District of Columbia Gun Laws

Silencing devices are prohibited outright with no federal-registration exception.

D.C. Code § 22-4514(a) (possession of certain dangerous weapons)

A short-barreled rifle cannot be registered, and unregistered possession is unlawful.

D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(3), (c)(1) (firearms not eligible for registration)

ATF stopped requiring NFA approval and registration for suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns and AOWs on October 9, 2026, but says the policy does not affect state or local law and that it cannot say whether an unregistered item counts as lawfully held under federal law for state-law purposes. The District's bans are absolute, so the enforcement-discretion question does not arise.

"ATF cannot opine on whether holding an unregistered firearm or silencer pursuant to ATF's enforcement discretion will qualify for state-law purposes as lawfully held (or registered) under federal law."

ATF Open Letter to All Federal Firearms Licensees and the Public, Oct. 9, 2026 (Director Robert Cekada), and the accompanying ATF FAQs

There is no permitless or constitutional carry in the District at any age. Public carry of a pistol requires an MPD concealed carry license, and mere possession of any firearm anywhere in the District — including at home — requires an MPD registration certificate. The narrow exceptions cover on-duty law enforcement and military, licensed dealers' inventory, non-residents passing through or attending a lawful shooting activity while transporting under § 22-4504.02, emergency temporary possession of a registrant's gun in the registrant's home or business, and students in a certified training class.

"no person or organization in the District shall possess or control any firearm, unless the person or organization holds a valid registration certificate for the firearm."

D.C. Code §§ 22-4504(a), 7-2502.01(a) statute

Carrying a pistol in the District without a license issued under District law is a felony punishable by up to 5 years outside the carrier's own home, business or land. The statute reaches open and concealed carry alike, so the MPD concealed carry license is the only lawful authority for public carry.

"No person shall carry within the District of Columbia either openly or concealed on or about their person, a pistol, without a license issued pursuant to District of Columbia law, or any deadly or dangerous weapon."

D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) statute

A concealed carry license applicant must be at least 21, must already hold an MPD registration certificate for the pistol to be carried, must not be disqualified on mental-health grounds, must complete at least 16 hours of instruction from an MPD-certified instructor covering safety, marksmanship, use of deadly force and District and federal law, and must complete at least 2 hours of range training with a 50-round qualification course at up to 15 yards. An in-person interview at MPD headquarters is mandatory.

"Has completed a firearms training course or combination of courses, conducted by an instructor (or instructors) certified by the Chief, which includes at least 16 hours of training … Has completed at least 2 hours of range training, conducted by an instructor certified by the Chief, including shooting a qualification course of 50 rounds of ammunition from a maximum distance of 15 yards (45 feet)"

D.C. Code § 7-2509.02(a) statute

The licensing statute still reads as a may-issue law on its face: it conditions issuance on the applicant showing 'good reason to fear injury' or 'any other proper reason' and being a 'suitable person'. The Council never repealed that language. It is unenforceable under the permanent injunction ordered in Wrenn v. District of Columbia, and MPD does not apply it. Only the suitability and training requirements are live.

"issue a license to such person to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person within the District of Columbia for not more than 2 years from the date of issue, if it appears that the applicant has good reason to fear injury to his or her person or property or has any other proper reason for carrying a pistol, and that he or she is a suitable person to be so licensed."

D.C. Code § 22-4506(a) (uncodified 'good reason' text, permanently enjoined) statute

The D.C. Circuit held the District's good-reason requirement facially unconstitutional and, rather than remand for further record development, directed the district courts to enter permanent injunctions against its enforcement. The District chose not to seek Supreme Court review, which is why the District has issued concealed carry licenses on a shall-issue basis since late 2017.

"We vacate both orders below and remand with instructions to enter permanent injunctions against enforcement of the District's good-reason law."

Wrenn v. District of Columbia, 864 F.3d 650 (D.C. Cir. July 25, 2017) (Nos. 16-7025, 16-7067, consolidated with Grace v. District of Columbia) court

MPD states on its own public FAQ that no good reason is required, confirming that the agency administers the license on a shall-issue basis. The same page confirms the 16-hour plus 2-hour range training requirement, that an applicant must already own or be in the process of buying a handgun, and that a preliminarily approved applicant has 45 days to finish training.

"Q: Do I need to explain why I am applying for a concealed carry license? A: No. Pursuant to decisions of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Wrenn v. District of Columbia and Grace v. District of Columbia, applicants do not need to provide a “good reason” to obtain a concealed carry license."

Metropolitan Police Department — Frequently Asked Questions: Firearms Registration and CCL ag

A D.C. concealed carry license lasts no more than 2 years. Renewal requires continued eligibility, 4 hours of refresher instruction instead of 16, and proof of 2 hours of range practice within the previous 12 months. MPD recommends filing a renewal 45 days before expiry.

"A license shall expire no later than 2 years after the date of issuance unless revoked by the Chief or renewed pursuant to this subchapter … With regard to § 7-2509.02(a)(4), only 4 hours of such training shall be required for renewal; and … the licensee shall provide proof of 2 hours of range practice within the previous 12 months"

D.C. Code § 7-2509.03 (expiration and renewal) statute

Open carry is prohibited for licensees by statute, not merely unlicensed. Even a valid D.C. concealed carry license does not authorize carrying a pistol in any manner that is not concealed, and a violation is itself grounds for revoking the license.

"A licensee shall not carry a pistol openly or otherwise in a manner that is not concealed."

D.C. Code § 7-2509.07(e) statute

MPD's rule requires the pistol to be entirely hidden from public view both on the person and in a vehicle, and requires it to be worn in a holster on the person, firmly secured against loss, theft or accidental discharge. MPD reads this to bar off-body carry — a purse, satchel or bag is not a lawful carry method in the District.

"A licensee shall carry any pistol in a manner that it is entirely hidden from view of the public when carried on or about a person, or when in a vehicle in such a way as it is entirely hidden from view of the public. A licensee shall carry any pistol in a holster on their person in a firmly secure manner that is reasonably designed to prevent loss, theft, or accidental discharge of the pistol."

24 DCMR § 2344 (pistol carry methods) statute

Long guns cannot be carried in public in the District at all. There is no license that authorizes it, and the penalty tracks the unlicensed-pistol penalties (up to 5 years, or 10 on a second or post-felony offense). A registered long gun may be kept at home and transported under § 22-4504.02, but not carried.

"Except as otherwise permitted by law, no person shall carry within the District of Columbia a rifle or shotgun. A person who violates this subsection shall be subject to the criminal penalties set forth in subsection (a)(1) and (2) of this section."

D.C. Code § 22-4504(a-1) (rifles and shotguns) statute

Without a D.C. concealed carry license, a firearm in a vehicle must be unloaded, and neither the gun nor its ammunition may be readily or directly accessible from the passenger compartment. If the vehicle has no separate trunk, both must go in a locked container that is expressly not the glove compartment or the console. Transport is lawful only between two places where the person may lawfully possess and carry the firearm.

"If the transportation of the firearm is by a vehicle, the firearm shall be unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported shall be readily accessible or directly accessible from the passenger compartment of the transporting vehicle. If the transporting vehicle does not have a compartment separate from the driver's compartment, the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console, and the firearm shall be unloaded."

D.C. Code § 22-4504.02(b) statute

The unloaded-and-locked rule does not apply to a D.C. concealed carry licensee who is carrying the pistol concealed upon the person. In practice that is the only way to have a loaded handgun in a car in the District, and 24 DCMR § 2344.2 still requires it to be holstered on the body — so there is no lawful loaded glove box, console or trunk option even for a licensee. Under § 7-2509.07(c) a licensee approaching any prohibited location must immediately secure the pistol under § 22-4504.02(b) if a vehicle is available, or otherwise leave.

"The requirements of subsection (b) of this section shall not apply to a person who has a license to carry a pistol concealed upon their person pursuant to § 22-4506 and who is transporting the firearm concealed upon their person."

D.C. Code § 22-4504.02(d)-(e) statute

MPD's guidance for out-of-state travellers is to pass through without stopping or deviating, with the firearm transported in compliance with the transportation statute. The FAQ miscites that statute as § 22-4502.02; the correct citation is § 22-4504.02. The same travel-through exception appears in § 7-2502.01(b)(3) and in MPD General Order GO-SPT-902.01.

"Non-residents traveling with a firearm that is not registered in the District should travel through the District without stopping or deviating from their destination. Your firearm must also be lawfully transported … in accordance with D.C. Code § 22-4502.02."

Metropolitan Police Department — FAQ (non-residents in transit) ag

The District has no guns-in-trunks or parking-lot statute protecting an employee who leaves a firearm in a personal vehicle at work, and private employers may set their own firearm policies. The statute pushes the other way: a licensee approaching any prohibited location must secure the pistol under § 22-4504.02(b), and the parking lots adjacent to childcare facilities, preschools, schools and colleges are themselves prohibited locations. Marked partial because the claim rests on the absence of any protective statute, which cannot be quoted.

D.C. Code § 7-2509.07(a)(1)-(2), (c) statute

The single statutory carve-out that resembles a parking-lot protection is narrow: a licensee may drive into and immediately park at a school or campus solely to drop off or pick up a child or student, provided the pistol is secured in compliance with § 22-4504.02(b) before leaving the parked vehicle.

"While driving a vehicle into and immediately parking at any location listed in subsection (a)(2) of this section for the purpose of picking up or dropping off a student or a child; provided, that the licensee shall secure the concealed pistol in accordance with § 22-4504.02(b), before leaving the parked vehicle."

D.C. Code § 7-2509.07(d)(2) (school pickup exception) statute

The District honors no other jurisdiction's carry permit. The offense is defined by the absence of 'a license issued pursuant to District of Columbia law', so a Virginia, Maryland, Utah or Florida permit is no defense. There is no statutory recognition provision anywhere in the Code, and MPD publishes no reciprocity list.

"No person shall carry within the District of Columbia either openly or concealed on or about their person, a pistol, without a license issued pursuant to District of Columbia law"

D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) statute

Non-residents are not shut out, they just have to get a D.C. license. A person with a bona fide residence or place of business anywhere in the United States may apply, either on the strength of a home-state carry license or, if their state does not license carry, directly. They must still register with MPD the pistol they intend to carry, and must complete training in D.C. firearms law and D.C. self-defense law even if other training components are waived.

"A non-resident who lives in a state that does not require a license to carry a concealed pistol may apply to the Chief for a license to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person within the District of Columbia for not more than 2 years from the date of issue; provided, that he or she meets the same reasons and requirements set forth in subsection (a) of this section."

D.C. Code § 22-4506(a)-(b); 24 DCMR § 2345 statute

MPD's eligibility page is consistent: the license is MPD-issued, requires a D.C.-registered handgun and lasts 2 years. Nothing on MPD's firearms pages recognizes an out-of-jurisdiction permit, and the agency recommends renewing 45 days before expiry.

"A person is eligible for a concealed carry license if the person is at least 21 years old, meets the legal requirements for firearm registration, possesses a DC-registered handgun, and satisfies the suitability standards under 24 DC Mun. Regs. § 2335.1"

Metropolitan Police Department — Eligibility Requirements for a Concealed Carry License ag

The District has no castle-doctrine statute and no settled common-law castle doctrine. The D.C. Court of Appeals expressly declined in Smith to decide whether a castle doctrine applies when a person is attacked in their own home through no fault of their own, and Cooper held that it does not apply to an attack by a co-occupant. Practically this matters less than in other jurisdictions because the District imposes no duty to retreat anywhere; a jury may nonetheless weigh whether retreat was safely possible, at home as elsewhere.

"Smith v. U.S., 686 A.2d 537 (D.C. 1996) (declining to decide whether the “castle doctrine” applies when one is attacked in his home, through no fault of his own, by an invitee whose invitation has been withdrawn; failure to so instruct not plain error; jury may consider a failure to retreat, together with all other circumstances, in determining if there was a case of true self-defense); Cooper v. U.S., 512 A.2d 1002 (D.C. 1986) (holding that the “castle doctrine” does not apply in the circumstance of an attack from a co-occupant in one's own home)."

Smith v. United States, 686 A.2d 537 (D.C. 1996); Cooper v. United States, 512 A.2d 1002 (D.C. 1986), as summarized in MPD's mandatory self-defense training handout ag

The District is not a stand-your-ground jurisdiction and not a duty-to-retreat jurisdiction either. MPD's own mandatory handout for concealed carry trainers states the Gillis middle ground: no legal duty to retreat or to consider retreating when deadly force is actually and reasonably believed necessary, but the jury is told to weigh whether the person could have safely stepped back or walked away when assessing reasonableness.

"Under the case law of the District of Columbia, the District is neither a “right to stand and kill” nor a “duty to retreat to the wall before killing” jurisdiction. The District case law has established a “middle ground.” … However, you do not have to retreat or consider retreating when you actually and reasonably believe that you are in danger of death or serious bodily harm and that deadly force is necessary to repel that danger."

Gillis v. United States, 400 A.2d 311, 313 (D.C. 1979), per MPD, Instructions to Trainers Concerning Law of Self-Defense (D.C. Criminal Jury Instruction 9.503) ag

The District imposes an affirmative duty to inform. A licensee must carry both the license and the pistol's registration certificate whenever armed, and on an investigative stop must disclose that they are carrying, hand over the license and registration, say where the pistol is, and comply with a pat-down and temporary surrender of the gun. The duty also binds any other licensee who is with the person stopped.

"If a law enforcement officer initiates an investigative stop of a licensee carrying a concealed pistol pursuant to § 22-4506, the licensee, and any other licensee carrying a concealed pistol pursuant to § 22-4506 who is with the stopped licensee at the time of the investigative stop, shall: (1) Disclose to the officer that he or she is carrying a concealed pistol; (2) Present the license and registration certificate; (3) Identify the location of the concealed pistol; and (4) Comply with all lawful orders and directions from the officer"

D.C. Code § 7-2509.04(c)-(d) statute

Fifteen categories are off limits to a licensee: D.C. government buildings and offices; the buildings, grounds and adjacent parking lots of childcare facilities, preschools, K-12 schools and colleges; hospitals and medical or mental-health offices; penal institutions, secure juvenile facilities and halfway houses; polling places while voting is occurring; public transportation vehicles including the entire Metrorail system and its stations; alcohol-licensed on-premises establishments; stadiums and arenas; public gatherings and special events; National Mall and Tidal Basin memorials and any federally prohibited area including the U.S. Capitol; the White House Complex; the U.S. Naval Observatory; protected dignitary movements within 1,000 feet; demonstrations within 1,000 feet; and anything the Chief adds by rule.

"No person holding a license shall carry a pistol in the following locations or under the following circumstances: (1) A building or office occupied by the District of Columbia, its agencies, or instrumentalities; (2) The building and grounds, including any adjacent parking lot, of an childcare facility, preschool, public or private elementary or secondary school; or a public or private college or university"

D.C. Code § 7-2509.07(a) statute

Private property runs on presumptions. Carry in a private residence is presumed prohibited unless the owner or person in control personally authorizes it before entry; carry in a place of religious worship is presumed prohibited unless the property is posted allowing it or the owner personally authorizes it; and carry on private non-residential property is presumed permitted unless the owner posts conspicuous signage or personally says no.

"the carrying of a concealed pistol: (1) On private residential property shall be presumed to be prohibited unless otherwise authorized by the property owner or person in control of the premises and communicated personally to the licensee in advance of entry onto the residential property … (3) On private property that is not a residence shall be presumed to be permitted unless the property is posted with conspicuous signage prohibiting the carrying of a concealed pistol"

D.C. Code § 7-2509.07(b) statute

MPD publishes the same list in plain language and adds its reading of the manner-of-carry rules: open carry is out, the pistol belongs in a holster, and off-body carry in a purse or satchel is not permitted. The page is the clearest official statement that a D.C. license is a concealed-only, holster-only authority.

"A DC concealed carry licensee shall not carry a handgun openly or otherwise in a manner that is not concealed. Your handgun should be carried in a holster. Off-body carry (i.e., in a purse or satchel) is not permitted."

Metropolitan Police Department — CCL Restrictions ag

The District bans every firearm, destructive-device, ghost-gun and ammunition transfer except the narrow set the Code allows. There is no private-sale channel: a non-dealer may only transfer to a licensed dealer, which means every change of ownership runs through a dealer and an MPD registration check. That is a universal background check in substance.

"No person or organization shall sell, transfer or otherwise dispose of any firearm, destructive device, ghost gun, or ammunition in the District except as provided in § 7-2502.10(c), § 7-2505.02, § 7-2507.05, § 7-2510.07, or § 7-2510.09."

D.C. Code § 7-2505.01 (sales and transfers prohibited) statute

A private owner's only permitted outlet is a licensed dealer, and a dealer may transfer a firearm only to someone who already holds a registration certificate for that specific firearm. If MPD denies the certificate, the dealer must withhold delivery or void the sale and refund the buyer.

"Any person or organization eligible to register a firearm may sell or otherwise transfer ammunition or any firearm, except those which are unregisterable under § 7-2502.02, to a licensed dealer … Any licensed dealer may sell or otherwise transfer a firearm except those which are unregisterable under § 7-2502.02, to any person or organization possessing a registration certificate for such firearm"

D.C. Code § 7-2505.02(a), (c) statute

MPD must affirmatively clear each applicant before issuing a registration certificate. The disqualifier list is longer than the federal one: felonies and weapons offenses, pending indictment for a crime of violence, drug, assault, threats, intrafamily-offense or stalking convictions and two or more DUIs in the past 5 years, insanity acquittals, mental-health commitments or incapacity findings in the past 5 years, a history of violent behavior in the past 5 years, civil or foreign protection orders, negligent firearm mishaps, legal blindness, failure of MPD's firearms-law test, and being the subject of an extreme risk protection order.

"No registration certificate shall be issued to any person (and in the case of a person between the ages of 18 and 21, to the person and the person's signatory parent or guardian) or organization unless the Chief determines that such person …"

D.C. Code § 7-2502.03(a) (disqualifiers checked before registration) statute

The baseline age to hold any D.C. firearm registration certificate is 21. The Chief may register a firearm to an applicant aged 18 to 20 only if a notarized parent or guardian statement grants permission and accepts civil liability for all damages, and that certificate expires on the applicant's 21st birthday.

"Is 21 years of age or older; provided, that the Chief may issue to an applicant between the ages of 18 and 21 years old, and who is otherwise qualified, a registration certificate if the application is accompanied by a notarized statement of the applicant's parent or guardian … provided further, that such registration certificate shall expire on such person's 21st birthday"

D.C. Code § 7-2502.03(a)(1) statute

MPD states the practical split: 21 for a handgun registration or a concealed carry license, and 18 to 20 for a long gun only, with notarized parental authorization. Because possession of any unregistered firearm is itself an offense in the District, these registration ages are the effective acquisition ages.

"A person must be 21 years old to register a handgun or obtain a concealed carry license. A long gun may be registered to someone 18 to 21 years old with notarized authorization from a parent or guardian."

Metropolitan Police Department — FAQ (age requirement) ag

Federal law independently bars a licensed dealer from selling a handgun to anyone under 21 or a long gun to anyone under 18. Since MPD's FAQ states that D.C. residents must buy through a federal firearms licensee, the federal floor and the District's registration ages point the same way.

"Federal Firearms Eligibility"

18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1) (federal floor) — ATF Firearms Eligibility atf

The District is one of a handful of U.S. jurisdictions with universal firearm registration. Every firearm possessed or controlled in the District — handgun, rifle or shotgun — must have a valid MPD registration certificate, and possessing an unregistered firearm is a criminal offense in its own right under § 7-2507.06.

"Except as otherwise provided in this unit, no person or organization in the District of Columbia (“District”) shall receive, possess, control, transfer, offer for sale, sell, give, or deliver any destructive device, and no person or organization in the District shall possess or control any firearm, unless the person or organization holds a valid registration certificate for the firearm."

D.C. Code § 7-2502.01(a) statute

Registration is not one-and-done. Certificates expire 3 years after issuance and must be renewed for successive 3-year terms by attesting that the registrant still has the gun, still lives at the registered address and still meets every § 7-2502.03(a) requirement. MPD mails a notice 90 days out, but expiry is the registrant's responsibility regardless.

"Registration certificates shall expire 3 years after the date of issuance unless renewed in accordance with this section for subsequent 3-year periods."

D.C. Code § 7-2502.07a(a), (c) statute

The District enforces a one-pistol-per-30-days registration cap. MPD's rule clarifies that the cap applies only to initial registrations, not renewals, and the statute lets the Chief waive it for a new resident bringing in pistols lawfully owned elsewhere for the 6 months before the application.

"The Chief shall register no more than one pistol per registrant during any 30-day period; provided, that the Chief may permit a person first becoming a District resident to register more than one pistol if those pistols were lawfully owned in another jurisdiction for a period of 6 months prior to the date of the application."

D.C. Code § 7-2502.03(e); 24 DCMR § 2305.3 statute

The District also runs an approved-handgun roster. The District Roster of Handguns Determined Not to be Unsafe adopts the California roster plus the Maryland and Massachusetts safe-gun rosters, so a handgun absent from all three generally cannot be registered.

"The District Roster of Handguns Determined Not to be Unsafe (District Roster) includes the California Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale … and handguns that are on the safe gun rosters of Maryland and Massachusetts."

Metropolitan Police Department — Firearms Eligible for Registration; 24 DCMR § 2323 ag

The District has had an extreme risk protection order law since May 10, 2019. A Superior Court judge may bar a respondent from possessing, controlling, buying or receiving any firearm, ammunition, registration certificate, concealed pistol license or dealer's license. Petitioners are family and household members, current, former or prospective romantic partners, any sworn law enforcement officer operating in the District, and mental health professionals — the last two categories expanded by Secure DC in 2024.

"“Extreme risk protection order” means an order issued, pursuant to this subchapter, by a judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia prohibiting a respondent from having possession or control of, purchasing, or receiving any firearm, ammunition, registration certificate, license to carry a concealed pistol, or dealer's license."

D.C. Code § 7-2510.01 (extreme risk protection orders) statute

The process has two tracks: an ex parte order under § 7-2510.04 and a final order after a hearing that must be set within 14 days of the petition under § 7-2510.03. Being the subject of either an ex parte or a final order is also a standalone bar to registering any firearm, and a prior violation of an ERPO disqualifies an applicant for 5 years.

"Upon receipt of a petition filed pursuant § 7-2510.02, the court shall order that a hearing be held to determine whether to issue a final extreme risk protection order against the respondent. The initial hearing shall be held within 14 days after the date the petition was filed."

D.C. Code §§ 7-2510.03, 7-2510.04, 7-2502.03(a)(15) statute

The District bans assault weapons by refusing them registration. Because possessing an unregistered firearm is an offense, a refusal to register is a possession ban. The same subsection also closes the door on sawed-off shotguns, machine guns, short-barreled rifles, unsafe firearms under § 7-2505.04, .50 BMG rifles and ghost guns.

"A registration certificate shall not be issued for a: (1) Sawed-off shotgun; (2) Machine gun; (3) Short-barreled rifle; (4) Pistol not validly registered to the current registrant in the District prior to September 24, 1976 … (5) An unsafe firearm prohibited under § 7-2505.04; (6) An assault weapon; (7) A .50 BMG rifle; or (8) Ghost gun."

D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a) statute

The definition is both list-based and feature-based. It names AK- and AR-pattern rifles and dozens of other models by manufacturer, then sweeps in any semi-automatic rifle that takes a detachable magazine and has a protruding pistol grip, thumbhole stock, folding or telescoping stock, grenade or flare launcher, flash suppressor or forward pistol grip; semi-automatic pistols with a threaded barrel, second handgrip, barrel shroud or magazine well outside the grip; most semi-automatic shotguns with a folding stock, pistol grip, thumbhole stock, vertical grip or detachable magazine; revolving-cylinder shotguns; and anything the Chief designates by rule. Antique firearms and listed Olympic target pistols are excluded.

"“Assault weapon” means: (i) The following semiautomatic firearms … (IV) A semiautomatic, rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any one of the following: (aa) A pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; (bb) A thumbhole stock; (cc) A folding or telescoping stock; (dd) A grenade launcher or flare launcher; (ee) A flash suppressor; or (ff) A forward pistol grip"

D.C. Code § 7-2501.01(3A) statute

The District caps magazine capacity at 10 rounds and bans possession, not just sale. The ban applies whether or not the magazine is in a gun, reaches anything readily restorable or convertible to more than 10 rounds, and excludes only attached tubular .22 rimfire magazines. Secure DC rewrote this subsection in 2024, and § 7-2507.06(a)(4) sets the penalty at up to 3 years, consecutive to any other sentence.

"No person in the District shall knowingly possess, sell, or transfer any ammunition feeding device that is, in fact, a large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm. For the purposes of this section, the term “large capacity ammunition feeding device” means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition."

D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b)-(c) statute

A divided D.C. Court of Appeals panel held the 10-round cap unconstitutional on March 5, 2026, reasoning that magazines over 10 rounds are 'arms' in common lawful use and that there is no historical tradition of banning arms in common use. It reversed every one of the defendant's convictions, including unregistered-firearm, carrying-without-a-license and ammunition counts, as derivative of the magazine ban. Chief Judge Blackburne-Rigsby dissented. This opinion was vacated on April 22, 2026 and is not current law.

"This appeal presents a Second Amendment challenge to the District's ban on firearm magazines capable of holding “more than 10 rounds of ammunition.” D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b)-(c). … For these reasons, we reverse and vacate Benson's convictions for possession of a “large capacity ammunition feeding device,” possession of an unregistered firearm, carrying a pistol without a license, and unlawful possession of ammunition."

Benson v. United States, No. 23-CF-0514 (D.C. Mar. 5, 2026) (panel opinion, since vacated) court

The full D.C. Court of Appeals granted the District's petition for rehearing en banc on April 22, 2026 and vacated the panel opinion, which restored the 10-round cap. The en banc order directs the parties to brief not only the magazine ban but also whether the District's licensing and registration requirements violate the Second Amendment — so the registration scheme itself is before the court. No en banc decision had issued as of 2026-10-12. Marked partial because the order is quoted from the certified copy filed in the Supreme Court; dccourts.gov does not publish rehearing orders.

"The order grants the District of Columbia's petition for rehearing en banc, and vacates the panel's opinion holding that the District's prohibition on firearm magazines holding more than ten rounds violates the Second Amendment. … The parties should focus their briefs on the following issues: (1) Whether the District's ban on firearm magazines capable of holding “more than 10 rounds of ammunition” violates the Second Amendment … and (2) Whether the District's licensing and registration requirements violate the Second Amendment."

Order granting rehearing en banc, United States v. Benson, No. 23-CF-0514 (D.C. Apr. 22, 2026), filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Duncan v. Bonta, No. 25-198 court

Suppressors are banned outright. The statute reaches any instrument, attachment or appliance for causing a firearm's firing to be silent or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of firing, and the exceptions cover only law enforcement, military and licensed dealers. Machine guns, sawed-off shotguns, bump stocks and ghost guns are banned by the same subsection.

"No person shall within the District of Columbia possess any item that is, in fact, a machine gun, sawed-off shotgun, bump stock, ghost gun, knuckles, or any instrument or weapon of the kind commonly known as a blackjack, slungshot, sand club, sandbag, switchblade knife, nor any instrument, attachment, or appliance for causing the firing of any firearm to be silent or intended to lessen or muffle the noise of the firing of any firearms"

D.C. Code § 22-4514(a) statute

Short-barreled rifles, machine guns and sawed-off shotguns cannot be registered, and the self-manufactured-firearm exception in subsection (c) expressly does not reach them. Combined with § 7-2502.01(a)'s registration requirement, that is a flat prohibition with no federal-registration workaround.

"Notwithstanding subsection (a)(5) of this section, a registration certificate may be issued for a self-manufactured firearm that is not prohibited under subsection (a)(1) through (4) or (6) through (8) of this section"

D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(1)-(3), (c)(1) statute

Federal NFA treatment is the usual starting point for suppressors, short-barreled rifles and shotguns and machine guns, but it does not help in the District: D.C. law bans these items as a matter of local law regardless of their federal status, and MPD's list of firearms eligible for registration says so plainly.

"The National Firearms Act (NFA) imposes a statutory excise tax on the manufacture and transfer of certain firearms and mandates the registration of those firearms."

26 U.S.C. ch. 53 (National Firearms Act) — ATF atf

State preemption has no analogue in the District because there are no counties or municipalities inside it to preempt — the Council legislates once, for the whole jurisdiction. The constraint that does exist runs upward: every Council act must be transmitted to Congress, and an act amending Title 22, 23 or 24 (where the carry and dangerous-weapons offenses sit) cannot take effect until a 60-day congressional review period passes without a joint resolution of disapproval.

"In the case of any such act transmitted by the Chairman with respect to any act codified in Title 22, 23, or 24 of the District of Columbia Code, such act shall take effect at the end of the 60-day period beginning on the day such act is transmitted by the Chairman to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate unless, during such 60-day period, there has been enacted into law a joint resolution disapproving such act."

D.C. Code § 1-206.02(c) (Home Rule Act limitations on the Council) statute

The single most consequential change to D.C. carry law in the last decade: the District became shall-issue by injunction in 2017, not by statute. The 'good reason' text survives unrepealed in § 22-4506(a) and in 24 DCMR §§ 2332.1(g), 2333, 2334 and 2345.4-.5, which is a trap for anyone reading the Code or the regulations cold.

"We vacate both orders below and remand with instructions to enter permanent injunctions against enforcement of the District's good-reason law."

Wrenn v. District of Columbia, 864 F.3d 650 (D.C. Cir. 2017) court

Secure DC rewrote § 7-2506.01(b)-(c) so the magazine ban reaches any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether it is attached to a firearm and moved the 10-round definition into its own subsection; made the up-to-3-year sentence for possessing one consecutive to any other sentence; added a 2-to-10-year penalty for possessing a firearm with intent to sell; withdrew the administrative disposition option from anyone with a prior felony; broadened ERPO petitioners to any sworn officer of a law enforcement agency operating in the District and to prospective or former romantic partners; and extended the impairment rule in § 7-2509.06(e) from licensees to any person.

"No person in the District shall knowingly possess, sell, or transfer any ammunition feeding device that is, in fact, a large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm."

D.C. Law 25-175, Secure DC Omnibus Amendment Act of 2024 (eff. June 8, 2024) statute

The 2023 cleanup act. It defined 'frame or receiver' and created a path to register a properly serialized self-manufactured firearm that is not otherwise prohibited, tightened the lawful-transportation rules in § 22-4504.02, expanded the prohibition on carrying a pistol while impaired, revised the prohibited-places section, and reworked carry rules for off-duty law enforcement officers.

"To amend the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 to clarify requirements involving ghost guns and permit the possession of properly serialized self-manufactured firearms that are not otherwise prohibited, to regulate carrying of firearms by off-duty law enforcement officers, and to expand the prohibition on carrying a pistol while impaired"

D.C. Law 24-347, Omnibus Firearm and Ghost Gun Clarification Amendment Act of 2022 (eff. Apr. 21, 2023) statute

MPD's most recent firearms rulemaking took effect May 9, 2025. It clarified that the one-pistol-per-30-days cap applies only to initial registrations and not renewals (§ 2305.3), added that a prior denial or revocation does not by itself bar a later application though the underlying evidence may be weighed (§ 2309.3), and recast the concealed carry suitability standard around whether the applicant's conduct, including threats, shows a credible threat of danger (§ 2335.1(d)). The enjoined 'good reason' rules at §§ 2333 and 2334 were left untouched. These changes are read from the amended rule text and its SOURCE notes rather than from the rulemaking notice, so treat the summary as unconfirmed.

"SOURCE: Final Rulemaking published at 62 DCR 9781 (July 17, 2015); as amended by Final Rulemaking published at 72 DCR 005751 (May 9, 2025)."

MPD final rulemaking, 72 DCR 005751 (May 9, 2025), amending 24 DCMR §§ 2305, 2309, 2335, 2337 statute

Four licensees' challenge to the Metro ban in § 7-2509.07(a)(6) was dismissed for lack of standing in 2024. On July 7, 2026 the D.C. Circuit reversed, holding that the extra cost of alternative transport is a pocketbook injury caused by compliance with an allegedly unconstitutional criminal statute, and remanded. The merits are undecided and the Metro ban remains fully enforceable.

"because the pistol owners have alleged a pocketbook injury that is caused by their compliance with an allegedly unconstitutional criminal statute, we reverse and remand the case for additional proceedings."

Angelo v. District of Columbia, No. 24-7127 (D.C. Cir. July 7, 2026) court

Four D.C. concealed carry licensees challenged § 7-2509.07(a)(6), which bars carrying on Metrorail trains and in its stations and on other public transit. The district court dismissed for lack of standing in August 2024. The D.C. Circuit reversed, holding that the extra cost of taking alternative transport to comply with an allegedly unconstitutional criminal statute is a pocketbook injury sufficient for Article III standing, and remanded for proceedings on the merits. No court has ruled on the ban's constitutionality; it remains fully enforceable.

Angelo v. District of Columbia, No. 24-7127 (D.C. Cir. July 7, 2026)

On March 5, 2026 a divided panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals held that D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b)-(c) violates the Second Amendment — magazines over 10 rounds are 'arms' in common lawful use and there is no historical tradition of banning arms in common use — and reversed all of the appellant's convictions, including the unregistered-firearm, carrying-without-a-license and ammunition counts, as derivative of the ban (Deahl, J.; Blackburne-Rigsby, C.J., dissenting). Seven weeks later the full court granted the District's petition for rehearing en banc and vacated that opinion, restoring the 10-round magazine cap. The briefing order directs the parties to address two questions: whether the magazine ban violates the Second Amendment facially or as applied and which convictions would fall if it does, and separately whether the District's licensing and registration requirements violate the Second Amendment. That second question puts the registration certificate system that underpins nearly all D.C. gun law before the court. No en banc decision had issued as of October 12, 2026.

Order granting rehearing en banc, United States v. Benson, No. 23-CF-0514 (D.C. Apr. 22, 2026)

MPD's most recent firearms rulemaking amended 24 DCMR §§ 2305, 2309, 2335 and 2337. It clarified that the one-pistol-per-30-days cap applies only to initial registration and not to renewals, restructured the 'other disqualifications for registration' rule and added that a prior denial or revocation does not by itself bar a later application although the evidence behind it may be weighed, and recast the concealed carry suitability standard around whether the applicant has engaged in conduct, including threats, showing that their carrying a concealed pistol poses a credible threat of danger. The enjoined 'good reason' rules at §§ 2333 and 2334 were left on the books untouched.

Final Rulemaking published at 72 DCR 005751 (May 9, 2025); 24 DCMR §§ 2305, 2309, 2335, 2337

Rewrote the magazine ban in § 7-2506.01 so it reaches any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether it is attached to a firearm, and moved the 'more than 10 rounds' definition into its own subsection. Made the up-to-3-year sentence for possessing one consecutive to any other sentence of incarceration, added a 2-to-10-year penalty for possessing a firearm with intent to sell, withdrew the administrative-disposition option from anyone with a prior felony, broadened ERPO petitioners to any sworn member of a law enforcement agency operating in the District and to former or prospective romantic partners, and extended the carrying-while-impaired rule from licensees to any person.

D.C. Law 25-175, 71 DCR 2732

Defined 'frame or receiver' and created a lawful path to register a self-manufactured firearm that is not otherwise prohibited, either with a serial number meeting federal marking standards or with a self-applied serial consisting of the maker's first and last name plus 'DC' plus 2 to 5 digits, pre-cleared with MPD. It also tightened the lawful-transportation rules in § 22-4504.02, expanded the prohibition on carrying a pistol while impaired, revised the prohibited-places section, and reworked carry rules for off-duty law enforcement officers.

D.C. Law 24-347, 70 DCR 928

Created the District's extreme risk protection order law at D.C. Code § 7-2510.01 et seq., with ex parte and final orders, service, renewal and termination procedures, rules for surrendering and storing firearms, and a penalty for violating an order. The same act banned bump stocks, raised the penalty for possessing a large capacity ammunition feeding device, and created a Superior Court process for petitioning out of a mental-health-based registration disqualification.

D.C. Law 22-314, 66 DCR 1672

The D.C. Circuit held the District's good-reason-to-fear-injury requirement facially unconstitutional, reasoning that it operated as a total ban on carrying by ordinary law-abiding residents rather than a regulation of carrying, and directed the entry of permanent injunctions against its enforcement rather than remanding for further proceedings. The District did not seek Supreme Court review, and MPD has issued licenses on a shall-issue basis ever since. The statutory and regulatory text was never repealed: § 22-4506(a) and 24 DCMR §§ 2332.1(g), 2333, 2334 and 2345.4-.5 still recite the enjoined standard.

Wrenn v. District of Columbia, 864 F.3d 650 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (Nos. 16-7025, 16-7067)

Built the District's concealed carry licensing scheme after the courts struck the total carry ban. Added D.C. Code §§ 7-2509.01 through 7-2509.11: the 21-year minimum, the requirement to register the pistol first, 16 hours of instruction plus 2 hours of range training, the 2-year license term, the duties of licensees including the duty to disclose on an investigative stop, the 15-category prohibited-places list, the rules on carrying while impaired, and the Chief's rulemaking authority. MPD issued the implementing regulations at 24 DCMR §§ 2331-2348 on July 17, 2015.

D.C. Law 20-279, 62 DCR 1944