3rd Circuit Court of Appeals OKs ban on un-serialized guns

[ericire12]

Now is it just me, or is this one of those laws that assumes all guns will be used for a crime and later must be able to be distinguished in a manor that will unequivocally result in solving said crime? I mean, it is after all your own personal property. Until it were to actually be stolen or used for a crime what good is it? Its the same with odometers. Unless you are going to sell a car whose odometer has been cracked open and changed, it should not be a crime - theoretically.


http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202464062676&In_Wake_of_Heller_rd_Circuit_OKs_Ban_on_Unnumbered_Guns

McLaughlin held that the Second Amendment does not protect a right to own handguns with obliterated serial numbers and that 922(k) does not meaningfully burden the "core" right recognized in Heller -- the right to possess firearms for defense of hearth and home.

Instead, McLaughlin concluded that because 922(k) is designed to regulate the commercial sale of firearms and to prevent possession by a class of presumptively dangerous individuals, it is analogous to several long-standing limitations on the right to bear arms identified as presumptively valid in Heller.

[Hazcat]

HMMM...

Not very clear to me.  In some places they say 'obliterated' and in others they say 'unmarked'. 

It seems to me that if 'unmarked' is included then many (most?) older firearms will be illegal to own.  When did serials numbers become mandatory, 66?

[fightingquaker13]

Its annoying, but a basic CYA ruling. In fact, its what I want the courts to do. Rule as narrowly as possible on the facts at hand, avoid sweeping changes that are the purview of the lesislature and kick the can down the road to appellate courts to rule on Constitutional issues. We lost this one, but I think the judge did the wrong thing for the right reasons, though I might be wrong on that.
FQ13

[ericire12]

HMMM...

Not very clear to me.  In some places they say 'obliterated' and in others they say 'unmarked'. 

It seems to me that if 'unmarked' is included then many (most?) older firearms will be illegal to own.  When did serials numbers become mandatory, 66?

Great point.

Also to their reasoning for ruling the way they did, ANY unique marking would suffice as a serial number. Get out your dremel tool!

[TAB]

68 is when they needed serial numbers.  i have several from the 20s and 30s that don't have them.

[Sponsor]

[Hazcat]

68 is when they needed serial numbers.  i have several from the 20s and 30s that don't have them.

I'm not going to admit anything in writing.

[tt11758]

I'm not going to admit anything in writing.

Guns?  What guns?  I ain't got no steenkin guns.

[tombogan03884]

TAB is right. The Omnibus crime bill of 1968 started the serial number requirement as well as dealer licensing.
However, fire arms made prior to that date were Grandfathered.
This will go to a higher court since it basically criminalizes objects based solely on date of manufacture with out any other variable.

[TAB]

TAB is right. The Omnibus crime bill of 1968 started the serial number requirement as well as dealer licensing.
However, fire arms made prior to that date were Grandfathered.
This will go to a higher court since it basically criminalizes objects based solely on date of manufacture with out any other variable.

it would also make 10s of thousands of people across the country felons.  just think of how much money some people would stand to lose if this would go into effect.  some older guns are worth big bucks.