, though reviewing everyone's ensueing bad art is not an attractive prospect. With air guns moving into the same ballistic functionality as fire & brimstone arms, these weapons may fall under 2nd Amendment protections.

I would like to see the number of average of 43/yr broken down as to how many objects were "toy" on one hand, and how many were air/Co2 weapons.

Edit: It appears a chart posted above sufficiently delineates

high velocity (1000 fps or greater, I believe) airguns are treated as firearms under IL law. FOID, etc.

"With air guns moving into the same ballistic functionality as fire & brimstone arms, these weapons may fall under 2nd Amendment protections." :Eleanors38

about "future" technologies, be they air guns, phasers, ray guns, and all the stuff of Buck Rogers, and how courts and society might view them. I suggested these weapons would be accepted more or less as civilian self defense techs, just as radio, t.v., and the innertubes are accepted as free "Press." He clung to the old muzzle loader (that was what was used when the Second was written, and all) as the only firearm protected. I suggested that his argument should at least fall back to semi-autos as the quaint firearm meant for use by our forefathers.

BTW, the Second doesn't even mention FIREarms, only "keep and bear arms."

were also in the "arms" list, I believe.

ETA: In the USMC, there is a "manual of arms" for the sword...