Federal court rules that law criminalizing obliterating serial numbers on guns unconstitutional

[starling]

I would assume those barrels will have been slugged, too. So unless you buy it used they would correlate it back to the buyer.

If that was the case we would most likely know about it by now through whistleblowers in the firearms community. People tend to shoot their mouths off. We would most likely also see some major pushes for gun legislative measures on aftermarket barrel control and manufacturering. Ive also never heard of a crime being solved this way but I could have missed it.

 

[MoscowMike]

As far as companies keeping fired bullets from firearms, a quick search didn’t find any evidence that it’s happening. Ruger says that some local jurisdictions keep fired casings, so they supply one with each firearm sold so the local dealer can send it to the appropriate bureaucrat.

As for being able to link fired bullets to individual guns, there’s a lot of wishful thinking involved. Here’s an article from Scientific American -

“courts have recently begun to recognize the scientific limitations of one forensic field: firearms identification, in which an examiner visually compares fired bullets or cartridge cases and opines on whether the items were fired by the same gun. Contrary to its popular reputation, firearms identification is a field built largely on smoke and mirrors.”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-field-of-firearms-forensics-is-flawed/

I like having a serial number on a firearm so I can prove it's mine if stolen, but I can see the argument that I should be allowed to remove it if I wanted.

 

[unclenunzie]

I think the judge got it wrong. A serial # does not infringe 2A Right. Serial numbers do not prohibit anyone who can legally possess a firearm from doing so. They are like serial numbers in vehicles. Every vehicle has a serial number and anyone may own a vehicle. If you think about it, many expensive items have serial numbers: smart phones, computers, TVs and more. They are part of keeping warranty services proper and for insurance records and settlements on listed items. They prove the item existed and therefore is subject to warranties and settlements.

So unless someone can explain to me how a serial number in a firearm keeps them from legally owning the firearm, I say the judge got it wrong.

The law as written criminalizes possession of defaced/altered/removed serial number firearms made after a certain date. The judge has interpreted the law in light of the Bruen decision. As a lay person I know that serial numbers were included on many firearms prior to the law's existence, and obviously done for reasons other than this law which didn't yet exist. But many others also were made that never had serial numbers until the law went into effect in the 1960's.

So I would say that the presence of serialization or lack thereof historically/traditionally was done for the maker's reasons, not of law reasons. Criminalizing defacement/possession of serialized firearms is not historical/traditional, seems to go against Bruen, and so I think the judge probably got it right. Just my lay opinion.

 

[Buzznrose]

Not at all. I am in Gun country and have been into firearms since I was very young. My concern here is "whats the real play/con going on". If I am understanding this correctly its one of the most radical rulings I have ever seen. Gut feeling is there is something bigger at play here. Think about the repercussions in play in terms of straw purchase buyers. Firearms would be as easy to get and hard to regulate as Alchohol and Tobacco. Many people would be for that... many against. Me personally doesnt matter because I am just a nobody. I am just a little shocked this is happening right now with everything going on right in the midst of culture wars and political insanity. Very strange timing.

Okay, and sorry I got that wrong.

The only reason liquor and cigarettes are highly regulated is for tax revenue. I suppose maybe some is due to harmful effects of unchecked products.

I’m not going to discount your theory. But I honestly see this as a layer of regulations removed, and I believe it’s a good thing.

Of course, anything good can be turned into something bad…

 

[dweis]

Is that the basis of the ruling? I think you have it backwards.

Judge said serial numbers were NOT REQUIRED for possession of a firearm.

You need a serial number on a vehicle to register it, but not to own or possess it.

My point is that requiring a serial number on a firearm does not infringe the right to own one. Not having a serial # does not either. Serial numbers are required to manufacture not to own. The regulation of a product does not (to me) regulate a right.

 

[Buzznrose]

I would assume those barrels will have been slugged, too. So unless you buy it used they would correlate it back to the buyer.

That would be an incorrect assumption.

There is no way that FN, Faxon, Lone Wolf, et Al are slugging the barrels they sell. And even if they did, there is no way they could track them.

 

[Buzznrose]

My point is that requiring a serial number on a firearm does not infringe the right to own one. Not having a serial # does not either. Serial numbers are required to manufacture not to own. The regulation of a product does not (to me) regulate a right.

Prior to the ruling in this thread, it was illegal to remove a SN from a firearm. So not having a SN on a firearm was an infringement.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

A lot of military rifles had serial numbers on parts of the receiver that would be covered or destroyed by installing a scope mount in sporterizing. And a lot of those SNs were destroyed in complete ignorance of the law with no intention of thwarting tracing.

 

[starling]

Okay, and sorry I got that wrong.

The only reason liquor and cigarettes are highly regulated is for tax revenue. I suppose maybe some is due to harmful effects of unchecked products.

I’m not going to discount your theory. But I honestly see this as a layer of regulations removed, and I believe it’s a good thing.

Of course, anything good can be turned into something bad…

No appolgies necessary we are good there. Its more of a concern I have than a theory. Lots of whacky stuff going on in legal and politics areas and this is just another one of those things. In a perfect world where Government trusts its populace (and vice versa) its not a major problem but sadly we are not in that world.

One minute its "get rid of firearms"... "next minute its no need for serial numbers".... before you know it someone will say "all gun owners are terrorists!".... wait a minute...seeing a pattern here. There is some sort of logic behind the madness. I dont know what it means but if this ruling actually stands it being allowed to happen.

I certainly wouldnt advise people to start milling of their serial numbers yet. Good way to make a nice looking firearm ugly.

 

[Buzznrose]

Starling,

Agreed. But the recent SCOTUS ruling has reset the bar for gun control laws at a level that is making gun control lovers go nuts.

And so many court cases are now really being looked at…and our side is winning “Bigley”. LOL!

 

[starling]

Prior to the ruling in this thread, it was illegal to remove a SN from a firearm. So not having a SN on a firearm was an infringement.

Kind of. Pre serial number firearms are still legal to own. Removing a serial number was the problem they way I understand it. I am always extra careful when polishing a firearm for refinishing prep.

 

[CapnMac]

it was illegal to remove a SN from a firearm. So not having a SN on a firearm was an infringement.

You probably meant that "possessing" a weapon with damaged s/n was illegal, and therefore, possession of same was illegal.

The "infringement" would be in requiring intact, undamaged s/n.

Now, where this is like to go sideways is in the details of what constitutes "damage." If you scrape your rifle or pistol crossing a barbed wire fence, is that "damage"?
FFL are generally under an onus to not sell, nor buy, weapons with damaged s/n.

Bruen citing the use of historical precedent is liable to cause further historical examination of laws. Firearms purchased from 1795 to 1866 had no requirement for serialization. Nor a bar to ownership for, say a ex-military rifle that had its military s/n struck out.
Serialization did not really become common until about the middle 20th century; it did not become a legal issue in the US until GCA 68, a mere half century ago.

 

[starling]

Starling,

Agreed. But the recent SCOTUS ruling has reset the bar for gun control laws at a level that is making gun control lovers go nuts.

And so many court cases are now really being looked at…and our side is winning “Bigley”. LOL!

yes.. its nice to see. This one is pretty radical though. Going to be interesting to see how it plays out. I have theories as to what is really going on behind the scenes but this is not the right place so I wont go into it. We may see some MASSIVE changes in the BATF pretty soon. My optomistic side says its a good thing. My blackpilled (more like black hole) side says.... wait a second. Seems like from a logical standpoint the timing on this is way off. Weeks before an election with talk of civil war if one side (antigun side) loses? Would make sense if this were to happen once the country was on the right track but right now... I am not so sure. I could make a phone call to my local field agent in the BATF but I dont like bothering him over things like this and he is most likely as shocked as I am.

 

[JN01]

My point is that requiring a serial number on a firearm does not infringe the right to own one. Not having a serial # does not either. Serial numbers are required to manufacture not to own. The regulation of a product does not (to me) regulate a right.

Four Boxes Diner did a review of the judges decision which basically said that. Government can require manufacturers to apply serial numbers for the purpose of regulating commerce, but can't violate the Second amendment by penalizing a citizen for possessing a gun with an obliterated serial number.

 

[AlexanderA]

This is huge.

It's a setup. The District judge that issued the ruling, Joseph Goodwin, is a Clinton appointee and comes from a family of Democratic politicos in West Virginia (pals of Joe Manchin). The intent seems to be to force the appellate courts -- even potentially including the Supreme Court -- to back off from some of the underlying reasoning in the Bruen case. The judge fully expects to be reversed on this.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Tying a firearm to a crime by matching a casing or bullet found at the crime scene to a sample from the factory is futile. Time to crime for guns recovered in crimes is measured in years. Marks left by fiiring pins, breech faces, chambers, extractors, ejectors, on bullets or casings at the factory may not match the marks left after years of use by various owners. Unique marks are often the result of accidental damage during the life of the gun after it left the factory any way.

What does some good is matching crime scene shells or bullets to guns found in the possession of caught criminals, like the NIBIN system does.

Maryland dropped its ballistic fingerprint database of casings after years years of the Maryland State Police telling the legislature the MSP was just dumping the casings in a spare basement room because the program was a waste of manpower and money needed for crime programs that actually work.

 

[Styx]

One can simply replace the factory barrel or scratch it up with something abrasive. T

 

[Thumper68]

As far as companies keeping fired bullets from firearms, a quick search didn’t find any evidence that it’s happening. Ruger says that some local jurisdictions keep fired casings, so they supply one with each firearm sold so the local dealer can send it to the appropriate bureaucrat.

As for being able to link fired bullets to individual guns, there’s a lot of wishful thinking involved. Here’s an article from Scientific American -

“courts have recently begun to recognize the scientific limitations of one forensic field: firearms identification, in which an examiner visually compares fired bullets or cartridge cases and opines on whether the items were fired by the same gun. Contrary to its popular reputation, firearms identification is a field built largely on smoke and mirrors.”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-field-of-firearms-forensics-is-flawed/

I like having a serial number on a firearm so I can prove it's mine if stolen, but I can see the argument that I should be allowed to remove it if I wanted.

I am glad that you bought this up. I have thought that this was suspect forensics for awhile now. I never understood how each firearm could have that much variation in the manufacturing process.

now.

 

[Ethan Verity]

I would assume those barrels will have been slugged, too. So unless you buy it used they would correlate it back to the buyer.

That would be a weak correlation, there is no documented paperwork... you can order a barrel and have it shipped straight to the house with the same ease as buying a new recoil spring.

 

[General Geoff]

The intent seems to be to force the appellate courts -- even potentially including the Supreme Court -- to back off from some of the underlying reasoning in the Bruen case. The judge fully expects to be reversed on this.

How sweet it would be for SCOTUS to call his bluff and uphold his ruling.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

I think the fact many of us see this as a shocker should be a wake up call to the amount of unconstitutional firearms laws we’ve grown accustomed to.

The 2A is pretty clear. It isn’t there to restrict citizens, it’s there to restrict the government. But how many times do we hear anti-gun crowd saying “the second amendment doesn’t allow people to own XYZ guns!”

The second amendment was NOT written to apply to citizens! But we rarely articulate that well.

Absolutely. And this applies to all of the Constitution. Amazing how many people in the general population don't realize this.

 

[D.B. Cooper]

This is huge.


I didn't see this as being one of the things that would fall.

Text and tradition.

 

[westernrover]

Barrels don't microstamp the bullet, and barrels can easily be swapped and altered -- more easily than serial numbers. If microstamping had been implemented, it would have been a simple matter to change the firing pins. It would also be difficult to distinguish a deliberate altering of microscopic detail on the tip of a firing pin versus normal wear. Would we have needed a form 4473 for new firing pins? It gets absurd.

Law enforcement does apparently build and maintain databases of the breech stamps on confiscated firearms. They can image the detail of a fired primer and case head from a gun. They can use the signature of the seized gun to try to match brass cases recovered from other crime scenes. It's not the kind of evidence that meets the standard of BARD in court, but it can provide leads in an investigation. I imagine the 'ballistics matching' of bullets to barrels is similar in that you could certainly tell the difference between a 9mm fired from a polygonal rifled Glock versus a 357 Sig with clockwise rifling, versus counterclockwise hexagonal rifling, versus 5R etc. But the fingerprint-style matching to a specific serial number is a stretch.

 

[230RN]

I think the part you are not understanding is the purpose and history of a firearm SN. They weren’t actually required by law until the Gun Control Act of 1968.

I’m guessing you live in a state that is very restrictive of firearms and have developed the paradigm that guns need to be controlled rigidly.

Please don’t take that as a personal attack, it is not. My in laws whom I love and respect deeply (from NY) get totally freaked out when they come to TX and see how firearms and ammo are way easier to buy and sell. I try and explain it doesn’t matter…the restrictions they must adhere to only hurt the law abiding citizen, but they just have a hard time grasping it after living under NY laws for so long.

...

Confirmed. I moved out to Colorado from NYC in ~1962. My relatives back in NY are shocked that I carry a "defensive sidearm" all the time, and even sugar-coating it that way doesn't matter. It's still a "EEEK!" "GUH-UN." I stopped mentioning anything firearms related to anyone back east.

Re bullet-saving, FYI, quite a while ago I bought a 1911 at a gun show and lo! inside the box was an envelope containing three cartridge cases with a printed note explaining that Maryland required that fired cases and bullets were kept by Md and that the owner (me) should keep those three cases for ID purposes. Ohhhhh-kay. I guess about four or five years ago Md. repealed that law because it didn't solve any crimes and was too expensive to implement for the supposed benefits. I kept the cases anyway.

Terry, 230RN

 

[buck460XVR]

This is huge.

I see it as not much of anything. It does not affect the fact that gun manufacturers still have to assign a serial number to a gun. I did not see where it makes it legal for you to intentionally remove the serial number from a gun. As has already been said, I see serial numbers more as a way to validate a warranty and to personally identify one's own guns, than I see them as a "confiscation" device. I also don't expect to see huge increases in the sale of Dremel tools as hordes of gun owners prepare to deface their firearms. But I'm sure there will be those out there that will, just because now they can.