testtest

Federal judge rules law criminalizing possession of guns without serial numbers is unconstitutional

Does it also mean that serial numbers can be removed by the owner? Possession of such a gun isn't illegal so why shouldn't removal be acceptable as well?
 
From the article below: "Serial numbers were largely unknown to the Framers, Goodwin wrote. And so the Second Amendment confers a right to remove them from modern weapons."

This is a "news" site that claims to be journalistic but from this article seems to have a pretty hard left POV.


www.commondreams.org

Judge's Ruling on Gun Serial Numbers Highlights 'Deadly' Impact of Right-Wing Supreme Court

"The Supreme Court's Second Amendment jurisprudence has grown so radical that it now shields criminals trying to conceal their involvement in a violent crime."
www.commondreams.org www.commondreams.org
 
My state, MD, just passed a law requiring all privately made firearms to be engraved with serial number and register it, and its retro-active. There are several more states that already have "Ghost Gun" laws.

So while the articles say its just about people removing the serial numbers on their firearms, what about if they never had one? i.e. the 80% frame/receiver? Logically, if you can own a firearm with the serial number removed, then you can own a firearm that never had a serial number to begin with.

And thus dos this strike down the state laws?
 
Old_Me said:
ok, that as i read it, is for guns that "were made and had" serial numbers..????

so then, it does not cover those kit guns....like Polymer 80...????
Click to expand...


Sure it does. Does the ruling specifically address Polymer 80 or homemade non-serialized guns? Precedent. I think the point being made in the ruling is that requiring guns to have serial numbers is unconstitutional.
 
Bassbob said:
Sure it does. Does the ruling specifically address Polymer 80 or homemade non-serialized guns? Precedent. I think the point being made in the ruling is that requiring guns to have serial numbers is unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
thanks.

the only "importance" i place on serial numbers (for me) is that when i purchase a brand new gun, or on the rare occasion a used one, that i "register" that gun with the manufacturer in case of a recall or warranty related issue.

in a crime, when a gun with the serial numbers ground down, and the thug commits a crime, IF the original serial numbers can still be found inside that gun, (if a second set are indeed somewhere INSIDE that gun), they can only trace it to the factory or the original owner.

if the original owner (say) reported the gun stolen, what can the police do? charge him with the crime the thug committed..??...(i think not)...but does that leave the door open to a civil suit by the victims...????

although however, (say) the owner does NOT report the gun stolen, can the victim then sue that owner for damages?

does that original owner THEN become liable..???


i dunno......just asking.

we ALL know in this day how the lawyers can try anything.....
 
So there is no confusion, lets remember the ATF has watered down their rule about 80% frames/receivers before it took effect, that now it is just 80% frames/receivers can not be sold with the tools required to finish them a Kit. 80% frames/receivers can still be sold without a serial number, and many of the retailers have gone back to selling them without serial numbers, just no kits with tools included.

Several states have still have some sort of ban or requirement for serial numbers. My state, Maryland, just past a requirement for serial numbers and worse, made it retro-active. Although arguably not ex post facto, we had 9 months from the law passing to get Privately Made Firearms engraved with serial numbers and marking per the ATF guidance and register them, only after March 2023 you will become a criminal if you do not come within compliance.

Bassbob said:
Sure it does. Does the ruling specifically address Polymer 80 or homemade non-serialized guns? Precedent. I think the point being made in the ruling is that requiring guns to have serial numbers is unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
I would feel more confident if they mention 80% frame/receivers in the reporting. But they only mention people removing serial numbers on firearms that are their personal property.

I'm not claiming to know all the details on this ruling. But I have read about Commerce and the judge stating firearms that fall under commerce (i.e. being manufactured, sold and bought) the government can require serial numbers. Its only when the firearm is the personal property, they can not criminalize you removing the serial number.

So I read this as, if they pass laws requiring 80% frames/receivers to have serial numbers when manufactured, sold and bought, that could stand under this decision. You could of course remove the serial number when it becomes your personal property if you want and the government couldn't do anything about it.

I could be wrong on that, again I would feel more confident on it if it was explained specifically that 80% frame/receivers can't be required to be serialized.

What I am very enthusiastic on, is this could be used to strike down Marylands retroactive part of their new law.

It may or may not be a stretch in logic to argue if you can't criminalize people removing serials numbers off firearms that are their personal property, means the government can't require serial numbers for the manufacture, sale and purchase of firearms.

I think it is very solid logic, if it is unconstitutional to criminalize the removal of serial numbers from firearms that are personal property. Then it is also unconstitutional to criminalize not engraving serial numbers on firearms that are personal property.
 
Old_Me said:
thanks.

the only "importance" i place on serial numbers (for me) is that when i purchase a brand new gun, or on the rare occasion a used one, that i "register" that gun with the manufacturer in case of a recall or warranty related issue.

in a crime, when a gun with the serial numbers ground down, and the thug commits a crime, IF the original serial numbers can still be found inside that gun, (if a second set are indeed somewhere INSIDE that gun), they can only trace it to the factory or the original owner.

if the original owner (say) reported the gun stolen, what can the police do? charge him with the crime the thug committed..??...(i think not)...but does that leave the door open to a civil suit by the victims...????

although however, (say) the owner does NOT report the gun stolen, can the victim then sue that owner for damages?

does that original owner THEN become liable..???


i dunno......just asking.

we ALL know in this day how the lawyers can try anything.....
Click to expand...
I think the ATF kept the rule that any Privately Made Firearm (PMF) that is taken into an FFL's inventory, the FFL will be required to Serialize it. The ATF rule has a stipulation on how to mark the firearm and the convention for making the serial number to assure there will not be duplicate serial numbers and help trace the firearm.

Maryland's retro-active ghost gun law, requiring all owners of PMF's to have them engraved and registered before Mar 23, well the law directs how to mark it totally different than the ATF and instead of fixing the law, they are merely passing down by word of mouth to FFL's that they are to ignore that part of the law and mark in accordance with the ATF rule. Yep, that's the bannana republic of Maryland for you. You'll get prosecuted for following the letter of the law, you're expected to check with experts what is the word of mouth being passed down on how your supposed to follow the law.

Anyway, the convention for the serial number, that has to be assigned and engraved by an FFL (they do allow an FFL to use a regular engraver as long as they supervise) is the first three and last five digits of the FFL's License Number, then a hyphen with an unique suffix number after it. And the FFL has to keep records to ensure they do not repeat that unique suffix number.

So you want to get your PMF serialized and registered to comply with the law, you have to find an FFL willing to put his License number on your firearm. And guess what, none of the FFL are willing to put their license number on a firearm that they have no control over.

This can turn out to be a real hairball for gun owners. I was lucky, I found the one FFL within 50 miles willing to do it.
 
I walked into a lgs a few years back and the owner was trying to push a slide\barrel\recoil spring off of a used 40 glock to go on my G19. Said the SN were filed off from a city PD.
 
I’d take this ruling with a grain of salt. A case of liberal, justice reforms by the bench steeped in favoritisms of past anointments. One shouldn’t expect this ruling to be case law.

Question remains and not answered is that the modern firearm HAD a serial number and was removed. Seems again the liberal approach is being stretched and interpreted beyond the scope of reality to fit another narrative and political agenda.

Some of the “rest of the story” found on the worldwide internets…
“Wednesday's ruling was a partial victory for an Ohio man, Randy Price, who had felony offenses of involuntary manslaughter and aggravated robbery. Goodwin upheld the federal rules barring felons from possessing firearms.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top