Representative Robin Kelly (D-IL) introduced a bill to Congress last Monday that would place strict rules on the “marketing of firearms to children.” The bill, known as HR 5093 or the “Children’s Firearm Marketing Safety Act,” would allow the Federal Trade Commission to “prescribe rules prohibiting the marketing of firearms to children.”

The bill includes a number of specific restrictions, including prohibitions on “the use of cartoon characters to promote firearms and firearm products,” “firearm brand name merchandise marketed for children,” and “the manufacturing of a gun with colors or designs that are specifically designed with the purpose to appeal to children,” among other stipulations. It also mandates that guns “intended for use by children” be clearly labeled with “Real gun, not a toy,” “Actual firearm the use of which may result in death or serious bodily injury,” “Dangerous weapon,” or other language approved by the Federal Trade Commission.

Kelly appeared alongside Illinois Governor Pat Quinn recently when the governor announced his support for tougher gun laws in his state. At the press conference, Kelly reiterated her desire to see more gun control legislation passed on a federal level, despite heavy opposition to previous attempts at national gun control laws.

The bill has also been widely been criticized by gun rights advocates for what they see as ambiguous wording and broad reach. Popular political commentator and law professor Eugene Volokh even commented that the bill may be unconstitutional in several parts. Writing for The Washington Post, Volokh further stated that the labeling requirement in HR 5093 can in fact be dangerous.

“Most guns would still not be labeled. The more children learn ‘oh, there’s no ‘real gun’ label, this must be a toy,’ the more they will be at risk when they come across a normal gun,” Volokh wrote.

HR 5093 is currently under consideration by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Image screenshot of video by Early & Often | Politics on YouTube.

What's Your Reaction?

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

10 thoughts on “Bill Introduced to Limit “Marketing of Firearms” Toward Children

  1. Are you kidding me. I have never seen a ad that was aimed at children. This is another Lib attempt to subvert our 2A rights.

  2. Really? Are liberals that stupid? Marketing firearms to children? I am a firearms dealer and the last time I checked you had to be 18+ to buy a long gun and 21+ to buy a hand gun (in Wisconsin). When I was a kid I received as a gift my first real firearm at age 12 which is the legal age to hunt unattended in Wisconsin and yes I carried a high power rifle through the woods to hunt deer at age 12. A rifle far more powerful than the liberal-feared AR-15. Growing up we were taught not only to respect firearms but to respect other people. These are two things that liberals or to be more specific, Democrats are not teaching their children these days.

    1. Of course “Democrats are not teaching their children these days”…..You have forgotten…”It takes a village” to educate children. A cute notion that relieves parents of all responsibility to educate their children and abdicates that responsibility to government.

      “It takes a village” was ’92 or ’93 and look at what a fine job of educating children the government has done since. Test scores down and school shootings up.

      How’s that village thing working out for you now Hillary?????

  3. We as parents need to take it upon ourselves to teach kids responsibility and respect, not just with firearms but in life in general. That will transfer itself to firearms as long as they are taught to understand them and to use them the way they are intended.

  4. Nothing surprises me coming out of chicago,i mean illinois. Then “dangerous when moving” should be stamped on the hood and doors of every vehicle coming out of assembly plants all over the world

  5. I always vote for Democratic candidates, because they represent the totality of my views better than the other party. that said, this bill is really silly. Every issue is not a product safety issue that can be cured by plastering an object with warning labels. Targeting children for gun sales is simply a way of increasing the adult market for firearms, since children will not be buying their own firearms. It’s completely analogous to making guns with pink camouflage stocks and stacking them behind a sign that blares “tough enough to shoot pink guns” or some such bs. That sort of marketing arose to get women into buying their own guns instead of borrowing one of their husband’s (as I sometimes do) or one of their dad’s. It was all about increasing sales, not patting women on the back for being tough guys. Putting a cartoon character on a gun and having it sport a day-glo orange stock, or some such shenanigan, is betting that the strategy will make a kid whine for that particular firearm when they are in the sporting goods section of a discount store, and make them unwilling to happily accept their dad’s hand-me-down .22. As fewer and fewer Americans exhibit a true, abiding and life-long interest in the shooting sports, shooting sports related manufacturers feel they have to come up with something to keep going, and this is their latest brainstorm. As this country continues to lose middle class jobs, and as people continue to struggle, this is what the party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt concerns itself with. This is embarrassing. No, it’s worse than that, it’s quite frustrating and in fact, angering. The gov. of ILL should be campaigning for the legalization of street drugs, because that is the only way Chicago will see a reduction in gang related murders. Instead he is fretting over cartoon characters on gunstocks.

  6. So if it’s a cartoon, does it mean it’s aimed towards children? And what is classified as a cartoon today?
    So we can say Bart Simpson is a cartoon character by old standards of cartoons, but if a good graphic artist makes Bart Simpson more realists, is he still a cartoon?

  7. Yes liberals are all about controlling every aspect of life.Guns to children? duh? We must remember the second ammendment exists so citizens can protect themselves from tyranny by the government..Ohh our forefathers had great vision….

  8. Remember the communist paty that openly marched down 5th around the WW2 days? They are now called “Progressive Democrats”…isn’t that nice? And yes for evil to succeed good people have to do nothing , I miss the strong America and presidents with a large Testicular Fortitude that led the world.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *