District of Columbia citizens, whether they wish to own handguns or not, should have the rudimentary knowledge needed to understand the new Firearms Control Emergency Amendment Act of 2008. That law is about guns, so you should know a few things about them.
The DC gun law allows qualified adults to register and own revolvers. DC handgun law continues to forbid semiautomatic (auto-loading) pistols.
Click the video to see how the 97-year-old semiautomatic design works (if the firearm is well-maintained).
Did you notice there was already a round in the firing chamber when the magazine (ammunition supply) was inserted? Some people don’t; if they live, you see them limping around or at the graves of friends and relatives.
See how the magazine holds seven rounds, and empty ones can quickly be replaced? People who do not practice markmanship think this will compensate for their bad aim, and end up spraying their houses and neighborhoods with wild shots and bodies, if they don’t maim or kill themselves first.
Most semiautomatic handguns are sold with magazines that have a capacity of seven to thirteen rounds. The DC code* continues to classify weapons that have a capacity of 12 rounds or more as machine guns, and forbids civilian ownership of them. Gun enthusiasts think it is unfair to place semiautomatic pistols, full-automatic firearms (machine guns or sub-machine guns), and assault weapons (high-capacity rifles and carbines, full-automatic or not), in the same category.
Here’s why DC does so. There is a vigorous aftermarket in expanded-capacity pistol magazines. For $20 to $40, semiautomatic handguns can be outfitted with magazines that hold as many as 33 rounds.
33-round capacity Scherer magazine for all Glock 9MM pistols.
Use of high-capacity magazines ideally involves small adjustments to the firearm, but these are not needed for operation.
The DC gun law allows qualified adults to register and own revolvers. Revolvers have a capacity of five or six rounds before they must be reloaded, clearly adequate for home protection. Expended shell casings must be removed before new ammunition is inserted.
Modern revolvers operate by “double-action”: depressing the trigger rotates a fresh round into place and draws back the hammer before dropping it, allowing rapid fire. The hammer may also be thumbed back manually for “single action” fire, which is generally more accurate, but care must be taken to avoid unintentional firing in this position.
To repeat: the DC gun law allows qualified adults to register and own revolvers. Civilian ownership of registered revolvers is legal for home protection in the District of Columbia. Civilian ownership of semiautomatic firearms is not.
Issues of gun security, the one-gun-per-person limit, ballistic ID registration, and gun possession outside of the home will all be questioned, but the ban on civilian semiautomatic handgun ownership is likely to be the first provision of the District of Columbia gun law to be challenged.
————————————-
*(10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:
(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;
(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.
District of Columbia Official Code
DC ST § 7-2501.01 [formerly cited as C ST 1981 § 6-2302]
District of Columbia Official Code 2001 Edition Division I. Government of District. Title 7. Human Health Care and Safety. (Refs & Annos),Subtitle J. Public Safety., Chapter 25. Firearms Control. Unit A. Firearms Control Regulations. Subchapter I. General Provisions. (Refs & Annos) § 7-2501.01. Definitions.
NotionsCapital 
July 16, 2008 at 10:16 am
Great post! I have linked to this at The DC Feed.
July 16, 2008 at 11:46 am
[…] NotionsCapital Ideas on Events and Culture from Washington, DC « DC Gun Law 101 for Non-Gunners […]
July 16, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Great article!
Well, outside of the outright lies, misinformation, and general hysterics, which pretty much sums up the entire article.
Yes, I noticed the round in the chamber, it’s how I carry my pistol. It’s pretty safe too being that accidental deaths by firearm are rare (in fact, only accidental poisoning by gas and “All Other” rank below firearms). Do people accidentally shoot themselves from time to time? About the same number of people who cut themselves with kitchen knives or slam fingers in the door. A firearm comes with a risk of injury just like any tool in your garage. That’s no reason to ban table saws and claw hammers.
Now, magazines. You assert that people who use higher capacity magazines do so to ‘spray’. You seem to consider 12 rounds as ‘too high’. If so, why do you allow the police to carry them? Because they have some magical training? You need to look up the hit percentage from ANY shootout involving cops. You’ll find they need the increased capacity because, wouldn’t you know it, shooting while moving and / or being shot at isn’t easy. Why should non-police be subjected to less?
Finally, for someone who wrote some pretty technical “here’s how a gun works”, you’re flat out lying when you say it’s simple to modify a gun to full auto, especially when you show a Glock 18 (a firearm that is MADE in full auto) as ‘proof’ that it can be done.
So, being that you have to lie and twist to get your point across, don’t you think maybe you’re on the wrong side of the argument. A 200 round drum magazine on a pistol in my hands poses no threat to the safety of the community. A .22 revolver with only 2 loaded chambers in the hands of a thug is a threat.
But it’s easier to attack the innocent, isn’t it?
July 16, 2008 at 1:39 pm
So, that video you linked to with the fully automatic Glocks? Those aren’t semi-automatic Glocks modified to fire on full auto…those are Glock 18s, which are made to fire full auto and are generally illegal, and are certainly already illegal in Washington, DC.
In fact, it’s quite difficult to modify a semi-automatic firearm to fire fully-automatic, and without fail it is illegal to perform such a modification.
July 16, 2008 at 1:39 pm
So these rules will only effect the citizens that obey the law.
How many of the gang bangers will give up their semi auto machineguns
;-}?
No wonder the US of A is going down the tubes (Just look at the Capitol City)
By the way there are people that can fire & reload a revolver faster than most people can shoot a semi-auto
July 16, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Did you notice there was already a round in the firing chamber when the magazine (ammunition supply) was inserted? Some people don’t; if they live, you see them limping around or at the graves of friends and relatives.
See how the magazine holds seven rounds, and empty ones can quickly be replaced? People who do not practice markmanship think this will compensate for their bad aim, and end up spraying their houses and neighborhoods with wild shots and bodies, if they don’t maim or kill themselves first.
So, you don’t like semi-automatic handguns, hence those of us who own them and do practice good safety and marksmanship should be prohibited from owning them as well as the idiots?
You don’t think very highly of your fellow citizens, do you?
July 16, 2008 at 3:32 pm
This is such a badly written, bureaucratically invasive and and obviously restrictive law – is it DC’s intention to simply inspire further lawsuits in order to keep lawyers employed? Since the “Gun Ban” has had no effect on crime except to increase it, why continue with an obviously failed policy?
July 16, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Ahab:
Thank you for the correction; I will delete that video ASAP — substitute this one, a Glock 17 full-auto conversion with a 100-round drum and some advertisements for illegal full-auto conversions.
The chief thrust of the post — and DC law — is that semiautomatic handguns can easily carry more than 12 rounds.
July 16, 2008 at 6:55 pm
“The chief thrust of the post — and DC law — is that semiautomatic handguns can easily carry more than 12 rounds.”
And what’s the big deal with that? What’s the magazine capacity of DC cops? Secret Service? Military Police? Private Security?
13-16 round capacity tends to be pretty standard in the world. Why? It makes the gun more effective. If you’re thinking “More Effective for Crime”, well crime is already illigal, and there are scads of Illigal guns on the streets of DC as is. Not like these people thought much of the law when they were shooting eachother…..you’d be a fool to think they’ll suddenly trade in their black-market semi-autos for revolvers now that the law has changed.
People who bother with the law aren’t suddenly going to start breaking it…let them have effective tools for personal defence.
July 16, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Ahab,
Thanks for getting the facts out, not that Mike seems to let them get in the way.
July 16, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Mike,
To me, as a somewhat average reader, this weblog post of yours certainly does not seem to have that as its primary “thrust”. However, I will accept that for the sake of argument.
That said, why is it such a bad thing for semiautomatic handguns to be capable of carrying more than 12 rounds? A firearm capable of doing so, despite an erroneous DC law, is not a “machine gun”. For a gun to be a “machine gun”, it would have to be capable of automatic fire, and automatic weapons are heavily regulated and controlled. Also, as Ahab already pointed out, it is not nearly as easy to make a semiautomatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon as some people would have you believe – feel free to do your own research on that matter, though. What I am working towards, however, is that magazine size does not make something an automatic weapon, so that fallacy can be discarded immediately.
Next up, rounds needed for self defense. Nothing personal, but you hardly seem like an expert on self-defense, and certainly not someone to tell someone else exactly how many rounds they do or do not need in order to defend themselves and their family. What would happen if the defender in question was faced with more than six assailants and only had a six-round revolver? Or, suppose he is not 100% accurate in a high-stress, high-speed, high-risk environment (who can really claim to be?) and he misses a few times against multiple assailants? Do you really want the guilt on your conscience that someone was killed, his family was killed, his children were killed, all because he was too busy trying to reload a cumbersome, technologically behind-the-curve revolver?
Finally, yes, now DC law allows for the keeping of handguns in homes for self-defense. However, if my understanding of that new law is correct, the guns in question must be disassembled (if possible, in the case of revolvers), locked, and unloaded during most of their life. Then, during self-defense situations, those firearms can be employed. I may be overstating things a bit, but I doubt any person can unlock, reassemble, load, and employ almost any firearm to be useful in a self-defense situation – after all, when the guy is already in your house, or banging down your door, or so forth, seconds count, and that whole process will take quite a few. As such, please explain to me how the current DC law meets the letter or the spirit of the Supreme Court ruling… because, so far as I can tell, it fails quite miserably. Also, given that Justice Scalia specifically cited the semi-automatic pistol as the most prevalent self-defense weapon of our time, it would seem the new DC law fails on multiple counts.
All this said, given that I know of multiple people leaving multiple comments on this particular post, and none of them yet seeing the light of day, I fully expect this particular comment to disappear in a similar fashion. After all, you cannot have someone pointing out the shortcomings of, problems with, and fallacies in your arguments – it might weaken your already limp position.
July 16, 2008 at 9:16 pm
and revolvers can easily fire just as fast as semi autos…
now if a champ can do this in under 3 seconds, how long does someone that is merely proficient take? perhaps 6 or 8?
and the guy in the video is doing it in controlled fire and accuracy, imagine if he was a gang banger that didnt really care about aim?
furthermore…
your argument that semi-atuos should be banned because they can be easily modified to become full auto… is like saying that honda’s should be banned because they can easily be turned into race cars…
interestingly enough, my most accurate rifle is considered a machine gun by DC (and an assault rifle in NJ)… what is is?
a .22 rifle that was sold in sears catalogs in the mid 1950s… yup, that 17 round tube mag makes it a more dangerous weapon somehow…
of course, the DC ban also includes things like this collectors item… because it COULD be equipped with a 32 round drum… never mind that the drums are almost impossible to get and that anyone actually buying one wouldn’t dare spend that much to actually use one in a crime ($1000 +)…
July 16, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Weer’d Beard:
And what’s the big deal with that?
Simply this: It is the law:
(10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:
(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;
(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.
District of Columbia Official Code
DC ST § 7-2501.01 [formerly cited as C ST 1981 § 6-2302]
Don’t like the law of the District of Columbia? You are welcome to move here, establish residency, register to vote, and elect representatives who share your views. Just don’t bring any semiautomatics.
July 16, 2008 at 10:28 pm
your argument that semi-atuos should be banned,
Chris: Civilian ownership of semiautomatics is banned in the District of Columbia. It is not “my argument;” it is the law:
10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:
(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;
(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.
District of Columbia Official Code
DC ST § 7-2501.01 [formerly cited as C ST 1981 § 6-2302]
Don’t like the law of the District of Columbia? You are welcome to move here, establish residency, register to vote, and elect representatives who share your views. Just don’t bring any semiautomatics.
July 16, 2008 at 10:34 pm
why is it such a bad thing for semiautomatic handguns to be capable of carrying more than 12 rounds?
Linoge:
It is the law:
(10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:
(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;
(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.
District of Columbia Official Code
DC ST § 7-2501.01 [formerly cited as C ST 1981 § 6-2302]
Don’t like the law of the District of Columbia? You are welcome to move here, establish residency, register to vote, and elect representatives who share your views. Just don’t bring any semiautomatics.
P.S.: Sorry it took me three hours to get back to the computer and these comments. Wait — how did you know others were commenting? Is this that vast conspiracy I’ve heard about? -ml
July 16, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Madrocketscientist:
You missed the revolver safety flaw I mentioned. You know full well that the unknown chambered round is the major safety hazard in handling semiautomatics.
People in DC don’t , because they don’t own pistols, do they? They don’t know the varieties of handguns and which the law allows. They are the audience for this post, as stated in the first sentence.
My affections for either type of firearm is not at issue (actually I think Free Pistols are cool). Current DC law forbids civilian ownership of semiautomatic firearms:
(10) “Machine gun” means any firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot:
(A) Automatically, more than 1 shot by a single function of the trigger;
(B) Semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.
District of Columbia Official Code
DC ST § 7-2501.01 [formerly cited as C ST 1981 § 6-2302]
Don’t like the law of the District of Columbia? You are welcome to move here, establish residency, register to vote, and elect representatives who share your views. Just don’t bring any semiautomatics.
July 16, 2008 at 11:08 pm
The Duck:
Pardon me for asking, but — huh?
July 16, 2008 at 11:15 pm
DirtCrashr:
I am the only non-lawyer on my block in DC, and I couldn’t agree more about the language of the law — it is stilted and dense as a result of the push and pull of deliberation by elected representatives.
That said, it is the law.
Don’t like the law of the District of Columbia? You are welcome to move here, establish residency, register to vote, and elect representatives who share your views. Just don’t bring any semiautomatics with you.
July 16, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Robb Allen:
I regret the error and have removed the full-auto video from this post. Rats. It was a great video, too. There are plenty of people selling full-auto conversion kits for Glocks, and I suppose I could include those, but that is not important. The 12-round limit is.
As stated in the the first sentence of this post, this is written for the people of the District of Columbia. Starting tomorrow, for the first time in decades, they may legally register revolvers to keep in their homes. If they cannot distinguish between revolvers (legal) and semiautomatic pistols (not legal), the registration process will be even more complicated than it is sure to be. I have mentiond one major safety flaw in each design, the ones that are learned in the first five minutes of any safety course (right after”don’t wave it aound” and “the range master is God”).
As for the prohibition of civilian ownership of semiautomatic handguns, it is the law. Don’t like the laws of the District of Columbia? You are welcome to move here, establish residency, register to vote, and elect representatives who share your views. Just don’t bring any semiautomatics with you.
July 17, 2008 at 6:00 am
I’d like to see these “full-auto conversion kits for Glocks”
BTW have you actully READ the Heller ruling? I belive you are citing a DC law that was covered in the ruling.
July 17, 2008 at 8:30 am
“There are plenty of people selling full-auto conversion kits for Glocks, and I suppose I could include those, but that is not important.”
It’s not important because nobody is selling them. It’s illegal.
I really like the whole “IT’S
July 17, 2008 at 8:35 am
(sorry hit the wrong button)
I really like the whole “IT’S THE LAW!!!” tirade as if denying blacks access to water fountains was OK before because, well, IT WAS THE LAW!!!
Turns out, the DC law is wrong. Heller affirmed what we’ve known all along. You cannot ban entire classes of firearms, semi-autos included. So regardless of how many times you want to chant that phrase, the law has been proven wrong. Get used to it because, as you’ve stated, it will be challenged and it will be overturned.
July 17, 2008 at 9:58 am
Weer’d Beard Says:
BTW have you actully READ the Heller ruling?
Yes. It is based on one-hundred-percent pure sophistry.
I belive you are citing a DC law that was covered in the ruling.
The regulation is in plain English in the DC Code, and could have been specified and struck down in the SCOTUS ruling. It was not.
July 17, 2008 at 10:13 am
Robb Allen says: nobody is selling them [full-auto conversion kits for Glocks]. It’s illegal.
See Les Jones’ commentary on this other Youtube video (I was going to post the one he mentions, but the other is better cinematically). And see this video.
Then Google “full-auto conversion” AND “Glocks” like I did. You can find books, plans, kits, etc., all with warnings that using them is illegal.
It is also illegal to have a 33-round capacity 9MM pistol magazine shipped to DC — but not to VA or MD or another 40-odd states.
Heller affirmed what we’ve known all along.
That Justice Scalia was on the rifle team in high school?
You cannot ban entire classes of firearms, semi-autos included.
Machineguns? Howitzers? Mortars? Bazookas? Just for home defense, of course.
So regardless of how many times you want to chant that phrase, the law has been proven wrong.
The regulation in question is in plain English in the DC code. It could have been specified and struck down in the SCOTUS ruling. It was not.
Get used to it because, as you’ve stated, it will be challenged and it will be overturned.
That’s right. It will be challenged by someone with the legal standing to do so — a resident of the District of Columbia who feels his or her rights have been infinged.
Of course, you could always move here, establish residency, try to register a machine pistol . . . .
July 17, 2008 at 10:50 am
Of course, you could always move here, establish residency, try to register a machine pistol . . . .
No thanks…I prefer to live in a city (and state) that recognizes (or is forced by state law to recognize) its citizens’ rights to defend themselves against violent criminals…and has half the rate of violent crime (with very similar population statistics) as a result.
But your post served one very important purpose: You poignantly pointed out exactly how stupid DCs laws are. They had so few rational arguments to justify the law that they had to manufacture a brand new definition of “machine gun” out of whole cloth in order to justify their position.
Hey, if some overzealous city council decides to redefine “murder” to include “looking at someone funny” does that automatically make the redefinition valid or true?
I won’t bother destroying your “it is the law” rationalization…Robb Allen covered that one very effectively.
I assume that means, after DC is sued (again) and is forced to change the law to something a bit more rational and in keeping with the US Constitution, you will fully and completely support it. Because…you know…it [will be] the law and all.
July 17, 2008 at 10:53 am
Machineguns? Howitzers? Mortars? Bazookas? Just for home defense, of course.
But it’s Scalia who’s guilty of sophistry.
OK.
Project much?
July 17, 2008 at 11:59 am
You know full well that the unknown chambered round is the major safety hazard in handling semiautomatics.
Not if you follow the four rules of gun safety, the first one being “All guns are always loaded”
July 17, 2008 at 11:48 am
“The regulation is in plain English in the DC Code, and could have been specified and struck down in the SCOTUS ruling. It was not.”
Actully nothing was Spesifically struck down at all. The ruling stated bans on classes of weapons was unconstitutional, but restrictions on arms “not in common use” can be seen as permissable.
Maybe you should read the ruling again and leave your bias at home.
July 17, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Mike Licht Says:
July 16, 2008 at 11:07 pm
—SNIP—
People in DC don’t [know handgun safety issues], because they don’t own pistols, do they? They don’t know the varieties of handguns and which the law allows. They are the audience for this post, as stated in the first sentence.
—SNIP—
No, the LAW-ABIDING people in DC don’t own pistols, but the CRIMINALS sure do! As evidenced by the too-high murder rate using handguns that all the gun control laws in the city have FAILED to lower.
I think the Mayor should be arrested (along with all the other co-conspirators in the city government) for denying DC residents their civil right to self-defense.
…Or at least tarred and feathered…
…Orygunner…
July 17, 2008 at 12:08 pm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/17/AR2008071700621.html
This might turn out VERY interesting, appears the the gun Heller requested to register and was denied, triggering the lawsuit was a .45 Semi-auto (I have a 10-shot revolver myself and I use it only for training, and wouldn’t trust it as a personal defence weapon, I suspect his 9-holer is, like mine, a .22LR)
I’ll keep you posted.
July 17, 2008 at 1:42 pm
It’s OK for a “Law” to be unconstitutional, have a poll-tax and eligibility requirements, and be handicapped-discriminatory – it’s providing legal-work for Lawyers who defend the obviously misshapen regurgitation of legalese as “Law.”
July 17, 2008 at 2:05 pm
That’s right. It will be challenged by someone with the legal standing to do so — a resident of the District of Columbia who feels his or her rights have been infinged.
Of course, you could always move here, establish residency, try to register a machine pistol . . . .
——————————————–
That is right. I am a DC resident, will try to register my 9mm Beretta (machine gun according to the incompetent DC government), and challenge them.
The DC Government is ridiculous.
July 17, 2008 at 2:40 pm
Rustmeister Says: Not if you follow the four rules of gun safety, the first one being “All guns are always loaded”
DC citizens have the first opportuniy in 32 years to legally have handguns in their homes. Before they register a weapon they need to know which types there are and which are legal under existing DC law as it stands in this moment in time.
People who do not own firearms yet do not know the rules of firearms safety. DC residents will need to pass a written safety test to register.
If it were up to me they would have to take a mandatory safety class and qualify at the range twice a year.
July 17, 2008 at 2:42 pm
Orygunner: Do you have a point?
July 17, 2008 at 2:44 pm
TM says: I am a DC resident, will try to register my 9mm Beretta (machine gun according to the incompetent DC government), and challenge them.
Bring a lawyer; get a reciept for your impounded 9mm, and best of luck in Federal Court and Federal Appeals Court.
July 17, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Mr. Licht:
And, if were up to me, you would be required to take a mandatory civics class and qualify at a an approved typing safety course twice a year before you could get government permission to publish your ideas. Registration of your typewriter/word processor/computer with the word police would be a reasonable restriction as well. Dangerous ideas have resulted in more cruelty and death than guns. “Reasonable” restrictions should apply to their publication, yes?
But that would be an abridgment of your 1st Amendment rights.
The Supremes have ruled the 2nd Amendment means what it says:
“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Be well,
gnholb
July 17, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Mike,
Bring a lawyer; get a reciept for your impounded 9mm, and best of luck in Federal Court and Federal Appeals Court.
___-
I am a lawyer and my gun will not be impounded jackass.
July 17, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Did you notice there was already a round in the firing chamber when the magazine (ammunition supply) was inserted? Some people don’t; if they live, you see them limping around or at the graves of friends and relatives.
…
Seriously?
There’s already a round in the chamber in that video because it’s a LOOPING FLASH ANIMATION intended to demonstrate how the weapon works from a mechanical standpoint.
Furthermore, it’s interesting that having a round chambered in a semi-auto is “bad” but having one chambered in a revolver is “perfectly fine”.
The example given in that vid only applies to one design in particular. Glock handguns, for example, which are mentioned later in the post – do not share that design.
Finally, the law designating all semi-autos as machine guns is clearly not just about magazine capacity. If it were, the law could simply ban 30rd magazines.
In other words, if DC were only allowed to ban oranges, they would begin referring to apples as an “orange”.
July 17, 2008 at 8:38 pm
r2streu says: Do you honestly believe that people who break into homes really love the new law?
Yes I do because, unlike you, I know that the vast majority of urban burglaries occur during the daytime, when homes are empty. In fact, many burglaries occur between 3:30PM and 5:00PM — kids break in on the way home from school — this is true in affluent suburbs, too.
With handguns carelessly strewn about — I mean conveniently within reach in case the fantasy home invaders from Mars show up — children, teens, and burglars will be well-armed in no time. Some will just sell weapons to real bad guys, some will graduate to robbery with violence themselves, some — especially the younger ones — will inadvertently shoot themselves or their friends and family.
July 17, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Notice:
Dick A. Heller of Capitol Hill brought a lawyer to DC Police HQ and asked if he could register his 1911 (stored in Maryland). He was told he could not.
I expect he will sue regarding the “revolver only” regulation.
See http://www.examiner.com/a-1492933~DC_residents_start_applying_for_gun_permits.html
That being the case, further comments are superfluous, and comments on this post are now closed.
Thank you for your participation, gentlemen.