By taking before and after pictures in a way that there can be no doubt
No, the very act of alteration in the statute and the obliteration of the original is illegal under a plain reading of the text--whether the defacer's intent is good or ill is irrelevant. Read the statute which is posted verbatim in my post above.
Here is the regulation based on the statute above if you need reiteration,
§ 478.34 Removed, obliterated, or altered serial number.
No person shall knowingly transport, ship, or receive in
interstate or foreign commerce any
firearm which has had the
importer's or
manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or
altered,
or possess or receive any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered and has, at any time, been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. [T.D. ATF-313,
56 FR 32508, July 17, 1991]
BTW, Frank has dealt with this question before, and has several case citations here,
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-firearm-with-a-defaced-serial-number.826593/
One can feel free to ignore the following if a reader has already concluded that it is a bad idea to do any alterations to marks.
I found a couple of more recent cases than the original THR thread that were after the Heller decision, including this trial court discussion here: U.S. v. Colon-Quiles, 859 F.Supp.2d 229, D. Puerto Rico (May 4, 2012).
III.
Section 922(k) does not Violate the Second Amendment
. . . .To the contrary,
section 922(k) does not enforce a total prohibition on an individual's right to carry a firearm—it simply makes unlawful the possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce. Additionally,
defendant Colon–Quiles was indicted by a grand jury of “knowingly and unlawfully” possessing a firearm “from which the manufacturer's serial number had been removed, obliterated or altered.” (Docket No. 1.) Notably, and unlike the plaintiff in
Heller, defendant was not prohibited from gaining lawful possession of a handgun if he complied with the requirements established by Puerto Rico law.
See P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 25 § 456(a) (2000) (stating that “[t]he Superintendent shall issue a weapons license to any petitioner who meets the following requirements....”) . . . .
While the First Circuit Court of Appeals has not addressed the constitutionality of section 922(k) under the Second Amendment, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has recently decided this precise issue. In
United States v. Marzzarella, a defendant was indicted for possession of a handgun with an obliterated serial number. 614 F.3d 85 (3rd Cir.2010). . . . .
89, In the U.S. v. Marzzarella appellate case above, regarding the district court decision from the Western District of PA (595 F.Supp.2d 596, 2009), the trial court explains 922(k) as amended in 1990,
"Importantly for our purposes, it should be noted that Congress further amended
§ 922(k) in 1990 so as to also make it unlawful for any person
knowingly “to possess or receive any firearm which has had the importer's or manufacturer's serial number removed, obliterated, or altered and has, at any time, been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.” Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1990,
Pub.L. 101–647, § 2202(b), 104 Stat. 4789, 4856. The intent of this amendment was to expand the time frame for establishing interstate movement of the contraband, thereby expanding federal jurisdiction beyond direct interstate trafficking in untraceable weaponry to include intrastate trafficking as well.
See H.R.Rep. No. 681, 101st Cong., 2d Sess., pt. 1 (1990),
reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6472, 6510 (explaining that the amendment will “expand Federal jurisdiction to permit prosecution for transactions involving ... firearms missing serial numbers where the firearms have already moved in interstate or foreign commerce” prior to the obliteration of the mark); Comprehensive Violent Crime Control Act of 1989: Hearing on H.R. 2709 Before the Subcomm. on Crime of the House Comm. on the Judiciary, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 79–80 (1990), comments of Assistant Attorney General Edward Dennis (explaining that the amendment “would expand federal jurisdiction to permit federal prosecution for trafficking in firearms which ... have had the serial number removed or altered and which have moved in interstate commerce at any time”)."
An American Law Reports summarizes appellate and district case law on the matter of 922k provision on serial numbers. (
Validity, Construction, and Application of 18 U.S.C.A. §922(k), Proscribing Possession of Firearm That Has Had Importer's or Manufacturer's Serial Number Removed, Marjorie Shields, J.D., 17 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 685 (2007). )
To briefly sum up their findings, prosecutors only need to prove a) the defendant knowingly possessed or made the alterations to a firearm's serial number, and b) in U.S. v. Adams, 305 F.3d 30 (1st Cir. 2002), the Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit considered a violation to be
any alteration that made a serial number harder to read (that would seem to include moving the serial number to unobtrusive place).
Thus, the intent would be shown by the o/p moving the serial number and obliterating the old one in the facts presented by the o/p. In addition, under 922k, the prosecutors would only need to demonstrate mere possession of the item with an altered serial number (whether the intent is to make a purty receiver or not, is irrelevant under this law). Under Adams which has not been contradicted by any court, merely altering the firearm's serial number (from the importer or manufacturer) and/or possessing such a firearm would be illegal. This would include moving it and worse yet, if you chose to move it to an unobtrusive area, that would also constitute alteration under the law regardless of the intent in moving the serial number.
You also run the risk of running afoul of state laws, such as North Carolina, § 14-160.2. Alteration, destruction, or removal of serial number from firearm; possession of firearm with serial number removed; Florida, § 790.27 Alteration or removal of firearm serial number or possession, sale, or delivery of firearm with serial number altered or removed prohibited; penalties; Washington, RCW
9.41.140
Alteration of identifying marks—Exceptions.; Virginia, § 18.2-311.1. Removing, altering, etc., serial number or other identification on firearm. etc., etc.
visable?
