may please the court no one argued here the demetrius murphy's gun wasn't dangerous the defense argument was more nuanced it was the due to what was essentially a historical accident the guidelines over emphasized magazine sides and it skewed the range to hide here so the question for this court is whether the sentencing judge considered that argument and there's no evidence in the record that he did the judge gave a very brief explanation of his sentence and his only reference preference to magazine size was in saying that the gun was dangerous the magazine was dangerous but in addressing the wasn't that the magazine wasn't dangerous it was that the enhancement really over emphasized magazine size and created a range that was years over where it needed to be i mean the judge could have said maybe as a categor matter that large capacity magazine does make a pistol a can you say like an f a a firearm like a machine gun or something or maybe he could have said that in this particular case that mr murphy's magazine created a danger that was so distinct from the simple danger created by his possession of the firearm that it warranted a much higher baseline in this case but he didn't address that at all and frankly it's not clear that she even understood the nuance of the argument and that the only thing he did say was that they're going to the judge said the extended magazine makes it that much more dangerous th pardon that's true it certainly is true that an extended magazine is dangerous but the question is whether it's how distinct and additional that danger is from the simple possession of a firearm at least where there's not some indication or evidence a little just a matter of judgment well yes but the question here is whether the judge considered that argument and without addressing i think on average more people are killed or wounded the larger the magazine of the gun while you're at it it's not clear that that's actually true i mean and the recent magazines and here are the guidelines on her application no two deals with fifteen clocks to pass a the magazine would be very strange to say the district court couldn't reach the same conclusion about fifteen capacity magazines that we get about ten capacity i certainly wouldn't argue that he couldn't reach that conclusion but at the time he did he said the larger capacity makes it more dangerous short but the question is whether that justifies the increase in the do research but that you know the danger of a large capacity magazine that the bands that are coming out tends to be cured toward the sort of mass shooting in a case where there is a large capacity magazine that just automatically gets t more like the use of get into trouble and then there bystanders you may actually shoot people who don't intend to shoot well what more is there to say really well i mean those weren't things that the judge said  without reloading the gun that's obvious and what more do you want the judge to say i wanted to do injuries by large magazine versus small many of the same going to know what i mean though again the argument was really going to the the appropriateness of the guidelines and handsome and so the level of the enhancement so while large capacity magazines are dangerous there are a lot of features of firearms and there are a lot of different kinds of firearms that range in dangerousness but the guidelines single out a large capacity magazine and in fact if the defendant here had had you know a couple of  of ten round magazines are several it wouldn't have counted because you have to get over the fifteen around magazine and so the question as whether it's appropriate for that to be singled out is the one feature that the particular guns more that are listed in the guidelines right the other exactly special about this the other guns that are listed in the guidelines are guns that are illegal to own for really anyone whereas a large capacity magazine in most places at least the vast majority is legal to buy and they're more readily available so there's not the same level of culpability of added culpability to the offense where it's not like you have to go designed for criminal use really don't know i don't know why you say they're illegal most of these are perfectly legal if they are properly registered sorry i'm sorry your honor if they're properly registered which is right but well that doesn't mean but device should be legal just means there is a regulatory requirement now i certainly understand that you wouldn't be able to register your portable rocket missile or device for launching a portable rocket or missile but that's an extra fifteen levels and stood next to that that's correct your honor but the the distinction i'm trying to draw is between weapons that are readily available on the normal market and then because of that on the black please the court the initial argument that the defense is making is really sort of will blanket attack on the guidelines which as a practical matter probably is more appropriately put before the sensing of mission rather than this court that the defense was making about the blanket attack on the a guideline but rather it went to the specifics of this case in which case we had not just a fifteen round magazine it was a thirty round magazine with twenty six bullets the defendant was brought up from georgia to george's muscle for his brother or cousin reggie gold he was there specifically to defend against intruders that were going to anticipated coming to the house the courts said the gun was dangerous so the extended magazine was dangerous explicitly asking the defense hey did that magazine go with the gun what's going on here yeah it did and the question then became what was going to happen and the court ruled also that it was dangerous and serious offense because there was a chance for an a violent confrontation on that basis so then what the court indicated to this court and gave assurances to this court that it was considering those arguments but that the thirty five fifty three a factors including the seriousness of the offense the need for specific and general deterrence and the need to protect the public from the defendant outweighed those considerations that they were i'll just conclude with the district judge didn't have to accept mr murphy's argument but it did not address the argument head on so we're asking for recent thing what would you have expected the judge  again though the argument was about the appropriateness of the range whether singling out the magazine as the feature to raise the range as high as it did in this case whether that was appropriate under the facts of this case and the judge didn't