I’m going to dive into what’s actually happening in Washington DC right now. See, high-capacity magazines are illegal high-capacity. They’re a scary word. But they’re illegal under DC law. But the U.S. Attorney’s Office says it will no longer prosecute people charged under that law, calling the law itself unconstitutional. But what does this mean for gun owners? Well, what does it mean for constitutional rights? How about what it means for public safety? Alright, stick around, because this is a complex topic. We know where we stand, but what’s going on in DC matters right now. Also, a quick thanks to our sponsor, CMMG, makers of quality 22 and centerfire long tools, shush tubes, and precision parts.

They’re built by folks who believe that our right to keep and bear arms is paramount. More on them at the end of the video. But first, in Washington DC, they’ve had a law in the books for about 17 years now banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, because that 11th round makes you John Wick, and that’s a no-no. If a magazine holds more than 10, it’s considered high-capacity, and thus illegal under the DC law. Unconstitutional. Now, city officials have long argued that high-capacity magazines are particularly deadly. Mass shootings, lots of ammunition expended rapidly.

These are their terms that they use, and the logic is that limiting that capacity can reduce the lethality of shootings. No. Antigone experts at unconstitutional places like John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, you heard the name. Well, they’ve been claiming there’s a link between high-capacity magazines and increased fatalities in shootings. Also, DC has criminalized the simple possession of such magazines, even if there’s no crime beyond just holding that mag itself. Our arrests and prosecutions, as well as convictions, have followed over the years since they’ve instituted this unconstitutional law. But enter Judge Jeanine Pirro, now US Attorney for DC.

Her office just informed the court that they will no longer charge people for carrying high-capacity magazines alone. They’re calling the DC law banning those magazines unconstitutional. In one case, Tyree Benson was convicted in 2023 for possession of an illegal handgun and a 31-round magazine. Now, Pirro’s office is seeking to vacate that conviction right now, arguing that the statute regarding high-capacity magazines is no longer valid under the Second Amendment. It never was. Not sure about her position on the so-called illegal gun yet, but if I find out more, I’ll let you know, so stay tuned. But from a 2A perspective, this is a big deal.

The Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruins says that gun laws must align with the Constitution as well as historical tradition of firearms regulation in America. And if it can’t be justified by precedent, then courts should tend to strike them down. Should tend to. And DC’s ban on high-capacity magazines was upheld in 2024 by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit when challenged. But that was before this change in policy from the DOJ. Now, here are a few reasons why this policy change is positive. These are obvious, but sometimes they need to be said.

Number one is protecting constitutional rights. If the law violates the Second Amendment under modern Supreme Court precedent, it’s important that prosecutors not enforce unconstitutional laws. They have that decision. They have the ability to do that. And enforcing it would perpetuate right violations. And number two, clarity for gun owners, right? Like right now, there’s confusion about what is legal and what’s not when you cross a fake dotted line on a map. And a whole lot of people who own standard-capacity magazines are perhaps unaware of local laws as they travel. If prosecutors no longer enforce these unconstitutional laws, well, that would reduce the risk of criminal penalties for otherwise law-abiding Americans.

Number three is limiting prosecutorial overreach. Now, the power to decide what to prosecute is huge. And when that power is used to enforce arguably unconstitutional laws, say that, arguably, it can lead to injustices, especially for people who may not have the resources to challenge the law or the charges. Number four is focus on real threats. Like if law enforcement resources are limited, then the argument should be we should prioritize prosecuting violent crime and serious offenses rather than criminalizing magazine ownership. Of course, you’re going to hear the public safety concerns or issues from the gun control side.

There are counter-arguments you’ll hear. Critics will say high-capacity magazines allow shooters to fire more rounds without reloading, which can lead to higher casualties. Well, there’s a sheriff in Texas who proved he can reload faster and shoot more with a 10-round mags. Homicide by gunshots is the leading cause of deaths in D.C., but not a single magazine did any of that. It’s the evil person, the evil within their heart that perpetuated those crimes, not an inanimate object. And even though DOJ is calling the statute unconstitutional, unless a court definitively rules it so, there’s legal uncertainty. Some individuals may still be at risk depending on who’s prosecuting and how courts interpret the individual case, meaning the next anti-American regime will flip the script quickly and start charging Americans with this unconstitutional law again.

So, what are the practical implications here? Well, convictions might be vacated. I mean, like Judge Pirro is doing with Tyree Benson’s case, and this could set precedent and lead to more challenges to similar convictions. Even if DOJ’s policy shift is good, like someone may challenge or seek to restore the law, courts may have to rule definitively if high-capacity magazines and bans on them are constitutional under the current court’s framework. Other jurisdictions with similar bans, there’s about 14 states, they’re watching this closely. Could DOJ’s policy influence how federal prosecutions happen elsewhere? Maybe. Could state courts be influenced by this decision, by this reasoning? I don’t know.

But gun owners in D.C. might feel safer carrying magazines over 10 rounds now. And as someone who strongly supports the Second Amendment, here’s what I think. Like, this change is long overdue, but we need the law struck down, not just a policy change. Laws that are unconstitutional need to be destroyed, challenged, and prosecutors should not enforce laws that undermine constitutional rights. If gun owners should stay informed, if you’re in D.C. or other areas with similar magazine bans, you should understand what your rights are, what the law you are currently is, and consult counsel if you believe you’re at risk.

Support organizations and legal actions that defend the Second Amendment. Litigation, public education, and political advocacy are huge, they’re essential. But stay engaged, more importantly, with your local officials, local state and federal, because they make these laws, and they vote to appoint these people to their offices, like Judge Janine. She had to be approved. If local law is out of step with constitutional law, then local reform really matters. Before I wrap up, I want to thank my sponsor, CMMG, for always supporting guns and gadgets. If you believe in quality, precision, and protecting your rights, these folks are worth knowing.

You should seek them out. Whether you’re looking for 22s, bigger chain rings, or just accessories done right with attention to detail, CMMG always delivers their craftsmanship and respect for the Second Amendment show. And as always, when you purchase from reliable manufacturers, it helps us ensure safety, accountability, and quality. And GMG 10 will make you smile there, too. Thanks to CMMG for always supporting what I do here, especially this important conversation around our unalienable right to keep in their arms. Remember, this is only affecting change of federal prosecutions in D.C. currently. The fight is not over.

Courts, local governments, and public safety advocates will continue to challenge and defend from opposite sides. If you found this video informative, then go ahead, please, and like the video and share it. And don’t forget to subscribe to Guns and Gadgets so you stay in the loop. Leave a comment on this question. What do you think? Is the high-capacity magazine ban justified or unconstitutional overreach? I think I know where you stand, but sound off below. Thanks for watching. Stay safe, know your rights, and I’ll see you on the next one. Stay free, America. [tr:trw].

See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.