Washington ghost Gun Ban dick heller
(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

A reliable source tells us that Dick Heller, of District of Columbia v. Heller fame, is back at it defending gun rights on a national level. Under an arbitrary rule established by the District of Columbia Police Chief years ago, an individual with a DC concealed carry permit may only carry enough ammunition to load their firearm and reload it once.

Heller’s new lawsuit challenging that restriction, naming the District and Police Chief Robert Contee as respondents. The suit challenges the constitutionality of the limit as a violation of the Second Amendment based on the original DC v. Heller ruling as well as well as the New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen decision.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

96 COMMENTS

  1. I agree that there is a limit on the amount of ammo you may carry. Load your backpack until you can’t lift it off the floor, to put it on your back. Remove one magazine at a time, until you can strap the backpack on. You now know your own personal limit. Some discretion is advised: you may want a little leeway so you can pack a few calories in an easily accessible pocket.

    Hey, it’s WORK toting all that ammo around!

    • “I agree that there is a limit on the amount of ammo you may carry. Load your backpack until you can’t lift it off the floor, to put it on your back.”

      When out-n-about, hire an unemployed Himalayan porter to hump your ammo…

      *Snicker* 😉

      • I like Sherpas as much as the next guy but damned if I’m gonna let em hump my ammo.

        • I dunno, Rider . . . is it consensual humping? Have you asked your ammo? Did the Sherpa? Now, don’t let those Ghurkas get year your ammo!!! They’ll shoot it all up, then cut your head off with their kukri.

        • Lamp, I imagine all of my ammo is either way too young to be humping or way too old (surplus) too even consider the act.

  3. Get ‘em!

    What is even the hypothetical purpose of such a law?

    A mass shooter would surely break it if they were intent on MURDERING people.

    Someone carrying a quantity of ammunition on their person is either:

    Super prepared

    Or a law abiding good guy that just got caught with a box in their pocket or person – maybe as a gift for a friend or family.

    Or most likely already a prohibited person illegally transferring it. If they are prohibited you don’t need a quantity limit to prosecute them.

    • “A mass shooter would surely break it if they were intent on MURDERING people.”

      You do kinda have a point, unfortunately.

      Call it 100 rounds for a pistol?

      • What if a concealed carry holder was going to the range and had a few thousand rounds in his/her range bag when they were stopped? I don’t think that amount is out of the ordinary. Especially if someone has the conceal permit. We know just about anyone willing to get a D sleaze permit isn’t the problem here.

    • “What is even the hypothetical purpose of such a law?”

      To make the prospect of someone carrying a firearm be so onerous, the carrier says ‘screw it, not worth the hassle’…

    • The purpose of the ordinance because it is NOT a law (legally) is merely because they think they can do it, and most people are sheep and allow it. Mr Heller like “Homey da Clown” don’t play that sh it.

      • DiVaginese and Geoff you both are correct.
        Just like those who object to CC, their arguments are meaningless and do absolutely nothing to reduce crime. The left is fixated on the law abiding citizen rather than criminals and crime. And if one thinks the left cares about the good citizen’s life, then I have a long bridge across the Atchalafaya basin that I can sell you at a fair price.

  4. How can we send money to Dick? I sent him a check a few years ago for a lawsuit he was pursuing after he won the first Heller. Dick called me personally, I was the first one. Nice guy.

  5. A DC carry permit is useless because of the prohibited places list. Severe “sensitive places” thanks to Bruen, and magazine bans make carry permits in the 6 recalcitrant states and DC more trouble than it’s worth.

    • ‘Bruen’ gives us ammo for blowing out excessive GFZs, according to St. Thomas.

      Probably gonna need a lot of lawsuits to be filed.

      A question for the TTAG ‘Legal Eagles’ –

      Is there anything stopping us from suing them for multiple legal infringements at the same time, like gun registration and gun-free zones at the same time?

  6. There is only one scenario that comes to mind regarding too much ammo. That is, when you have to swim with it!

  7. So if I have a DC CCW, I can only carry less than one box of ammo home from the gun store? Or is it, if I do not have a DC CCW, but do have a weapons ownership permit, I can carry as much as I want as long as I am not carrying the firearm? Who the hell comes up with this stuff? Never mind, don’t answer that. It must have been a politician.

  8. Dollars to doughnuts the “Limit” doesn’t apply to officers under chief robert contee. Perhaps in the mind of chief robert contee some lives are worth more than others.

    • Gestapo. All of them. Cops should be front n center shutting this crap down, not quietly waiting in the wings behind their carve outs and retirement packages to just ‘do their job’ when the commissar hands them their orders. They and no one else are the enablers of tyranny. Shame on them.

      • Bingo! When I was sworn in I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the state of Maine. Not the whims of the Gov or mayor.

        • Mainer, that’s all fine and good but did you and your (800K+!) co-civil servants get together and step up to fight this tyranny after volunteering to put yourself between a rock and a hard place? Hell, you haven’t even vocally refused to enforce it. If there’s a ‘front line’ in all this stuff it’s with you guys, not the courts or media/public opinion. Like I said, oath or no oath, you guys n gals are the enablers, even if just by being silent. Your fraternity not only allows this, it acts as it’s muscle. All for a paycheque. I hate to say this but until we see a concerted effort from your profession then that oath, your oath, taken by so very many, rings hollow. Worse than that it makes a mockery of itself through its abject failure at its first real opportunity to stand tall. Maybe it’s time to not only honor that oath but to act on it. I’m sure there’s a Union Representative near you. Be the change and all that…

        • Mainer, sorry, I realize you were agreeing with me but that doesn’t change what I said. Had to vent.

  9. I tend to agree with John Correia (activeselfprotection.com). In the tens of thousands of gunfight videos he has studied, no one has ever reloaded or cleared a malfunction. The incident is over with in less time than it takes for either. I can see one use for a reload. When the excitement is over, you can reload so that you have a full gun again. Still, the restriction is ridiculous so I hope Heller wins this one, too.

    • The number 1 cause of malfunctions is the magazine. So carrying an extra part that could get your weapon back in the fight doesn’t seem so crazy. Also I live like most people in that 1 is none and 2 is 1 so i carry two magazines. Its not for the ammo its to keep my weapon running in case the part that is most likely to fail does.

      • Even a Speedo has a left and a right side, a front and a back. There exists no excuse for not having a reload for a mechanism designed to be reloaded easily, especially when that’s also it’s weak point. Fitness centers abound if that’s the issue.

      • AH!! Montana Actual has spoken!! Some guy is a “tool”, because Montana doesn’t approve of his research/conclusions.

        OTOH, Montana is NOT a tool, because . . . tools are occasionally useful. Montana, not so much.

  11. When you think you have enough ammo, well, you are just being silly, because obviously you don’t. You should have at least 3000 rounds for every defensive weapon and about 500 for any hunting rifle. Yea, I know 338 win mag and 45-70 is super expensive, even when reloading it yourself.

  12. If we are limited on amount of ammo we can carry, the police, fedboi’s and military should be as well. Ever wonder why our government dislikes others having nuclear capabilities? They should feel the same way with their citizens as they do with other governments that have just as much power as they do.

    • Ever wonder why our government dislikes others having nuclear capabilities?

      Good point. I’ll be using that when I talk to an anti-gunner.

  13. Since I live in Ca, that would limit me to 21 rds, 2 mags and 1 in the pipe. Since I like pocket pistols, the mags hold 6 or 7 rounds, so this further limits me.

    • rt66paul,

      “Since I live in Ca . . . ”

      Well, at least we’ve identified the problem. paul, my friend, GTFO of that socialist shithole. It IS a beautiful state. After all the idiot Leftist/fascists starve to death, due to their idiot Leftist policies, we can go back and reclaim the land. In the interim, move to a civilized state.

  14. For most people 50 pounds of ammo with magazines would probably be enough.

    But whatever it’s your back.

  15. These days I usually carry one additional mag but due to mag size restrictions we are talking twenty rounds. Why on earth would politicians want to get so involved as to dictate how much ammo you are carrying? The answer is simple. Control. Power. Imagine the criminals following that; authorities aren’t even enforcing today’s gun laws so why add another for them to ignore?

    • Selective enforcement. Prosecutorial discretion. They like having options. They don’t like you having options.

  16. “a DC concealed carry permit may only carry enough ammunition to load their firearm and reload it once.”

    Does that mean two bullets is the maximum?

    I don’t live in DC…. but I learned my lesson about ammo really fast in an incident having to save the life of my wife… long story short: I had to go thru the 15 round mags I was carrying, there were two of the bad guys, despite multiple hits one of the bad guys was still up and firing at my wife where she was trapped and at me as I advanced in fire-maneuver to get to her. Its difficult to put definitively stopping shots in the bad guy when he is moving and so are you having to cover a distance at the same time while trying to keep him pinned down to keep him from moving closer to my wife where she was trapped and had to stay under that cover because he was firing at her. Had she run from there he would have had an easy shot and probably shot her as she ran. I was down to the last couple of rounds when the bad guy finally went down. Had I needed to fire those last couple of rounds and the bad guy was still able to keep firing both my wife and I would have died because I would have been out of ammo but the bad guy had another magazine left.

    So I learned my lesson on ammo then – I now carry four 15 round magazines for my EDC, and I’ve seriously thought about adding a fifth when I look at the increase in general lawlessness. Might not ever need them, but then again I didn’t back then think I would ever have used the ammo I had to use then to save my wife. So better prepared than not prepared.

    All these idiots that say “no one needs more than 5 rounds” or similar simply do not have any idea what they are talking about. Its not all about what usually happens and statistics and numbers on average and all that other crap they spout trying to restrict ammo and guns – its also a lot more about what can happen and being prepared to encounter that and a person is a fool if they are not prepared to give them self the best chance to stop that life harming or killing threat definitively when it does happen.

    Sure, it might never happen to a person and the anti-gun complain about guns. But if it does happen to you remember this – that anti-gun faction complaining about guns is not going to be there to defend you or your family. There are exactly zero cases where the anti-gun faction has come in to defend a person against an imminent threat to their lives when that threat happened but they sure do like to tell you how wrong you are for having the firearms means to defend yourself. Anti-gun is about one thing, and its not public safety – its all about making sure a law abiding person does not have that firearms means for defense when the time comes where its the only choice left, anti-gun is all about ensuring you have the best chance of being seriously injured or killed when the time comes.

    So when anti-gun starts talking about ‘lives saved’ and ‘safety’ and statistics remember that its a very subjective thing to them and only applies in their control of the narrative, and their version of ‘lives saved’ and ‘safety’ don’t include you and the anti-gun faction will not be there for you when the time comes to face that imminent threat.

    One of our own local anti-gun people learned that lesson herself. An ardent anti-gun person… she was attacked one night and pretty close to being killed when a good guy with a gun happen to have made a wrong turn and saw what was going on and saved her from what would have been certain death with a few more blows to the head. He had to shoot a couple of them when they didn’t heed commands to stop, the others ran away. Her very first realization after she came out of the coma was that anti-gun is a lie and among the greatest frauds ever perpetrated upon the American people. She understood the concept then as to why be armed with a firearm for self defense. Her first stop out of the hospital was a local gun store to buy guns, and today she is someone who the bad guys will be sorry they ever saw if they get near her or anyone around her and start their crap.

    Turns out shes a great cook and baker too, especially deserts and fancy pastries which are a hobby of hers. When she shows up at the range on a weekend when a bunch of us get together she brings a new recipe she is trying out and its always good. We laugh about all the times she got in our faces or picketed a gun store or tried to intimidate us in her past anti-gun life. She tells us of her interactions with anti-gun on a national level and with people in the anti-gun movement like Shannon Watts who she says its the most insufferable and deluded control freak she has ever met or worked with and she tells of the anti-gun people with EveryTown and Moms Demand Action who really own and carry firearms their selves while trying to not let others own and carry firearms.

    • That’s a hell of a story, both of them.
      Damn that shootzing at that guy and not bringing him down must have been a real nightmare.
      ✌

      • It was a night mare. I had hit him several times but they not in areas that would put him down and stop him definitively quickly, mostly slightly wounding like grazes or a round in an outer thigh. Like I said, it was difficult to put definitively stopping shots in the bad guy when he is moving and so was I with having to cover a distance using fire-maneuver while at the same time trying to keep him pinned down to keep him from moving closer to my wife where she was trapped and dodging bullets he sent my way. And on top of this the bad guy stayed mostly behind cover so I had to put rounds in what I could see when he exposed a body part and he did not expose much and then when he did expose something it was for a very brief time.

        I look back on it now and despite the horror of the whole thing I sort of grin a little at one part. When they first grabbed my wife they had not seen me yet, I was still some distance away but I saw what was happening and I was coming and a bystander a few feet from me said he was calling police and left the area quickly. She saw me coming, they had not yet, she screamed at them right before she broke loose from them “You sons a bitches, hes going to kill you.” and one of them looked up and saw me before the other did and he yelled “Mothe… Fu@k got a gun.”

        It was all over by the time the police arrived. One of them is still alive and down unable to move and when the police roll up my wife is still kicking him and cussing and screaming at him, I did not try to stop her. The police asked her to calm down and step away so she got one more good kick in and stepped away.

        They had done this to three other women previously. One was out on bond for one of those previous attacks. They will not do this again.

        • Have to be honest, I always carry my fully loaded Sig on me, but I rarely if ever carry an extra magazine with me, figuring “Hey, at least I have my side arm if something happens.”

          Your story is making me re-think things, and I may start carrying those extra mags around.

          Kudos.

        • This… This is why I carry a backpacked folder in addition to my standard EDC. Two 15rd for the EDC, two 21’s backing that up. 5 mags in the backpack for what’s inside. Tight fit with just enough room for a little anti-rattle preventative/bloating to disguise shapes foam.

          Unlikely to be outgunned normally with, also enough to fight my way back to the trunk or cab for heavier rifle or shotgun fire power. Have both in each vehicle secured in strong boxes.

    • .40,

      Breath-taking story!!
      Good reminder about readiness….. and training.

      Kudos!!! Many times over!!

    • Yea, we carry for the small .001 percent chance that we will be in loved in something life threatening. Why would we want to carry less rounds? It’s a mindset these people will never understand. That saving your own life means resulting to violence. They expect others with that mindset to keep them safe. Elite forces, police, etc etc… And when they don’t, it’s their fault. From the black and white gestapo to the president – it’s their fault. Not only do these people not understand the mindset of self defense, but they refuse to accept the responsibility of it.

    • Allow me to point out that, from an anti’s point of view, you’ve actually made their point for them [because these people argue in bad faith].

      You got into what might be termed a “large” gunfight. Lots of rounds were sent downrange, the air was filled with lead and those rounds could have harmed numerous innocent bystanders. That’s, like, totes bad, see? Children could have been killed and we can’t allow you to just kill innocent people and kids (unless they’re not born, in which case, by all means kill ’em quick).

      This couldn’t happen if you didn’t have so many bullets. And the fact that the BG had more bullets than you is immaterial because your “half” of the gunfight wouldn’t have generated so many rounds being fired if you didn’t have the ammo to do that. This is prima facie evidence of the absolute need for magazine capacity limits and limits on how much you can carry because such laws mean that everyone else can get on the side that doesn’t have a lot of incoming and be safe. (Well, safe-ish. I mean, there is an armed criminal but what do you want here, a fuckin’ utopia? We can’t have that under capitalism anyway, everyone knows that.)

      Further, you’re walking, talking evidence of the need for stringent training requirements. The fact that you didn’t manage to pop this guy in the head with your first or second round (preferably both) proves that only well trained individuals should be allowed to tote a burner in public. The fact that you didn’t manage to drop this guy like a ninja/Delta operator/Angelina Jolie in Wanted is prima facie evidence that you’re not trained to an acceptable standard and are, quite frankly, an irresponsible gun nut who only cares about your toys.

      The level of danger the public was placed in here, by your actions, is something that needs to be addressed. We cannot allow these “open air shooting ranges” to continue.

      Next time such a thing happens, you don’t need all the mags and bullets. You only need one. Simply shoot yourself. For the children. (Unless they’re unborn. Mag dump those parasites, it’s a womyn’s right to choose and you’re a non-birthing womyn temporarily identifying as something else because you’re a multi-spirit, fluid entity, right?)

        • I’m glad you didn’t skip the first sentence and take that seriously. There’s a few regulars who would (or still will).

      • Ha! That was like an exorcism, purging yer inner progressive liberal. Fuck meditation.

        • Take the jokes and snark out of it and it’s essentially what you’ll see “gun experts” say on CNN given the opportunity. In fact, they’ve already used a species of this argument both in the US and in your country.

          That post is simply a mashup of what they already say (though admittedly they don’t usually say it all all at the same time).

          Run that through a media apparatus and you actually get what is likely the argument the Police Chief did make in creating the rules.

          Less bullets = less fireable bullets = less fired bullets = less collateral damage = safer.

          See? Simple logic.

          That’s how these people think and they’re actually shockingly good at selling that position to normies who don’t have experience with firearms and don’t pay that much attention to detailed policy arguments.

          They take that argument and spice it up with some stories/pictures of kids killed by stray bullets in Chicago or somewhere else, wrap it in a slick marketing campaign and we (the gun community) have a messaging problem to deal with.

          And, historically, we suck at doing that because we like to go down detailed, nuanced rabbit holes about facts and data which is not what the attack we’re defending against is based on and therefore the best we can hope for is to spend a lot of time, money and energy for a draw in terms of public opinion, which yes, does matter.

          Propaganda. It’s effective and it’s fucking everywhere.

        • Trust me bro, I’m overly familiar with their wicked ways, just as you are. And it’s not just effective (baaa baaa, mooo, mooo) and everywhere, it’s ages old as well. My own dear old Ma thinks every word that spills out of the Tell-A-Vision and other affiliated media outlets (ain’t they all) is cold stone truth. Drives me around the bend. While not actually anti-gun, some time ago she put forward this gem: “most everyone who carries a gun is irresponsible. Imagine if that was the situation the world over”. I asked if she arrived at that conclusion from her own vast experience with gun carriers (I’m the only one she’s ever known and she isn’t even aware I do it) and if (obviously) not, where might her opinion have sprung from? Or does she mean law enforcement? No matter how I tried, logic, statistics, etc, I couldn’t get her, an otherwise intelligent and knowledgeable individual, to see where it must necessarily originate. Boggles the mind.

  17. A possum can carry around two pounds of emu, a big musclely guy could probably carry around three hundred pounds of emu.
    I suppose the CDC medical stuff is behind this. They dont want a lot of back injuries claiming disability on account of carry to much emu.

        • Ha! Nuanced. Having a moderate (maybe p+ factor) but ever increasing beer gut has had a destabilizing effect on going prone. Hard to acquire a good sight picture rocking back and forth like an egg. My shiny new level 1Vs sticking out at a 30* angle aren’t helping either. Maybe a taller bipod and some clown shoes…

  18. I suppose you’d have to sue DC through the Supreme Court.
    Most of these other law suits should be sue’ing the States for violating the States Constitution.
    I’ve kinda quit going on what the constitution of the US has to say and go on what my States constitution says.
    It describes my Right To Bear Arms much better.

    • possum,

      DC not only has its own federal district courts, it has its OWN “Court of Appeals”.

      They are at least as deranged as the 9th Circus, but being swamp dwellers, are SLIGHTLY better at disguising it.

  19. Considering Jefferson said a right includes a right to that which makes it operable, that without which the right would not be capable of being exercised….

    In other words, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, includes the right to ammunition (without governmental limitations), the right to magazines (without governmental limitations) and every other item or accoutrements to exercise the right to keep and bear arms.

  20. I’m going to cheer Heller with “Go Heller!” because “Go Dick” doesn’t really cut it.

  23. What you may or may not know, is that the vast majority of the figureheads behind the anti-gun movement are JEWS.

    All because they want to destroy the sovereignty of the US. Which it doesn’t have much of anyway.

    WEF. CFR. Bilderbergs. Tri-lateral commission. In short, Jews.

  24. I was born and raised in the District. Attended mostly private schools. My parents were well educated and thankfully funded my education. I left after high school and never moved back. I currently enjoy living in a free western state where I can own anything I can afford. DC will never allow people to fully enjoy their constitutional rights. About the ammo limit, I had a older Vietnam combat veteran tell me years ago he was issued seven 20rd magazines with his M16. He was in a firefight on his very first combat patrol. After that he always carried no less than 20 magazines and extra gernades.

    • Slapshot,

      From “70 Maxims of Maximally-Effective Mercenaries”:

      #37. There is no ‘overkill.’ There is only ‘open fire’ and ‘I need to reload’.

      You know you packed enough ammunition if, after the firefight is over, you have ammunition left. Otherwise? Your logistical decisions sucked.

  25. Is Heller and McDonald the only guys with guts enough to file suits in those areas?…IT should be hundreds, if not 10s of thousands, of victims in a class action style suit…Its not an issue where I’m from…

  26. Gosh Golly Gee Whiz,
    Surely if someone was to engage in a gun battle with police or engage in a mass shooting, such a law assuredly would mediate negative results. This is only common sense.

  27. Never heard so much ballocks. Nobody needs anything more than a single mag for any self defence situation so TWO mags are to me on the unnessessarily generous side . Other than SELF DEFENCE there is absolutely no nessessity to carry any handgun at all so why would you need more than an unns essessary two magazines – [what’s that in a GLOCK 30rounds] You are not in a bloody war zone. The ONLY viable reason to carry more is to ASSAULT rather than to DEFEND. How much do the PROFESSIONAL MILITARY carry in a war zone for their handguns? NO more than four loads. And that’s in a war zone!!
    I’ll tell you this. If in ANY self defence situation and you have to use more tha half a dozen rounds you will us no more bbecause you’ll be on the way to the bloody morgue.

      • Actually it just admitted that carrying a gun for defense is good to go. It’s progressing, in its own window licking way.

      • You have to admit that it’s amusing when idiots try to make a point.

        Four mags for a pistol in a war zone. That’s 17×4 for the M17, for simplicity’s sake call it 15×4 for the M9.

        60-68 rounds of pistol ammo… for when your rifle runs out of the 210(+) rounds you had for that, or your 600-1000(+) round basic loadout for a 240/249…

    • Well, if one round was enough for Barney Fife, it should be enough for al of us. And it’s more than enough for all of Great Britain and Lord Haw Hall.

    • What a crock! Why do you care how many mags POTG carry since you think they don’t need them? If POTG don’t need them, then why do you bother to even comment? And, as far as your comment, ” The ONLY viable reason to carry more is to ASSAULT”, how do you know the “whys” of POTG and how dare you assert that the presence of extra magazines means POTG are going to “Assault” anyone! You, sir, are a pompous ass and that is exactly where you can stick you feeble opinions.

    • So, once again, Albert the Subject is a lying liar who lies.

      “How much do the PROFESSIONAL MILITARY carry in a war zone for their handguns? NO more than four loads. And that’s in a war zone!!”

      Standard combat load for US soldiers is 210 rounds of rifle ammunition, and at least two spare pistol magazines (for the old M9 pistol, that’s a total of 45 rounds).

      https://www.policemag.com/373733/how-to-determine-a-basic-le-combat-load#:~:text=In%20military%20terms%2C%20your%20basic,an%20issued%20personal%20defense%20weapon.

      WHY ARE YOU A LYING LIAR, ALBERT??????

      Sod off, you lying Limey prick.

    • You miltary tactics on defense are impressive. Good thing you never served as a Combat Arms leader.

  29. Does this mean you can have one drum in your AK and one for reload?? Just asking for a friend. 😉

  30. Has anyone told DC Officialdom/Officialdumb, hard to tell the difference, about how things have changed. Airplanes and the travel via such are quite commonplace these days, or is this regulation or rule simply an example of “ If you play in my house, you play by my rules”.

  31. I was reading through the comments agreeing with the majority, and marveling that Albert the Limey and Dacian the Dem Witted hadn’t chimed in, when there. All of a sudden, Alberto rings his 2A Only So Far Bell. I expected the usual you only need to store 25 rounds, but surprise, surprise, he thinks you only need 1 magazine. Ah, but what size magazine Albert? What if you have a stoppage AL?
    Jaysus, here I sit thinking Albert would really get his knickers in a twist, if he knew that I won’t even fire up my press and reload for less than 500 rounds. His Spotted Dick would be burnt if he knew that I consider 1,000 rounds to be the minimum I keep in any caliber.

    But Hey, I’ll count my blessings that Dacian, the Dem witted felt this conversation beneath his self proclaimed superior intellect. I can only handle so much drivel in one sitting.

  32. Once again, Boys and Girls….

    Politicians with laws never stop bad guys with guns….and lots of ammo.
    They only control the good guys, which is their true agenda.

Comments are closed.