New Bill Could Put Some Airguns Under Federal Gun Rules

Shotguns and rifles lined up on a rack in a gun store — Photo: Nomad_Soul / Shutterstock

A California Democrat’s bill would put some BB and pellet guns under federal firearm rules, bringing background checks and serial numbers to part of a market long treated like toys.

Story Snapshot

Rep. Kevin Mullin introduced “Garrett’s Law” to classify lethal airguns as firearms.
The bill targets high-powered airguns and excludes airsoft and paintball, per Mullin.
Coverage says buyers of qualifying airguns would face the same background checks as firearm buyers.
Critics say this “redefines BB guns,” warning of regulatory creep into common products.

What Garrett’s Law Would Do Under Federal Rules

Rep. Kevin Mullin of California introduced Garrett’s Law after a constituent’s death. His office says the bill would classify lethal, high-powered airguns as firearms under the Gun Control Act. That move would shift some airguns from consumer product oversight to firearm oversight. The press release says modern airguns can cause serious injury or death, yet avoid gun rules because they do not use gunpowder. The proposal excludes airsoft and paintball devices, according to Mullin’s release.

Reports describe practical effects that mirror firearm rules. Buyers of qualifying airguns would need a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. Manufacturers and dealers would need serial numbers and records, similar to standard firearm compliance. Supporters frame this as closing a safety gap. They argue power and lethality, not propellant type, should guide regulation. Coverage from pro-gun outlets emphasizes that the change would treat some BB and pellet guns like rifles and pistols today.

How Supporters Define the Line Between Toys and Weapons

Mullin says the bill is targeted, not a broad ban. He states it would not affect airsoft guns, paintball guns, or airguns that are not powerful enough to kill. His message highlights that the law aims at “lethal” airguns only. The push reflects a larger policy pattern: as technology boosts airgun power, the old “explosive propellant” test leaves modern airguns outside federal firearm law. Mullin’s communications place the focus on safety thresholds and federal oversight, not on removing products from the market.

Public debate turns on where to set those thresholds. Commentary cites draft velocity levels for.177,.22, and.25 caliber airguns as possible trigger points for firearm treatment. That reporting says the bill would kick in at speeds like 800 feet per second for.177 caliber, and lower cutoffs for larger pellets. If Congress accepts such numbers, many big-bore or tuned airguns could come under gun rules. Mullin’s office, however, stresses exclusions for nonlethal platforms and toys.

Why This Fight Resonates Across Ideological Lines

Gun policy veterans will recognize the playbook. Lawmakers revise definitions when product tech blurs old lines. Here, compressed air replaces gunpowder, but the result can still be deadly. Supporters point to that real-world harm and to federal gaps. They want the same checks used for firearms to apply when power crosses a lethal line. Skeptics see mission creep and fear that familiar backyard gear will face strict rules and government lists, despite long legal use by hobbyists.

This tension feeds a wider concern about trust in government. Many Americans on the right and left doubt Washington’s judgment and priorities. They worry that leaders reach for new rules while failing at core tasks like enforcing existing laws and targeting criminals. Garrett’s Law tests that trust. If it is narrow and data-driven, it may win quiet support. If it sweeps in common, lower-risk airguns, it will look like another case of leaders regulating first and listening later.

Key Practical Questions Congress Must Answer

Congress must settle three issues before this idea can stand. First, which power level makes an airgun “lethal” in clear, testable terms? Second, how will sellers and owners meet serial number and record duties without crushing small retailers? Third, how will the federal government treat millions of existing airguns that may cross any new line? Mullin’s release lays out the intent. The hard work now is drawing bright lines with evidence and narrow scope.