2ndshift
Member
Real simple Cutting torch.
Last edited:
How to recover a filed off SERIAL NUMBER ?
- Thread starter RANGERRON72
- Start date
- Status
This is a proven method and I have used it. I was an auto theft detective in the 70's and was taught this method at an auto/motorcycle theft school. Alligator clip to the object and other connected to the swab dipped in the acid. Swab was a long wooden stick with a loosely coiled very small copper wire around it and then the cotton swab on end covering the wire. Seems to me we used one of those lantern batteries. This method is for umbers that are ground of filed off. Will not work if number has been obliterated by being punched out first and then ground/filed off.
Just turn it over to your local law enforcement agency for destruction. It isn't worth the trouble. One could possibly remove all useful parts, i.e. barrel, hammer, trigger, etc. before turning it over.
Read the laws of the state in which the "friend" who is holding the gun resides and your own state's laws. That should not require an attorney. Some states preempt firearm laws prohibiting cities and counties adding additional burdens but most do not. What you read might convince you that you do not want the gun's frame on your property regardless of federal law.
That said, if the serial was not removed for criminal purposes a gunsmith can apply to BATFE for them to assign a serial number for him or her to add to the frame making it legally transferable again.
Since this is the S&W forum it's odd that no one has written that 1955 and older S&W hand ejector revolvers also had the serial number on the barrel, cylinder, yoke, and extractor. If the numbers match on all those parts then it is very likely that's the frame's number.
That said, if the serial was not removed for criminal purposes a gunsmith can apply to BATFE for them to assign a serial number for him or her to add to the frame making it legally transferable again.
Since this is the S&W forum it's odd that no one has written that 1955 and older S&W hand ejector revolvers also had the serial number on the barrel, cylinder, yoke, and extractor. If the numbers match on all those parts then it is very likely that's the frame's number.
ggibson511960
Member
How about stamping new numbers of your choice?? Given that you're not committing crimes with the weapon, but rather enjoying it, what is the probability you or any subsequent owner be accused of possessing an illegal weapon or altering serial numbers? It would require an incredible combination of circumstances to reveal that the gun has a duplicate or erroneous serial number. It is not legal to do such a thing, but once done there is no way or reason to determine who applied serial numbers. No, it's not legal, but should be if the owner's motivations are not criminal. The bureaucracy has rules for so many inconceivable circumstances. There is also the issue of prosecutorial discretion. There is also the issue of who you are. An FFL or gunsmith shouldn't do this (too much to lose), but a hobbyist that wants to use the piece and lock it away in a gunsafe can sleep well with a clear (mostly) conscience.
If you read the entire post you’ll see I addressed that really bad idea aspect of it, and your assumption that all commercially manufactured firearms have been involved in interstate commerce demonstrates why it’s a bad idea. Someone will be charged and prosecuted absent any proof at all that a particular firearm was ever involved in interstate commerce.
What you’ve done here is apply the ruling in Scarborough v United States where the court found that the ban on firearm possession by felons did not require contemporaneous interstate commerce, but rather interstate commerce “at some time”. The basis for this was the obvious larger congressional intent to prevent people who had demonstrated they should not be trusted with firearms (felons) from possessing firearms.
Similarly in the United States V. Barret the court determined that the GCA 1968 applied to intrastate transfers if the firearm had ever been shipped in interstate commerce anywhere in the chain from the factory to distributor to the dealer to possessor.
However it’s worth noting that if someone lived in, for example, Montana, bought a new Sharps from Shiloh Sharps and picked it up at the factory in Montana, that firearm will never have been involved in interstate commerce and would not fall under the provisions of GCA 1968. A lot of folks in MT take that very seriously.
The same could be said for any firearm made in any state that was never sold, shipped or otherwise transferred across state lines and this was never involved in interstate commerce. Absent paperwork showing, for example, a Hi Standard Victor made in Connecticut had been shipped or transferred to someone outside of Connecticut that particular pistol should not fall under The provisions of GCA 1968. But it will because federal agents will make the assumption that it has been involved in interstate commerce.
They ignore the whole presumption of innocence concept and immediately place the burden of proof on the suspect to prove a firearm has *not* been engaged in interstate commerce. That’s a more detailed version of what I stated above, and you’ve made my point very nicely.
I’ll add here that in 1995 United State v Lopez involved a federal law banning guns in school zones. The court ruled that nothing in the law showed any connection to interstate commerce and thus the federal law wasn’t valid as it was outside the scope of the commerce clause. The law had to be revised to explicitly stare that in order for the federal law to be applied, the prosecution had to prove the firearm had moved in or otherwise affected intestate or foreign commerce.
This is applicable as in the bigger picture it shows that the board application of the felon in possession aspect of the interstate commerce clause and GCA 1968 doesn’t automatically apply to all other uses of the commerce clause or provisions in GCA 1968, or any other federal gun control law based in the commerce clause.
But once again, successfully defending that in the court system will be a long arduous and expensive process, and one that will also be necessary as the feds involved will over reach and overcharge even with a complete lack of evidence that the firearm was ever involved in interstate commerce. it’s just not worth it.
Ask for free legal advice, and you get what you paid for.
Even if the logic were good on this one, and it’s not, the lack of understanding what the legal term “altering” means and the associated potential felony penalties make this advice the worst yet posted.
Unfortunately yes. GCA 1968 made it illegal to remove serial numbers and also to possess a weapon where the serial number had been removed.
Someone who removed a serial number prior to 10-22-1968 could not be charged as it would be an ex post facto offense (“I did it before it was illegal and they charged me anyway” isn’t legal).
However possession is an on going action so possession of a firearm where the serial number had been removed became a chargeable offense on 10-22-1968. There was some debate about grace period at the time, but since we’re over 50 years past 1968, any intended grace period has long passed.
So in short, if a gun never had a serial number and was made before 10-22-1968 it’s legal to possess it and to transfer it.
However, it if ever had a serial number and it was removed, even of that was prior to 10+22-1968, it’s illegal to possess or transfer.
Acquired a 1911A1 that had the serial # ground off. Contacted ATF agent I knew and he submitted it to their lab. It took a few months to get it back and number was not recoverable. They issued a new number (about 10 digits & letters long) and accompanied me to engraver to observe as they applied new number to frame. It was no value to me with no serial # so I had not much to lose. It is a very nice weapon and is a good representative of a Colt .45.
In the past it wasn’t uncommon for a gunsmith to round butt a square butt revolver and in the process remove or at least truncate the serial number. In that case they didn’t worry about it and just re-stamped the full number elsewhere on the grip frame.
It wasn’t an issue then, even with the ATF as they recognized the intent for what it was and didn’t over apply the law in that case. I don’t think the same can be said today.
However, with that said, if the OP’s revolver were an older S&W with multiple serial numbers, an illegible serial number should not be a huge issue as the gun still has legible and matching serial numbers elsewhere. In the past most gunsmiths would just re stamp the illegible or hard to read serial number and move on.
Today, most would probably still do that, provided they had plausible deniability. ATF could theoretically come in and prove the stamp was in the wrong font, was stamped rather than roll marked, etc, but to what end and for what purpose?
That said putting a new serial number of your choice on the gun is in fact illegal and goes beyond the bounds of just replacing a serial number that was partly or wholly illegible due to rust, refinishing, round butting, etc.
If you were to use parts of a unserialized revolver on a frame/receiver you made yourself then adding your own serial number is just fine (and not even required). But that won’t pass muster on a factory made revolver that had a different serial number at some time.
Altering, removing, obliterating the manufacturers applied ser# on a firearm became a Felony under Fed Law in 1938.
That was with the signing of the Federal Firearms Act 1938 (FDR).
The same language was turned over into the GCA68 when that law went into effect.
GCA68 took the place of the FFA38 and FFA38 was nullified (correct term).
As far as the gun being transported in Interstate Commerce ,,or not making it subject to any of these laws,,IIRC there have been rulings that came to the conclusion that the raw materials used to make the guns would be included in the make-up of the firearms.
So if the steel, wood, whatever else came from an OOS source,,,the gun was already considered as having gone through Interstate Commerce.
No I don't know where I read it but it's probably out there to be found.
They're not going to leave a huge loop hole like that open.
As far as the gun w/o a ser# that has been 'ground off'..everyone knows what it is.
An attempt to hide the ID of the gun. Stolen? maybe. Some people just don't like gov'mnt numbers on things. So they take them off and feel like no one can find them. Like living in a plywwod shack in the woods.
That's OK,,but there is a law that says taking the number off the frame of a firearm is not legal,plain and simple.
Each state has a similarly worded law that may also contain language that prohibits removing other factory applied markings like the Model, caliber, Makers name, ect.
Placing your own ser# on a firearm that you did not yourself mfg'r is unlawful.
Re-stamping the manufacturers applied ser# on a firearm is
'altering a manufacturers applied ser'.
Because of the fact that the orig marking is now over stamped with non- orig font, depth, size, ect characters,,the orig mfg ser# has been defaced.
They may allow that one to pass,,they may not. Want to poke the bear.?
I was hit up at a ATF compliance check yrs back when the Agent checking the guns in inventory was handed one was working on,,an engraved shotgun frame.
The ser# on the frame I had inlayed in gold as per the customers request...and certainly not an uncommon thing to do.
He immediately said that I had obliterated and altered the ser#!
I said that was the ser#. and back and forth it went.
He shook his head and finally told me that he was going to take the frame (confiscate it),,do further checking and get back to me.
I did get him to finally agree to leave the frame with me with the agreement that I would do no further work on it and would not send it back to the customer while he did his research.
About 2 or 3 weeks later he called and said it was Ok for the Original mfg'rs ser# to be so inlayed as has been commonly done by engravers,,but made a strong point of noting that in no way should the mfg'rs ser# be changed.
...OK,,Thank You...
You never know who and what they are thinking.
You can place a ser# of your choosing on a firearm that you yourself did make. None actually needed though as you cannot resell the gun (legally). A ser# may be needed if State/Local laws demand it for registration purposes though.
If you are going to make and sell even a small number of firearms,,then you need in the least a 07FFL (manufactures). Along with the ser#, your name or business name, address, model, and caliber must appear on the gun. Don't forget to pay FET if you make over 50 per yr.
Yes there are ways to 'retrieve' a ground, filed, punched out marking.
Sometimes they are successful,,other times not.
But why the process needs to be done in the first place is the question when it comes to a firearm.
OP says the owner is deceased and the Executor of the Estate needs the Ser# retrieval help.
An Executor of an Estate who finds themselves with a firearm with a ground -off ser# should simply contact local LE or the BATF and turn it in.
Simple as that.
There's no playing detective and taking a chance at handing over a stolen or defaced firearm to another person,,all on paperwork besides.
What are they thinking...
That was with the signing of the Federal Firearms Act 1938 (FDR).
The same language was turned over into the GCA68 when that law went into effect.
GCA68 took the place of the FFA38 and FFA38 was nullified (correct term).
As far as the gun being transported in Interstate Commerce ,,or not making it subject to any of these laws,,IIRC there have been rulings that came to the conclusion that the raw materials used to make the guns would be included in the make-up of the firearms.
So if the steel, wood, whatever else came from an OOS source,,,the gun was already considered as having gone through Interstate Commerce.
No I don't know where I read it but it's probably out there to be found.
They're not going to leave a huge loop hole like that open.
As far as the gun w/o a ser# that has been 'ground off'..everyone knows what it is.
An attempt to hide the ID of the gun. Stolen? maybe. Some people just don't like gov'mnt numbers on things. So they take them off and feel like no one can find them. Like living in a plywwod shack in the woods.
That's OK,,but there is a law that says taking the number off the frame of a firearm is not legal,plain and simple.
Each state has a similarly worded law that may also contain language that prohibits removing other factory applied markings like the Model, caliber, Makers name, ect.
Placing your own ser# on a firearm that you did not yourself mfg'r is unlawful.
Re-stamping the manufacturers applied ser# on a firearm is
'altering a manufacturers applied ser'.
Because of the fact that the orig marking is now over stamped with non- orig font, depth, size, ect characters,,the orig mfg ser# has been defaced.
They may allow that one to pass,,they may not. Want to poke the bear.?
I was hit up at a ATF compliance check yrs back when the Agent checking the guns in inventory was handed one was working on,,an engraved shotgun frame.
The ser# on the frame I had inlayed in gold as per the customers request...and certainly not an uncommon thing to do.
He immediately said that I had obliterated and altered the ser#!
I said that was the ser#. and back and forth it went.
He shook his head and finally told me that he was going to take the frame (confiscate it),,do further checking and get back to me.
I did get him to finally agree to leave the frame with me with the agreement that I would do no further work on it and would not send it back to the customer while he did his research.
About 2 or 3 weeks later he called and said it was Ok for the Original mfg'rs ser# to be so inlayed as has been commonly done by engravers,,but made a strong point of noting that in no way should the mfg'rs ser# be changed.
...OK,,Thank You...
You never know who and what they are thinking.
You can place a ser# of your choosing on a firearm that you yourself did make. None actually needed though as you cannot resell the gun (legally). A ser# may be needed if State/Local laws demand it for registration purposes though.
If you are going to make and sell even a small number of firearms,,then you need in the least a 07FFL (manufactures). Along with the ser#, your name or business name, address, model, and caliber must appear on the gun. Don't forget to pay FET if you make over 50 per yr.
Yes there are ways to 'retrieve' a ground, filed, punched out marking.
Sometimes they are successful,,other times not.
But why the process needs to be done in the first place is the question when it comes to a firearm.
OP says the owner is deceased and the Executor of the Estate needs the Ser# retrieval help.
An Executor of an Estate who finds themselves with a firearm with a ground -off ser# should simply contact local LE or the BATF and turn it in.
Simple as that.
There's no playing detective and taking a chance at handing over a stolen or defaced firearm to another person,,all on paperwork besides.
What are they thinking...
Last edited:
That is a very tight, technical question. I would take the first quoted statement at face value. You can presume without argument that every commercially manufactured firearm in America passed through interstate commerce. Even if a firearm was made in a foreign country and is imported into a coastal state our friends at the ATF could then use customs rules to cause the firearm to be subject to the GCA.
As for Montana, that's extremely technical - to pass muster every part of that firearm would have to be manufactured from scratch in Montana. Every spring, screw, nut, bolt, wood, etc., would have to provably have originated in that state.
I can't say what the ATF will or won't allow in re serial numbers but they did permit me to register a class III NFA AOW holster/derringer bearing a serial number that my FFL hand wrote onto the leather.
The phrase is “possess in or affecting commerce.” The Yankee Gov’t, prior to charging a crime with one of the elements being the commerce clause, conducts what’s known as an interstate nexus determination. Generally, this is fairly simple process. Born in Montana, found in Missouri. Problem solved.
In the case you cite, of a Sharps rifle in Montana, or a Smith & Wesson firearm in Massachusetts, it’s not much more complicated. Here are some questions that the Yankee Gov’t will ask during this process:
Where did the raw materials come from? How were payments for the raw materials made?
Is the company publicly traded?
Who handles the company’s financials?
Where did the equipment to manufacture the firearm come from?
How was the firearm paid for?
Any or all of the above can create an interstate nexus. I was once involved in the prosecution of an egregious hillbilly assault of a very pleasant Hispanic family at a state park. The interstate nexus for a successful federal civil rights prosecution of those three morons was in part created because the toilet paper at the outhouse at the campground came to Missouri from Ohio, after being manufactured in Missouri . . .
It’s one thing to read about it and speculate from afar. It’s quite another to live it and deal with it as it happens, with real world consequences . . .
Last edited:
Agreed.
About 15 years ago a friend and I assisted assisted the daughter of a deceased friend of mine. Her father had died and left a large and very impressive collection of firearms, including a dozen class III firearms. We helped her assess the value of them with the intent of ensuring she got fair market value for them. We also connected her with a class III dealer who could help her legally transfer or sell the NFA weapons.
Unfortunately, that dozen class III full auto weapons turned into 13, with a select fire AK-47 that didn’t have any paper work. Going through John’s notes and talking with other shooting friends who knew him, we were able to determine that he was storing it for a solider who was on another deployment to Afghanistan. What we could not find was a name for that solider or any evidence that it was a properly registered AK-47.
Worse, it was a US made commercial receiver and I suspected it wasn’t legally converted. In the proces of cross referencing the serial number with the date of manufacture I discovered it didn’t matter as the company hadn’t made AK receivers at all until 1990. That made it crystal clear it was made or more likely converted after the Hughes Amendment of the FOPA. As such it could not legally be possessed as anything other than a dealer sample, and that wasn’t the case.
It’s remotely possible that the receiver was a replacement for a worn out AK that had been legally registered prior to 1986, but that again is irrelevant. You can repair a full auto receiver but you can’t replace it.
Around the same time the ATF had convicted a gunsmith for cutting the serial numbered section of worn out M16 receivers and welding those sections into a new AR-15 receivers converting them to accommodate the full auto sear and calling it a “repair”. He ended up with about 15 years in federal prison to contemplate the downside of over stepping what the ATF considered to be a “repair”.
We all reached a consensus that the full auto parts needed to be destroyed, and as the receiver had been altered to accommodate full auto parts, it needed to be de-activated. It was torched into three pieces.
I never heard what happened when (or even if) the solider involved came to pick up what was now just an AK parts kit. If he did, he probably wasn’t happy, but getting ATF involved would have probably cost him his career plus about 10 years in federal prison.
For the daughter as executor of the estate, doing anything other than what was done would have been all downside. At best it would have subjected the rest of John’s NFA registered firearms to a great deal of scrutiny that could have potentially tied up the estate for months or years while the ATF verified the provenance of each and every NFA item he had.
Once again Muse we agree. You provided a superb example of the regulatory creep, over reach and over enforcement that has sadly become common in America.
I certainly saw it happen the department I worked in as a fed, and while it is often well intended it almost invariably contains unhealthy doses of “the ends justify the means” reasoning.
The old saw that it is better to let 100 guilty men go free than convict one innocent man is an ethical tenet that has long fallen out of common use. Law enforcement that consistently exceeds the original scope of the law, uses narrow reads of the law to circumvent the intent of a law or court ruling (such as creating a nexus by looking at the source of raw materials, accounting services/software etc) still isn’t ethical even if it is widely practiced. Yet ad populuum logical fallacies abound as “justification”.
Last edited:
I’m pretty much done here. I’m sorry you don’t like our laws or agree with their enforcement. You had knowledge of a significant felony, which you knew was a felony, and destroyed the evidence. Anything else you post will be duly noted . . .
Thanks Muss, I appreciate it. I appreciate qthe NC tie, but it didn’t happen in NC, More importantly, our capacity was advisory, we were never able to determine who may have committed the crime or even if a crime had occurred. Other than hearsay we also had no evidence that the deceased hadn’t done it himself and concocted a cover story (it’s also not something you suggest to a grieving daughter either). Conversely, we also did not have any concrete proof that it wasn’t legally registered and then possibly incorrectly repaired by parties unknown, consistent with was apparently not a one off practice as the ATF raked someone else over the coals for repairs on an AR-15 that the ATF determined (after the fact) were in excess of their definition of “repair” around the same general time frame. I don’t recall exactly when the ATF went after the gunsmith in question, but I do know we didn’t hear about it until after this event and we all had the same thought “oh good call cutting it up”.
What the daughter did have on her hands was an unaccounted for class III firearm with no paperwork, no clear ownership, and a suspect provenance. It was destroyed it to conceal or avoid reporting a crime, but rather in an abundance of caution regarding its legality in order to avoid the daughter/executor committing a crime by knowingly being in possession of an unregistered NFA item.
I used the example as the parallel to the OPs question is direct.
Like it or not he’s in possession of a firearm without a serial number. It’s unclear whether a crime was committed or not for a variety of reason, but it is crystal clear that it isn’t legal to possess it, and it’s quite likely that any view a federal ATF agent would take on it would be negative.
In other words, if in doubt cutting it up is a much safer approach than relying on fine points of the law.
And once again you’ve demonstrated that some federal agents are hardwired to look for an offense regardless of context, intent, public interest or lack of harm.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
