Dems Now Want Gun Control for Air Rifles

In the 1983 film A Christmas Story, all young Ralphie wants under the tree is an official Red Ryder carbine-action 200-shot range model air rifle. But everyone from his mother to his teacher and even a department store Santa has the same response: “You’ll shoot your eye out, kid.” Rep. Kevin Mullin (D-CA) turned 13 that year, and the film must have had an impact. Now he’s pushing a bill to have “lethal air rifles” regulated by the Gun Control Act as if they were firearms. Because when it comes to Democrats and gun control, too much is clearly never enough.

Air Rifles – Next Target in the Never-Ending March of ‘Progress’

The Bill of Rights explicitly protects the right to keep and bear arms. The idea was so important to the Founding Fathers that it became the Second Amendment. Only the First Amendment protections of speech, general expression, and religious belief took greater priority.

There is no such right guaranteed in the founding documents for tax-funded health care, voting, citizenship for illegal aliens, or abortion. Yet many Democrats and other so-called progressives of the American left in general champion these causes and strive to suppress the right to keep and bear arms any time they can find an excuse to do so. All the while, they move the goalposts of what the wording means and say they “respect the Second Amendment, but …” 

Mullin is no different. And now he’s pushing a gun control measure that could have come from the lyrics of “People Will Die!” – a political parody song written by libertarian Remy Munasifi.

Free with the Daily Briefing

85Essays

Unravel the Constitution

Hamilton, Madison & Jay’s complete case for America, free and searchable in the Publius Reader.

Join Free & Read

Free with the Daily Briefing. Unsubscribe anytime.

The Sept. 25 bill announcement on Mullin’s House page reads: “Modern airguns can be powerful enough to cause serious injury or death, yet face far fewer safeguards than traditional firearms simply because they use compressed air instead of gunpowder.” It added: “To close this dangerous gap, Rep. Kevin Mullin (CA-15) introduced Garrett’s Law today after one of his constituents lost her son to suicide involving a high-powered airgun.”

The California Democrat went on to explain that Garrett Edwards, who had struggled with mental health issues during the pandemic and was prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, bought an air rifle and ended his own life with it. Mullin called the fact that air rifles aren’t regulated like firearms a “loophole” that has caused “irreparable and, in some cases, fatal harm.” He went on to quote Garrett’s mother – who was, understandably, distraught: “Garrett’s Law represents every person’s right to be protected from a needless death.”

The bill is backed by such gun control giants as March for Our Lives and Giffords. No surprise there.

Gun Control Is People Control – Not Safety

There are a few problems with Mullin’s idea – call it logic, if you will. First, just how many air rifle deaths are there? For reliable annual data on related matters, the FBI tracks crime data and the CDC tracks causes of death by firearm. The same is not true for air rifles. Still, there are some numbers, dated though they are. According to a 2004 report in Pediatrics, there were a total of 39 “nonpowder gun deaths” between 1990 and 2000. Can a “high-power air rifle” take a life? Yes. Do they? Extremely rarely. The bill would restrict guns shooting .177 caliber pellets at 800 feet per second or faster, .22 caliber pellets at 500 fps, or .25 caliber at 450 fps; it would even allow the attorney general to add others. 

Why are there so few deaths, despite millions of such air rifles being sold each year? Because they lack the power to be reliably lethal.*  Only about 4% of air gun injuries are estimated to even require hospitalization. Again, only 39 deaths in a decade.

Then there’s the suicide angle. The National Rifle Association argues in its criticism of the bill that the man would have found some other way to kill himself if he couldn’t get an air rifle. While we can’t know that for certain, it does make sense. As someone who was prohibited from acquiring firearms (for reasons not reported), Garrett bought an air rifle. The congressman’s narrative certainly suggests he bought it only to end his life. We don’t know that either, as no other report seems to explicitly say he shot himself with it or that he did so immediately after buying it. Either way, suicide is a personal choice, which, oddly enough, is considered an individual right by the left so long as it isn’t done with a gun.

Interestingly, Democrats seem to want to ban or restrict to save lives only when it comes to firearms. The latest from the CDC shows that, in 2024, firearm homicides were down about 14% from the previous year to 15,364. Firearm suicides rose to a record high of 27,593. These numbers are tragic, but again, one could argue that those who opt out would do so by some other method if a gun weren’t available.

From Liberty Nation News, Trivia, Facts, Check Us Out Stay informed. Today’s news, the Constitution and American history, written for young readers. Visit GenerationLiberty.com

As Liberty Nation News’ Joe Schaeffer recently reported, progressive Democrats are perfectly fine with suicide as long as it isn’t via a gun. In fact, now in the Empire State, you can pay about 12 grand to have assisted suicide in your own home. It’s regulated, for now, but as our neighbor to the north proves, that doesn’t last long. As well, according to abortion advocate Guttmacher Institute, more than a million unborn children are legally aborted each year. Not only do Democrats generally not oppose that either, but, in fact, they openly champion it.

Now let’s look at some other causes of death. In April 2026, NHTSA reported that 39,254 people died in auto accidents in 2024 – yet cars aren’t illegal. While it isn’t tracked annually, a 2016 report by Johns Hopkins estimates a quarter million deaths a year by medical mistake. Do we ban doctors? Of course not. There are a great many things that kill far more people each year than the criminal use of firearms – or air rifles – yet a look at the common talking points and the party’s official platform shows that Democrats want to ban none of those and, in fact, actively defend some as fundamental human rights. Why is it that life only seems to be precious when it’s threatened by guns?

And, of course, there’s no such thing as enough gun control. No matter how much they claim to respect the Second Amendment, Democrats always push for more. Again, it calls to mind “People Will Die!” by Remy.

To quote the song regarding a proposal for a 4 mph speed limit: “Traffic deaths have many crying with fear. Over 30,000 people are dying each year. This modest change I propose must be applied. Unless, of course, you just want people to die!” In a later verse dedicated to a two-helmet law, he explains: “Those car deaths I mentioned are terrible stuff. It just doesn’t seem that one seatbelt’s ever enough.”

Gun deaths really are terrible stuff – but when it comes to gun control, for Democrats, too much is never enough.

*Author’s Note: Many years ago, this author personally shot the same squirrel three times with a .177 air rifle rated at 1200 fps before the tree rat died. Yes, the first two pellets missed vital areas – but I thought I had missed entirely until I found the other two pellets just under the skin upon butchering the animal. For such a shot to be fatal to a human is exceedingly rare.