How to recover a filed off SERIAL NUMBER ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
IMHO, unless the firearm in question has some significant monetary, or historical value, or if it is truly exempt in any way of requiring it to have a legible serial number, by far the only reasonable thing to do is to contact your local law enforcement agency, and surrender it. Unless it's something that Christopher Columbus wore on his hip as he landed in the New World, the legal fees defending yourself may far outweigh the value of the piece.
 
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 . . .

Wow! And I guess your Signature “Wisdom comes thru fear” pretty much says it all huh? That you be the all knowing dispenser of wisdom thru fear :rolleyes:
 
IIRC California has a provision in their laws (or they did) which allows that should a person come in possession of a firearm without a serial number that person may stamp a number of his/her choice onto the firearm.

How that affects the legality of the process as far as the feds are concerned is unknown to me, though I'm fairly sure they would do their utmost to stick the person in jail for as long as they can get simply because it's one more conviction. And they have then, once again, shown themselves to the the sledgehammer of the Federal Government. Nothing against any one individual, but IMHO those individuals that use the law in such a fashion, should all be taken out and stood against a wall, from the top down.
 
Last edited:
I have watched as dealers doing background checks mistakenly used another number from a gun instead of the serial number. Check goes through, incorrect number used in their books and life actually went on as usual.
 
I have watched as dealers doing background checks mistakenly used another number from a gun instead of the serial number. Check goes through, incorrect number used in their books and life actually went on as usual.

True, more often than not.

Until it’s not.

Then people have to start negotiating with BATF over potential felony charges. Minor mistakes are just that, until some one with a little bit of authority decides to . . . Make a federal case out of it.

Once such an unintentional mistake is uncovered, it is probably better to correct it ASAP to show lack of criminal intent. It becomes problematic if there is a series of such mistakes.

Gun stores running background checks around here always have a second employee check the form for just such errors. Up front effort is rewarded with fewer problems later.
 
You guys have been yapping about this for 2 days and the op hasn't replied to any comments or questions. Me thinks something is amiss...

The OP doesn’t want to reveal the owner of the gun in question or what type of gun it is. The type of gun involved could make a big difference because as mentioned above many guns have the serial number in more than one place.
 
I have watched as dealers doing background checks mistakenly used another number from a gun instead of the serial number. Check goes through, incorrect number used in their books and life actually went on as usual.

So have I. I correct them when that occurs, but it gets complicated when it went into the bound book with the wrong number. That sometimes happens when there is a prominent serial number stamped on the slide, frame and barrel of a surplus military pistol, as well as a less obvious importer added serial number (required by law) that goes unnoticed or unrecognized in the larger importer information.

I also see firearms like P08 and P38 being sold that have a 4 digit serial number with a prefix letter. In effect, every 10000 units the prefix letter advanced one letter in thr alphabet but sometimes the prefix is left off. That obviously means it is no longer a unique serial number and that there are then scores or even hundreds of pistols of that same model with the same 4 digits.

More commonly, the FFL will fail to realize that the prefix resets at the end of the year, and just record the prefix and serial number. However to capture a truly unique serial number with a pistol like the P38 you need to record the year, the prefix and the 4 digit serial number.

You also need to properly record the manufacturer as with a P38 there may well be three pistols with that same year with identical prefix and 4 digit number - “ac” for Walther, “byf” for Mauser and “cyq” for Spreewerk. Unless the FFL knows the codes and the manufacturer, they are likely to incorrectly put “Walther” as the manufacturer.

In part because of this misunderstanding and knowledge gap by FFLs, and in part because ATF also didn’t fully appreciate how the systems in use out there worked to avoid duplicate serial numbers, the law was changed to require importers to put a unique serial number along with their name and address on all imported surplus firearms. In most cases it was unnecessary as the system used by the maker as a whole ensured a uniquely identifiable firearm.

FN was one of the few and more notable exceptions. For example, a friend of mine owns FN Hi Power serial number 27. It isn’t all that early as Hi Powers go, it was just number 27 on a small police contract where they wanted their own serial number range starting with “1”. Taken out of the larger context of the other stamps and property marks it is easy to confuse with an unknown number of other Hi Powers with 27 for the serial number.

The problem is that this fix created the larger problem of firearms having multiple serial numbers and FFLs now recording the wrong one in bound books and when they are transferred.

However, in the bigger picture, I agree with you that the difference is small and that even for firearm tracing purposes if a firearm is recovered, law enforcement has the option to trace both numbers as one of them would have been recorded by the
FFL, and when applicable forwarded when the FFL closed.

That said, I’m sure a large percentage of ATF agents would find fault with that kind of unintentional mistake - and a few federal agency might even decide that you, as a witness to it who did not report it, committed a crime.
 
Wow! And I guess your Signature “Wisdom comes thru fear” pretty much says it all huh? That you be the all knowing dispenser of wisdom thru fear :rolleyes:

Don’t be too hard on him.

Muss and I have a long history of philosophical disagreements. He was probably good at what he did in terms of following directives he was given. My career was mostly spent determining what directives should be given and pointing out the pitfalls and unintended consequences when short term goals or objectives are used to drive long term policy.

——

I am not a narrow read of the law person by any means as I’ve seen over the last 30 years how that ends badly when very narrow read of the law or guidance in a particular case is then generalized.

The ongoing rule making process for braced handguns is a great example.

They were clearly illegal and from a common sense perspective were a “stock” intended to circumvent the SBR provisions of the NFA of 1934 - until a company made the case that they were a disability accommodation for veterans who wanted to shoot heavy AR-15 pistols. The ATF should have just said “nice try but the answer is no.” The ATF also could have put some amended rules regarding disability accommodation and documenting disability, etc for lawful users of said braces. But they did not, because the federal rule making process is very time consuming, and there was no real legal authority to amend the regulations to accommodate disabilities.

Instead they made a narrow read of the law and determined a brace that looked like a stick and could be used like a stock despite its purported (and let’s be honest really improbable) design intent was in fact not a stock but a brace.

That opened the flood gates as ATF approved more of them on the same flawed logic.

At some point it occurred to them that these were items that were being very commonly used by non disabled people and that they were being used to circumvent the SBR registration requirement in the NFA. Rather than reverse their original option they added language that stated if you use a brace on a handgun as a stock, it changes the status from handgun to SBR. Worse, they used language about rifles being designed to be fired with two Handys that when read very narrowly meant my 1911 was no longer a “handgun”.

They figured that out pretty quickly and backed off from “mere use” as a criteria for defining classification of firearms. They also figured out it was virtually unenforceable:

Defense attorney: Agent do you agree that the law says that a braced handgun becomes an SBR when the brace is placed against the shoulder like a stock?

Agent: yes, that is how the law reads.

Defense attorney: How far away from you from the defendant when you observed him place the brace against his shoulder wand at what angle were you to the defendant.

Agent: I was about 50 yards away and at to his left rear.

Defense attorney: So.. you could not directly observe whether the stock was against his right shoulder or, as was the case, that it was still 1/4” in front of his shoulder.

Agent: (long pause) No I could not.


Consequently the ATF then said you can have braced handguns and shoot them off your shoulder, forget we ever mentioned it.

Fast forward a couple more years and the ATF has proposed a new rule change that will reclassify the vast majority of previously approved braced handguns as SBRs and require owners of said firearms to complete a form 1 application and pay a $200 tax stamp fee.

The basis for this is once again a narrow read of the law citing the use of braced pistols in 2 out of more than 2600 mass shootings since 2013 when braced handguns were first approved. That’s 2/2600 mass shootings and by its own estimate 2/3,000,000 braced handguns in existence.

That’s a problem as the scope of the NFA of 1934 is firearms that are likely to be used in crimes by gangs. Long guns of any kind are used in less than 1.5% of all crimes and they even take a distant second place in mass shootings to traditional unbraced handguns. Braced handguns are virtually never used in crimes as while they are still technically handguns, they are heavy and hard to conceal.

But like the “interstate nexus” Muss speaks about, if you get enough lawyers together taking a narrow enough read of the law, you can twist it around to do almost anything. Unless of course enough law abiding citizens step up and say “enough”.

The public comment period just closed on the proposed braced handgun rules and the ATF received over 180,000 comments. I suspect the vast majority of them are opposed to part or all of the proposed rule.

We’ll see what happens. By law they have to respond to all comments, although they can and will group them together. Unfortunately there is no requirement to change the proposed rule based on any comments, no matter how valid they may be. The ATF. Am simply say “we disagree” and refuse to make any substantive change.


Personally, I have no issue with having them classified as SBRs - going forward. Existing examples should remain as braced handguns. The ATF has rejected that alternative due to concerns for tracing these unserialized braces and deter owning what is pre or post reclassification. However it isn’t that hard. Current owners could just submit the proposed worksheet, with the criteria and include the serial number of the handgun the brace is on. It’s then only legal on that handgun, and only in that configuration. Any change in configuration would require a new worksheet be completed as a post classification requirement firearm.

The ATF also rejected the idea of waiving the $200 tax stamp out of fear that shooters would register all their current firearms as potential braced handguns and add braces later. The above mentioned method addresses that as well. I also don’t think the number of braced handguns would increase appreciably because of it.

If it does come to pass it will criminalize a large number of otherwise law abiding Americans who statistically have less than a one tenth of one percent chance they’ll ever use a braced handgun on a crime. For those that comply it will cost them literally hundreds of millions of dollars to comply.

For those that opt to convert them back to braced handguns, it won’t make most of them any less lethal. For example the British train their MP5 equipped officers to shoot them using a sling. They push the MP5 forward against the single point sling to stabilize the weapon. It actually works better than a stock if the office is wearing body armor and/or a gas mask, and it’s much easier and more compact to use in close quarters.

But we are not talking common sense here, or even public safety - instead we are talking about a pattern of using a narrow read of the law to achieve an agenda.
 
Speaking from personal experience this whole issue is a hot potato. Having a post 1898 firearm with a defaced serial number is a felony- period. The only solution is to voluntarily surrender it to a law enforcement agency. Not doing so risks criminal prosecution. There really is no wishful thinking or debate possible.
 
Unfortunately these kinds of threads deteriorate into two camps. Real world and common sense vs a strict interpretation of the law. How many on here actually believe that the BATF is going to descend on surviving family members with both feet when and if it comes to light that grampa’s WW2 relic had the serial number ground off in one location? To what end?? And how many who seem to get some satisfaction in trying to impose rules on others would actually use a cutting torch on a nice family heirloom if it belonged to their family?
 
I always get a good laugh out of these “ATF GONNA GETCHA” threads.

I’ve worked with them enough to know better.

ATFE gets about 95% of their cases as referrals from local PD’s, and that’s where the problem would start, because that’s a mark of pride to get a federal conviction from the midnight shift in podunk county. A pistol like the OP described is most likely to get discovered after some event the OP would report, like a burglary, or even a house fire, or an event the domestic partner would report, like an assault, which generates a whole house search and a “Hey, c’mere and look at this . . . “ Once found a hidden marijuana grow after a fire, and another after “my husband’s been hitting me, and by the way he grows weed in the basement. Can easily change to “by the way, he’s got a pistol he said was illegal.”

We’ve stopped that in Missouri by legislatively prohibiting the locals from cooperating in any way with federal prosecution of gun crimes.
 
We (the Eff-Bee-Eye) had an MOU with them and the US Attorney’s Office. We could charge gun counts in addition to another charge (murder, rape, serious assault) but they got all stand-alone gun charges. Typically the tribe would make a good traffic stop and turn up a sawed-off shotgun or rifle. Most were single shot shotguns sawed off in front of the handguard and behind the pistol grip. I called them Navajo Pirate Pistols. (Once it was a Marlin Model 60 .22 semi-auto, sawn straight through the tubular magazine).

They would call me (ATF would not respond. Ever.) I would get the gun, do a referal, and wait. The earth would circle the sun, leaves would change color, regimes would rise and fall. And yet - crickets.

When I had enough illegal guns no one cared about I would put them in my rig and drive across a nearby dam. Sometimes I could skip them a couple times.

Once I managed a stand alone felon in possession. A local d-bag fired his Navajo Pirate Pistol from inside his house through his barred window and killed a guy who was throwing rocks at his house. The USAO quivered and quaked at the thought of a self-defense claim and wouldn’t even take it to the grand jury. I finally got the ATF to commit their “we don’t care” to paper, and the USAO charged the felon in possession count (not the sawed off bit, though) and of course he pled and we were rid of him for a couple of years.

Maybe it was just me. Or the rez. But I don’t think so.

I encourage everyone to follow the law. In this case, there is a legal way to restore a serial number.
 
Last edited:
Earlier S&W revolvers had the serial number stamped in a couple of places, usually on the butt and on the bottom of the barrel. If one of those is removed but the other is intact is it legal or not?
 
Earlier S&W revolvers had the serial number stamped in a couple of places, usually on the butt and on the bottom of the barrel. If one of those is removed but the other is intact is it legal or not?

I think it has to be on the frame.
 
I am going to chime in here and show one of two questionable handguns I have owned. This was my first Glock 26. This was a LE confiscation gun that was in a batch of guns traded by a Florida SO to a LE supply company. If you look at the serial number on the slide you can see it has been tampered with but is readable. The number on the frame got damaged too. If the gun was held at a 45° angle under good light the number was easily legible. A ATF agent advised that this could be sold, and stated he had no need to personally eyeball this firearm.

I had the property tag from the Florida SO so I never was uncomfortable with it, but sold it after getting the second one. I sold it to a forum member LEO who said it was good enough; but if the right lawman saw it I would likely be inconvenienced for a few hours.

The other handgun was a pre model 10 M&P someone round butted and messed up the serial number. I did call ATF about it, explained I bought it from an estate sale in west Georgia, and an agent met me to eyeball it. He said over the phone I could surrender it if necessary with no charges. The agent was from the community where the gun came from and had been at the sale. He knew the family, and the gun, and bought it from me. The deceased former owner had been the agent’s Scoutmaster and that M&P was the first gun the agent had ever fired.

You may notice the Glock has night sights. I took that gun to Glock, Inc. the day after I bought it for service and the sights. When the service tech noticed the serial number he brought me the gun and asked me to leave. I pulled the slide off and put the frame in my pocket. I asked him to install the sights on the slide. He did so and he brought me a baggy with new frame internals and replaced the magazine.
 

Attachments

  • 65C1D0DC-1B35-4819-ABF1-3E8AA4701C0C.jpeg
    65C1D0DC-1B35-4819-ABF1-3E8AA4701C0C.jpeg
    190.3 KB · Views: 37
Last edited:
Everything is interstate commerce because the air that was use even if just for the workers breath, blew across state lines at some point in the history of the world and the water, they drank, evaporated in one state and rained down in another at some point in history. There got it covered for the Feds it is all under their jurisdiction now. If I eat a can of soup and J walk it is a Federal crime because the soup in my belly came from a plant in Texas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top