Hearing on imitation-firearm labeling draws industry opposition
January 19, 2026 | Legislative Sessions, Washington
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
OLYMPIA, Wash. — On Jan. 19 the Senate Law and Justice Committee considered SB 5375, a bill to establish state-level standards for labeling imitation firearms, including BB and pellet devices, and to prohibit alterations of federally mandated markings.
Staff counsel said federal law already requires bright-orange muzzle identifiers on many imitation firearms, but the bill goes further by defining imitation firearms to include BB devices and toy guns that a reasonable person could mistake for a real firearm, prohibiting alteration to markings, imposing misdemeanor and civil penalties and requiring advisory labeling that warns buyers that the product could be mistaken for a firearm.
Sen. Phil Sondland, sponsor, said the bill was prompted by a Northgate Mall incident in which an airsoft gun contributed to a fatal shooting, and said California-style markings and color coding could reduce accidental shootings. "Real-looking toy guns may be a small part of the problem of violence in our society, but it is a part of the problem that we can solve today," Sondland said.
Opponents included the NRA's legislative arm, firearm trainers who use laser training pistols (SIRT devices), competitive shooters and firearm clubs. Evian Klein (NRA-ILA) and Jane Melhans, a firearms instructor, warned the bill is overbroad, could keep training products out of Washington, and may be circumvented by malicious actors using paint. The Washington State Rifle and Pistol Association said existing federal regulation is sufficient and raised concerns about competitive and training impacts.
No committee votes were recorded; the record shows organized opposition from firearm and sporting communities and statements from the sponsor emphasizing public-safety motivations. Committee members asked staff for clarifications on some definitions (for example, whether laser-only trainer pistols without projectiles would be covered).
Next steps: staff will follow up on definition questions and stakeholders signaled willingness to pursue technical amendments.
Staff counsel said federal law already requires bright-orange muzzle identifiers on many imitation firearms, but the bill goes further by defining imitation firearms to include BB devices and toy guns that a reasonable person could mistake for a real firearm, prohibiting alteration to markings, imposing misdemeanor and civil penalties and requiring advisory labeling that warns buyers that the product could be mistaken for a firearm.
Sen. Phil Sondland, sponsor, said the bill was prompted by a Northgate Mall incident in which an airsoft gun contributed to a fatal shooting, and said California-style markings and color coding could reduce accidental shootings. "Real-looking toy guns may be a small part of the problem of violence in our society, but it is a part of the problem that we can solve today," Sondland said.
Opponents included the NRA's legislative arm, firearm trainers who use laser training pistols (SIRT devices), competitive shooters and firearm clubs. Evian Klein (NRA-ILA) and Jane Melhans, a firearms instructor, warned the bill is overbroad, could keep training products out of Washington, and may be circumvented by malicious actors using paint. The Washington State Rifle and Pistol Association said existing federal regulation is sufficient and raised concerns about competitive and training impacts.
No committee votes were recorded; the record shows organized opposition from firearm and sporting communities and statements from the sponsor emphasizing public-safety motivations. Committee members asked staff for clarifications on some definitions (for example, whether laser-only trainer pistols without projectiles would be covered).
Next steps: staff will follow up on definition questions and stakeholders signaled willingness to pursue technical amendments.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
