New Mexico Gun Shop Seizes Polymer80 Pistol For Not Having A Serial Number

Ματθιας

Ματθιας

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
3,935
Reaction score
8,903
Location
Nuke City
I'm not sure where to put this article.

New Mexico Gun Shop Seizes Polymer80 Pistol For Not Having A Serial Number

Ammoland Inc. Posted on September 11, 2023 by John Crump

New Mexico Gun Shop Seizes Polymer80 Pistol For Not Having A Serial Number


Albuequree, New Mexico – A man searching for a holster for his Polymer80 pistol had his firearms confiscated by a gun store in New Mexico because the gun lacked a serial number. The man is currently serving in the military and stationed in New Mexico. He went to Shooter’s Den in Albuquerque to purchase some Glock magazines and search for a holster that would fit his pistol. Although the man is under 21, he legally built the firearm himself.
Click to expand...

If you've been in ABQ and make your rounds to the gunshops in the area, then, you know Shooter's Den. Unfortunately, the old owners sold out a few years ago, and while it has same the name it's NOT the same store. I've only been in the store once since the new owners took over and I wasn't impressed with prices or inventory and this was a few years ago. Haven't been back since.

What happens if the theft charges stick?
 
Register to hide this ad
Who elected these nitwits to be Sheriff and take a legally owned firearm from a private citizen? Demanding his ID, like you're LE... :mad: Just plain ignorant.

Yes, I think they should be charged with theft at a minimum.

With that said, I don't live in NM, but I'd hope they go out of business or get their license pulled for doing something so stupid. Pretty bad when the ATF doesn't agree with what you did in this situation!

Obviously not too "Pro 2A" if you ask me. Obviously also don't know the law well for being a "gun store".
 
At face value... theft of a firearm.
As I understand things, the gun must be serialized if, it spends a business day at an FFL. Outside this, it's within the law pertaining to privately manufactured firearms, assuming the owner is not otherwise prohibited.
That shop found trouble
 
Ok, if I read this correctly, even tho the ATF says return the gun it now has to have a serial number. Gun pwner now has to have a background check to get the gun back. Because he's under he won't pass the BC. He's still screwed

From the article:

Read more: New Mexico Gun Shop Seizes Polymer80 Pistol For Not Having A Serial Number
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

When the young man attempted to retrieve his firearm from the gun shop, the FFL informed him that the firearm could not be transferred. Shooter’s Den stated the ATF had instructed the shop to serialize the firearm and add it to their FFL records. The young man would have to pass a NICS background check to retake possession from the FFL. Now, the man, who was a young military member under 21, is by law unable to pass the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) due to his age.

“Citizens under 21 are prohibited from buying a handgun from a Federal Firearms Licensee.” Source ATF [18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1)].
 
g-dad said:
Ok, if I read this correctly, even tho the ATF says return the gun it now has to have a serial number. Gun pwner now has to have a background check to get the gun back. Because he's under he won't pass the BC. He's still screwed

From the article:

Read more: New Mexico Gun Shop Seizes Polymer80 Pistol For Not Having A Serial Number
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

When the young man attempted to retrieve his firearm from the gun shop, the FFL informed him that the firearm could not be transferred. Shooter’s Den stated the ATF had instructed the shop to serialize the firearm and add it to their FFL records. The young man would have to pass a NICS background check to retake possession from the FFL. Now, the man, who was a young military member under 21, is by law unable to pass the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) due to his age.

“Citizens under 21 are prohibited from buying a handgun from a Federal Firearms Licensee.” Source ATF [18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1)].
Click to expand...

But he wouldnt be buying it.
 
Interesting situation.

Perfectly legal to manufacture a firearm for your own personal use. No prohibition on possession by a 19-year old (federal or New Mexico law). FFL is required to enter the firearm in its records because it was held pending investigation, now anyone receiving it from the FFL is completing a transfer subject to federal law, and the lawful owner cannot qualify to receive the firearm.

I doubt that a prosecutor would consider theft charges against the shop personnel. Pretty obvious they were acting out of an abundance of caution in consideration of their position as a licensed firearms dealer.

As a civil matter this might find some traction. The young man might be able to convince a judge or jury that he has been deprived of property rights without just cause and receive an award for damages in the amount of market value of the homemade pistol. Proving value will be problematic because there are unlikely to be any comparable sales data, and sale of a homemade firearm is questionable under federal law. Difficult lawsuit to pursue, unlikely to draw much in the way of legal representation. What are we talking about, at most a few hundred bucks for the 80% frame and parts to complete? Probably less than a lawyer's retainer fee to draft and file the complaint in civil court, and right back to the argument that the shop personnel were just trying their best to comply with the law and protect their business, so punitive damages would be very unlikely.

Probably one of life's little learning experiences for a 19-year old man.
 
The thing is, legal gun or not, the shop does not have the authority to sieze the firearm. They are licensed to sell guns, not enforce laws. If I pulled into their parking lot with an unregistered vehicle, would they sieze it? Do we really need to get into the issues untrained and unsworn citizens enforcing laws would cause? Not to mention that in this case, they were absolutely wrong about the legality of said pistol. If a plumber pulled up next to you and said he was pulling you over for "reckless driving" and told you he was taking you to jail, would you go? No. Because a plumber doesn't have the authority. And neither does a gunshop employee.
 
lihpster said:
The thing is, legal gun or not, the shop does not have the authority to sieze the firearm. They are licensed to sell guns, not enforce laws. If I pulled into their parking lot with an unregistered vehicle, would they sieze it? Do we really need to get into the issues untrained and unsworn citizens enforcing laws would cause? Not to mention that in this case, they were absolutely wrong about the legality of said pistol. If a plumber pulled up next to you and said he was pulling you over for "reckless driving" and told you he was taking you to jail, would you go? No. Because a plumber doesn't have the authority. And neither does a gunshop employee.
Click to expand...

I agree with your comments, but we are discussing a situation that has already occurred. No do-overs now, only alternatives to go forward with what now exists and cannot be changed.

The milk has been spilled, only the clean-up remains.

This situation took place inside a commercial business, on private property, under the control of people who (presumably) were acting in good faith while attending to their private business. Trying to convince a prosecuting attorney, a judge, or a jury that there was some egregious wrong committed would be practically impossible. Once the BATFE became involved the only course of action for the FFL dealer is to follow the instructions for disposition of the firearm.
 
When a gunshop/range wanted to 'inspect' my......

...AR-15 for 'illegal stocks', many said that a gunshop can't confiscate anything. Well, they may not be legally allowed to but it looks like in this case they did. And he's most likely got a court battle to get his gun back.

Just like the Governor of NM isn't allowed to suspend the Constitution, but SHE DID, and now the representatives from the state are asking the Attorney General of the US to get the Supreme court to nullify the order. No matter what is done it is going to take time and whatever time it takes, citizens are criminals if they are armed like the 2nd Amendment allows. Maybe they'll even get rid of her, but it's going to take time.
 
ImprovedModel56Fan said:
Several posters have mentioned seizing a firearm. Didn't happen. The customer gave it to them, not realizing that they couldn't legally give it back. Doesn't look like anyone has broken a law yet.
Click to expand...

I don’t read where the link article says he gave the gun to the shop employee. Maybe a assumption on your part because the owner posted;

“he asked me to show him my firearm, thinking nothing of it I went to my car and came back with it and he TOOK it said he was filing a report with the atf.”

Why couldn’t they give back while he was still in the store? He was not giving them the gun for repair, trade, consignment or selling it to them. It appears the employee offered to help the poster to purchase some magazines for it and handled the gun to help to do so (otherwise he could not have seen it had no serial number).
 
Last edited:
Just be aware that this is based on an internet forum post by the alleged victim. There's no other source cited. Then it gets reposted in places like this. Then Ammoland gets a lot of visits.
 
Last edited:
LoboGunLeather said:
Interesting situation.

Perfectly legal to manufacture a firearm for your own personal use. No prohibition on possession by a 19-year old (federal or New Mexico law). FFL is required to enter the firearm in its records because it was held pending investigation, now anyone receiving it from the FFL is completing a transfer subject to federal law, and the lawful owner cannot qualify to receive the firearm.

I doubt that a prosecutor would consider theft charges against the shop personnel. Pretty obvious they were acting out of an abundance of caution in consideration of their position as a licensed firearms dealer.
Click to expand...

This is the same theory as a “citizens arrest” and the risk in doing so. Since the dealer thought the gun was illegal why didn’t they call the Police/Sheriff and turn the matter over to them? This would absolve the FFL of any criminal liability.

LoboGunLeather said:
As a civil matter this might find some traction. The young man might be able to convince a judge or jury that he has been deprived of property rights without just cause and receive an award for damages in the amount of market value of the homemade pistol. Proving value will be problematic because there are unlikely to be any comparable sales data, and sale of a homemade firearm is questionable under federal law. Difficult lawsuit to pursue, unlikely to draw much in the way of legal representation. What are we talking about, at most a few hundred bucks for the 80% frame and parts to complete? Probably less than a lawyer's retainer fee to draft and file the complaint in civil court, and right back to the argument that the shop personnel were just trying their best to comply with the law and protect their business, so punitive damages would be very unlikely.
Click to expand...

If he still as receipts for the parts it would help to establish value. He could try to add the amount of time for his labor to build it (which might take some convincing of the judge).

Pistols with a “80% receivers” usually have the same mechanical features of a Glock. In fact Glock parts may be used in the build. The appearance of the slide and frame can be argued merely as “cosmetic”. So he could compare it to a Glock 17 or 19 for example.

However well intended by the FFL dealer the result of his actions is legally “taking” although not likely to result in criminal charges. The poster could file a case in small claims court thus avoiding a lawyer. As many lawyers give free one hour consultation when determining whether to accept a case he might get some legal advice that way.

IMO the best solution is for the FFL to reach a agreement for cash settlement with the owner. It would be a win-win. The owner would have the money to do another 80% build and the FFL could sell it as a used gun after putting a serial number on it.
 
The young man isn't "purchasing" the firearm. He is taking possession of his own gun, which under federal law is legal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kevin J.
Gun Shop Types
Replies
13
Views
797
WR Moore
W
Narragansett
Joining a New Gun Club
2
Replies
27
Views
929
jeffrefrig
J
soFlaNative
I'm Not a Cop but...
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
2K
Shrek Of The Arctic
S
JRB416
What Arizona gun shops are worth a visit?
Replies
18
Views
954
JRB416
JRB416
soFlaNative
That's Not a Knife!
Replies
15
Views
649
gjgalligan
G

Latest posts

Back
Top