Back to News
April 2, 2025
Maine’s Magazine Ban Focus of Committee Hearing
Maine and New Hampshire are cut off from the rest of the country by several states that already impose strict gun control regulations limiting magazine capacity – a restriction on law-abiding Americans that criminals readily ignore. Vermont, New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Jersey all have magazine capacity limits and it could be that Maine joins the rest and leaves New Hampshire all by itself.
All told, 14 states and the District of Columbia restrict the number of rounds allowed to be in a firearm’s magazine – commonly to just 10 rounds. Maine could join that group if gun control activists in the Pine Tree State are successful in their efforts to pass LD 1109.
First Step Hearing
The Maine state House of Representatives Judiciary Committee debated LD 1109 in a hearing, and dozens of supporters and opponents showed up make their voices heard. Hundreds of Maine residents submitted testimony. The magazine restriction bill has co-sponsorships from six Democrats and would make the possession, sale or purchase of any “large-capacity ammunition feeding device” illegal. This includes any device, such as a magazine, that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition or that can be “easily” modified to hold over 10 rounds. Law-abiding gun owners and Second Amendment supporters are already aware that standard capacity handgun magazines hold up to 17 rounds and standard capacity rifle magazines can hold up to 30 rounds of ammunition. NSSF research estimates there are 717,900,000 of these magazine with a capacity greater than 10 rounds in circulation since 2021.
Arguing against the ban, Maine resident Glenn Gisel pointed out the double absurdity of the proposal. His standard capacity magazine – which would be outlawed under the new magazine ban proposal – saved his life during a violent road rage incident.
“Maine is continuously rated the safest state in the nation, and it’s not a coincidence that Maine also has very liberal gun laws, and limiting magazine capacities only undermines the ability of lawful citizens to defend themselves,” he told legislators.
Other residents offered criticism of the proposal, too.
“With no proven benefits, legislation arbitrarily limiting the capacity of magazines places an undue burden on law-abiding citizens. It requires responsible firearm owners to purchase additional and expensive equipment for their firearms to be operational and comply with legislation. Elected officials should vote ought not to pass, and move on with fixing some of the real issues,” said Jeremy Burlingham.
Even Franklin County Sheriff Scott Nichols, who is president of the Maine Sheriffs’ Association, argued against the bill, claiming that it would violate a federal ruling and negatively impact the vast majority of law-abiding gun owners in the state. He also questioned how the state would compensate gun owners for the magazines they would be required to surrender.
“The court ruled that Heller established a test regarding arms in ‘common use’ today, not in the past. If semiautomatic rifles and handguns that accept detachable magazines are in common use today, they are protected. Their ubiquity, and their being ‘in common use,’ confirms their protected status under the Second Amendment,” Sheriff Nichols stated, forewarning the state legislators of court challenges that could be in the future.
NSSF Action
The sheriff’s words are prescient and NSSF knows firsthand. NSSF submitted written testimony against the bill, highlighting the legislation’s significant flaws and reminding gun control legislators NSSF has taken legal action before against unconstitutional attempts like this to restrict the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans.
“Maine legislators have decided that anything over 10 rounds is too high and thus any law-abiding citizen in possession of a larger magazine will be involved in criminal acts,” NSSF stated. “What exactly is the basis for the arbitrary standard of no more than 10 round magazines? Magazines come in many different capacities and serve many different purposes, such as home defense, collecting, and participation in the shooting sports.
“Instead of wasting state resources on legislation that will only make legislators feel like they did something, how about making sure the necessary checks and balances are in place to deal with all the warning signs present in many of these perpetrators,” the testimony added.
NSSF has consistently challenged these unconstitutional bans on standard capacity magazines. NSSF successfully challenged Illinois’s “Protect Illinois Communities Act,” HB 5471,which was among the nation’s most expansive gun control laws that, among other restrictions, banned the sale of commonly-owned semiautomatic handguns and rifles as well as banning magazines with a capacity greater than 10 cartridges and pistol magazines with a capacity greater than 15 cartridges. After trial, a federal court held the law violates the Second Amendment and permanently enjoined the state from enforcing it.
The case is now before the Chicago-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
NSSF has also led the legal charge against similarly arbitrary and unconstitutional magazine capacity bans in Oregon, California and Colorado. And NSSF is funding a challenge to Rhode Island’s ban where the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to hear the case.
Magazine Bans Gone Viral
More than 26 million law-abiding Americans became first-time gun owners since 2020. That means more than 26 million Americans have learned first-hand what magazines do, how they function and what restrictions they face in their communities based on in which state they live. They also now recognize that criminals don’t follow those laws.
The absurdity of magazine bans has recently been showcased to much wider audiences by video explanations that have gone viral. Most recently and notably, the San Francisco-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth District in the Duncan v. Bonta case upheld California’s ban on standard capacity magazines, holding that standard sized magazines are not protected by the Second Amendment because they are not even “arms,” rather that they are merely an accessory or an “accoutrement” to firearms. NSSF filed an amicus brief in the Duncan case.
Judge Lawrence VanDyke, however, included as part of his dissent a video to demonstrate the shortcomings of the Ninth Circuit’s majority opinion, explaining that if the magazine can be considered an accessory, that reasoning could reduce nearly every part of a firearm to “an accessory.”
In Washington, D.C., Democratic Congressional gun control supporters held a bill markup hearing in 2022 where a strict gun control package of bills was debated. Florida Congressman Greg Steube (R-Fla.) used his time while joining the committee hearing remotely from home to argue against a federal proposal to limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds.
“They want to take away law abiding citizens ability to purchase the firearm of their choice. Don’t let them fool you that they are not attempting to take away your ability to purchase handguns,” Rep. Stuebe stated, showing off a few different varieties of handguns he owned. “They’re using the magazine ban to do it. Last year 2020 and 2021, the Glock 19 was the highest sold handgun in the United States. It comes with a 15-round magazine. That gun would be banned.”
“Right here in front of me, I have a Sig Sauer P226. It comes with a 21-round magazine. This gun would be banned. Here’s a 12-round magazine. This magazine would be banned. Under this current bill it doesn’t fit,” the congressman demonstrated.
Criminals do not think twice about using a magazine arbitrarily deemed illegal by legislators looking to “do something” rather than get tough on criminals who break the law. Imposing magazine restrictions on law-abiding citizens, like gun control supporters in Maine are attempting to do, won’t make anyone safer. Rather than spending time and resources on these flawed proposals, legislators should hold criminals accountable for their crimes. Not turn law-abiding Americans into criminals.
Rest assured, if LD 1109 were to be enacted, NSSF will promptly file a lawsuit to challenge the law as a violation of the Second Amendment.
You may also be interested in:
House Republicans Honor Second Amendment Promises, Advance Key Legislation
Categories: BP Item, Featured, Government Relations, Top Stories
25650
