Law Against Possession of Unserialized Gun Ruled Unconstitutional in West Virginia

AmmoLand ^ | October 17, 2022 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

On October 12, 2022, in the US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, Judge Joseph R. Gordon granted a motion to dismiss the charge of possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(k) as being facially unconstitutional. Judge Gordon was appointed by President Bill Clinton.

From the decision:

Assume, for example, that a law-abiding citizen purchases a firearm from a sporting goods store. At the time of the sale, that firearm complies with the commercial regulation that it bear a serial number. The law-abiding citizen takes the firearm home and removes the serial number. He has no ill intent and never takes any otherwise unlawful action with the firearm. Contrary to the Government’s argument that Section 922(k) does not amount to an “infringement” on the law-abiding citizen’s Second Amendment right, the practical application is that while the law-abiding citizen’s possession of the firearm was originally legal, it became illegal only because the serial number was removed. He could be prosecuted federally for his possession of it. That is the definition of an infringement on one’s right to possess a firearm.

Now, assume that the law-abiding citizen dies and leaves his gun collection to his law-abiding daughter. The daughter takes the firearms, the one with the removed serial number among them, to her home and displays them in her father’s memory. As it stands, Section 922(k) also makes her possession of the firearm illegal, despite the fact that it was legally purchased by her father and despite the fact that she was not the person who removed the serial number. These scenarios make clear that Section 922(k) is far more than the mere commercial regulation the Government claims it to be.

[Wilhelm Tell]

Maybe it is a scheme to ban old guns or make it illegal to replace the barrel. They have to have thought of all the ways they can make things difficult for ordinary citizens and trip them up on a technicality that becomes a “felony” - that is really the point of this.

[Still Thinking]

And what about guns that never had a serial number in the first place?? If you own one of them, legally, then when they pass this law, if you don’t go engrave one, you’re committing a crime by omission? Or guns you build yourself? If the law is that it has to have a serial number (unique to the maker, not the world), then I recommend “1”. Or “42” cause, you know, it’s the meaning of life and stuff.

[zeugma]

This decision pretty much couldn’t be anything else with Gruen as precident. Thanks for the link to the decision itself!

[marktwain]

An important point is the federal law against possession of a firearm with a defaced/removed serial number did not exist before 1990.

It is a very recent law.

[zeugma]

It helps to determine the date of manufacture if you’re a collector or there is a recall and there are recalls.

Yup. One of the few legitimate purposes of serial numbers. This could be accomplished as well by placing a manufacturing date or otherwise note manufacture date. Zippo has used a number of systems over the years to identify when a particular lighter was made.