Senators Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) have reintroduced a federal bill that would impose a nationwide ban on gun magazines holding more than 10 rounds. According to Maui Now, the proposed Keep Americans Safe Act seeks to prohibit the sale, transfer, possession, import, or manufacture of these so-called “high-capacity magazines” – with exceptions only for law enforcement. A companion bill has also been introduced in the House by Reps. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), and Brad Schneider (D-Ill.).
A “Commonsense Measure”?
Hirono claims this legislation is a “commonsense” measure to curb mass shootings, citing research that suggests a previous federal assault weapons and magazine ban (1994-2004) reduced the likelihood of mass shooting fatalities by 70%. Supporters argue that high-capacity magazines enable shooters to fire continuously without reloading, making mass attacks more deadly. However, critics argue that the bill does little to address violent crime and mainly serves to restrict law-abiding citizens.
Seizing and Destroying Private Property
One of the most controversial aspects of the Keep Americans Safe Act is its provision allowing federal agencies, including the FBI and ATF, to seize and destroy any magazines that violate the law. As reported by Maui Now, this gives the government sweeping power to confiscate privately owned property, even though these items were legally purchased and possessed before the bill’s enactment.
Gun rights activists see this as an extreme overreach. Jared Yanis of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News argues that the bill is not about safety but about control. “Come and get them, tough guys,” he sarcastically remarks, calling the seizure authorization a blatant attack on private property rights. The proposed buyback program, he adds, is another example of the government attempting to “purchase” something it never owned in the first place.
Law Enforcement Keeps Their Magazines—But You Don’t
One particularly glaring issue with the bill is its carve-out for law enforcement. As Yanis points out, the same government that wants to limit civilians to 10-round magazines has ensured that police and federal agencies will retain their standard-capacity magazines. “They don’t think you should have the same tools to defend yourself,” Yanis says.
This exception fuels the growing divide between government authorities and the public. While lawmakers insist that limiting magazine capacity makes Americans safer, opponents argue that criminals will still obtain high-capacity magazines illegally, leaving law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage. If the bill truly aimed to reduce violence, why wouldn’t it apply equally to all firearms owners?
The Data Debate: Do Magazine Bans Actually Work?
Supporters of the Keep Americans Safe Act frequently cite studies suggesting that magazine bans reduce gun violence. However, Yanis brings up research from the RAND Corporation, which reviewed past gun control measures and found no conclusive evidence that restricting magazine capacity has any impact on mass shootings or overall crime rates.
Furthermore, when the 1994 federal assault weapons ban – including a high-capacity magazine restriction – expired in 2004, crime rates did not suddenly spike. In fact, studies commissioned by Congress found that the law had little measurable effect on gun violence. If past bans didn’t work, why should this one be any different?
Who Decides How Many Rounds You Need?
The bill also raises philosophical concerns about government overreach. Yanis questions whether lawmakers have the right to dictate how many rounds a person needs for self-defense. “In a crisis, criminals aren’t going to wait for you to reload after your 10 rounds are up,” he says. Self-defense scenarios are unpredictable, and many gun owners argue that arbitrary capacity limits could leave them vulnerable in life-threatening situations.
Political Timing and Legislative Realities
Despite the strong push from Democrats, the likelihood of this bill passing remains slim. As Yanis explains, the current House and Senate majorities are unlikely to move forward with such a sweeping gun control measure. However, that doesn’t mean the bill should be ignored. “We need to know what these swamp creatures are up to at all times,” he warns, suggesting that supporters will use the bill to gather political momentum ahead of future elections.
Even if the bill doesn’t advance immediately, it signals the direction gun control advocates want to take. By introducing legislation now, they lay the groundwork for potential passage under a more favorable Congress in the future.
An Attack on Gun Owners or a Necessary Safety Measure?
The core argument for the Keep Americans Safe Act rests on the claim that restricting magazine capacity will prevent mass shootings. While studies have shown that high-capacity magazines can increase casualties in attacks, opponents argue that such bans do not prevent criminals from acquiring them. Instead, these laws primarily affect law-abiding gun owners.
Mark Collins of Brady: United Against Gun Violence calls large-capacity magazines the “common denominator” in mass shootings. However, many gun rights advocates counter that the true common denominator in violent crime is the criminal, not the firearm accessories they use. Focusing on magazine size, they argue, ignores the deeper societal issues behind gun violence.
A Buyback or a Confiscation Program?
The bill’s inclusion of a federal buyback program has also drawn criticism. The government will offer to purchase banned magazines from owners, but as Yanis points out, this isn’t really a “buyback” since the government never owned these magazines to begin with. In reality, gun owners are being forced to surrender their property or face legal consequences.
What’s more, there is no clarity on how such a program would be enforced. Would compliance be voluntary, or would law enforcement actively pursue those who refuse to turn in their magazines? Given the bill’s explicit mention of seizure and destruction, many fear the latter.
The Slippery Slope of Incremental Gun Control
Gun rights advocates often warn about the dangers of incremental restrictions. Today, it’s a ban on magazines over 10 rounds – what’s next? “They want to chip away at our rights little by little,” Yanis warns. If this bill becomes law, it could pave the way for future restrictions on other firearm components, leading toward more sweeping gun bans.
Many Second Amendment supporters view this legislation as part of a broader strategy to erode gun rights over time. While each measure may seem “reasonable” in isolation, they argue that the cumulative effect is a gradual disarmament of the American public.
Public Response and the Path Forward
Yanis urges gun owners to stay engaged in the political process. While the bill may not pass now, the fight isn’t over. He encourages people to call their representatives and make their opposition known, as well as to support pro-Second Amendment organizations.
The Keep Americans Safe Act is framed as a public safety measure, but its implications go far beyond restricting magazine capacity. With its authorization for government confiscation, buyback programs, and selective exemptions for law enforcement, the bill raises fundamental questions about constitutional rights and government power. Whether or not it succeeds this time, one thing is clear – this debate is far from over.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa writes about homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Whether it’s canning vegetables or setting up a rainwater harvesting system, Lisa’s goal is to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.