District of Columbia Carry Laws

Concealed Carry License Required - Very Strict

DC requires a license to carry, issued to applicants meeting objective criteria (shall-issue in practice since Wrenn v. District of Columbia, 2017). Open carry is PROHIBITED. Many restrictions and sensitive places.

DC issues licenses on objective criteria (shall-issue in practice): the 'good reason to fear injury' requirement that still appears in D.C. Code § 22-4506(a) was permanently enjoined in Wrenn v. District of Columbia (D.C. Cir. 2017) and is not enforced. MPD issues to applicants who satisfy D.C. Code § 7-2509.02 — at least 21 years old, holding a registration certificate for the pistol to be carried, no disqualifying mental illness, and at least 16 hours of certified firearms training. Must complete training. OPEN CARRY PROHIBITED. Assault weapons and magazines over 10 rounds banned. Many federal building restrictions. D.C. Code §22-4504.

Magazine Limit - 10 Rounds Maximum

District of Columbia: Max 10 rounds Possessing large-capacity magazines may be a crime.

MAGAZINE CAPACITY RESTRICTIONS
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LAW
RESTRICTED: Max 10 rounds
FEDERAL FACILITIES
Note: Some federal facilities may have their own restrictions regardless of state law.

Prohibited Places - Where You Cannot Carry

District of Columbia: Licensees may not carry a pistol (D.C. Code 7-2509.07) in DC government buildings; childcare through university buildings/grounds; hospitals and medical/mental-health offices; penal institutions; polling places; transit vehicles/Metro stations; alcohol-serving premises; stadiums/arenas; noticed public gatherings; National Mall memorials; White House and Naval Observatory zones; and near protected dignitaries/demonstrations.

PROHIBITED PLACES - WHERE YOU CANNOT CARRY
District of Columbia

District of Columbia: Licensees may not carry a pistol (D.C. Code 7-2509.07) in DC government buildings; childcare through university buildings/grounds; hospitals and medical/mental-health offices; penal institutions; polling places; transit vehicles/Metro stations; alcohol-serving premises; stadiums/arenas; noticed public gatherings; National Mall memorials; White House and Naval Observatory zones; and near protected dignitaries/demonstrations.
Authority: D.C. Code 7-2509.07 (prohibitions on carrying licensed pistols).

Self-Defense: No Absolute Duty to Retreat Before Deadly Force ("Middle Ground" Rule)

DC does not require you to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense, and failure to retreat never by itself defeats a self-defense claim. But if safe retreat was available, a jury may weigh that fact when deciding whether your use of deadly force was reasonable. DC has not clearly established a stronger, separate no-retreat rule for the home.

District of Columbia law does not impose a legal duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense. Under DC Criminal Jury Instructions (Redbook) Instruction 9.503, 'the law does not require a person to retreat or consider retreating when s/he actually and reasonably believes that s/he is in danger of death or serious bodily harm and that deadly force is necessary to repel that danger.' Failure to retreat is never, by itself, a bar to a self-defense claim.

However, the same instruction tells the jury that a person 'should take reasonable steps, such as stepping back or walking away, to avoid the necessity of taking a human life, so long as those steps are consistent with the person's own safety,' and directs jurors to consider whether the defendant could safely have done so when deciding whether the defendant's belief that deadly force was necessary was reasonable. This is DC's judicially-created 'middle ground,' first articulated in Gillis v. United States, 400 A.2d 311, 313 (D.C. 1979), sitting between an unqualified no-retreat rule and a strict duty to retreat: the availability of safe retreat is one circumstance the jury may weigh, not a legal requirement.

DC has not clearly established a distinct, stronger Castle Doctrine that removes this jury-consideration entirely for the home. In Smith v. United States, 686 A.2d 537 (D.C. 1996), the DC Court of Appeals expressly declined to decide whether a no-retreat castle-doctrine rule applies to someone attacked in their own home, and held that a jury may still consider a defendant's failure to retreat inside the home, together with all other circumstances, in determining whether there was a genuine case of self-defense. Cooper v. United States, 512 A.2d 1002 (D.C. 1986), held that any such home-based protection does not apply to an attack by a co-occupant of the home. A later case, Bassil v. United States, 147 A.3d 303, 315 n.28 (D.C. 2016), is widely cited as applying this same middle-ground/Smith approach in a home-invasion context, reinforcing that DC courts have not adopted a separate, stronger no-retreat rule for the dwelling.

This rule addresses retreat only. It does not change the other required elements of self-defense: the defendant must not have been the initial aggressor, must have actually and reasonably believed deadly force was necessary, and may use no more force than reasonably necessary under the circumstances.

Duty to Inform - Required During an Investigative Stop

District of Columbia: Duty to inform. On an investigative stop, a licensee must proactively disclose that they are carrying, present the license and registration certificate, and identify the pistol's location (D.C. Code § 7-2509.04(d))

DUTY TO INFORM LAW ENFORCEMENT
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REQUIREMENT
Type: Required — you must disclose during an investigative stop, without being asked
Must proactively disclose, present license and registration certificate, and identify the pistol's location (D.C. Code § 7-2509.04(d))
WHAT THIS MEANS
Under D.C. Code § 7-2509.04(d), if a law enforcement officer initiates an investigative stop of a licensee carrying a concealed pistol, the licensee — and any other licensee carrying a concealed pistol who is with them at the time — must disclose to the officer that they are carrying a concealed pistol, present the license and the registration certificate, identify the location of the concealed pistol, and comply with all lawful orders, including allowing a pat down and permitting the officer to take possession of the pistol as long as necessary for safety. Under § 7-2509.04(c) you must also have the license and the registration certificate on or about your person every time the pistol is carried in the District. A violation is grounds for revocation of the license in addition to any other penalty provided by law (§ 7-2509.04(f)).
CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE
Lying to an officer about carrying is a crime. If asked, always answer truthfully.

No-Carry Signs - Posted Signs Carry Legal Force in DC

District of Columbia: Check local requirements for sign laws.

"NO FIREARMS" SIGN LAWS
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LAW
Signs DO have legal force (D.C. Code § 7-2509.07(b))
Check state statutes for specific requirements.
WHAT THIS MEANS
In the District of Columbia, carrying on private property that is NOT a residence is presumed permitted unless the property is posted with conspicuous signage prohibiting concealed carry, or the owner or an authorized agent tells you personally (D.C. Code § 7-2509.07(b)(3)). The default is reversed for two categories: carrying on private residential property is presumed PROHIBITED unless the owner personally authorizes it in advance (§ 7-2509.07(b)(1)), and carrying in a church, synagogue, mosque or other place of regular religious worship is presumed PROHIBITED unless the property is posted with conspicuous signage allowing it or the owner personally allows it in advance (§ 7-2509.07(b)(2)). On encountering such a location you must immediately secure the pistol as required by § 22-4504.02(b) or leave (§ 7-2509.07(c)). A violation is grounds for revocation of your license in addition to any other penalty provided by law (§ 7-2509.07(f)).
AR, IL, KS, MO, NC, NM, OH, OK, SC, TN, TX, VA
AZ, CO, FL, GA, MI, PA, WI

Red Flag Law - ERPO in Effect

District of Columbia: An Extreme Risk Protection Order (red flag) law is in effect (D.C. Code § 7-2510.01).

RED FLAG / EXTREME RISK LAW
District of Columbia

District of Columbia: An Extreme Risk Protection Order (red flag) law is in effect (D.C. Code § 7-2510.01).

Authority: D.C. Code § 7-2510.01 (ERPO definitions), added by D.C. Law 22-314, effective May 10, 2019.

Vehicle Transport - Check Permit Requirements

District of Columbia: Vehicle transport must be unloaded and inaccessible (D.C. Code § 22-4504.02); a concealed-carry licensee stopped by police MUST proactively disclose the pistol, present license and registration, and identify its location (D.C. Code § 7-2509.04(d)).

VEHICLE TRANSPORT - CHECK PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
District of Columbia

District of Columbia: Vehicle transport must be unloaded and inaccessible (D.C. Code § 22-4504.02); a concealed-carry licensee stopped by police MUST proactively disclose the pistol, present license and registration, and identify its location (D.C. Code § 7-2509.04(d)).

Authority: Code of the District of Columbia § 22-4504.02 — Transportation of firearms.