Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bill DeShivs
Many years ago I had an encounter with ATF about this on a gun that I refinished....
|
An interesting anecdote, but merely an anecdote nonetheless. Certainly your story has no legal significance and won't help the OP if he gets himself into trouble for possession of that gun with the obliterated serial number.
Among other things:
- It was many years ago. Has ATF policy changed? And whoever you dealt with at ATF is probably no longer around to give the OP a pass.
- Someone with an FFL refinishing a gun with an ATF authorized replacement serial number is different enough from the OP's situation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dashunde
...I'd "reveal" the number by whatever method worked (acid, magnuflux, etc) then re-stamp it as it should be and refinish/restore it from there...
|
And exactly what makes you think that would be legal?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dashunde
...If the number is re-stamped, then bead-blasted, then refinished it should look reasonably legit....
|
Looking "legit" is not, however, the legal test.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dashunde
...It would be interesting to see how messed up it really is.
Heck, even messing with a high resolution quality photo of it in Photoshop might reveal what the number really is....
|
On the other hand, see
U.S. v. Horey, 36 F.3d 1106 (C.A.10 (Okl.), 1993):
Quote:
...We turn to defendant's argument that his conviction for violating 18 U.S.C. 922(k) was also based on insufficient evidence. Defendant argues the government failed to sufficiently show that the revolver's serial number was removed, obliterated, or altered. He asserts the statute does not reach serial numbers that are still readable.
Police officers testified that the serial number was obliterated. In addition, an expert in firearms and tool mark examination testified the revolver's serial number was partially obscured or obliterated. The examiner also noted that it was possible one or two additional serial numbers were completely obliterated. Based on the clear language of 922(k), we reject defendant's argument that the statute does not reach the firearm recovered by the police in this case. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction, and we AFFIRM the jury's verdict....
|
See also
U.S. v. Adams, 305 F.3d 30 (Fed. 1st Cir., 2002)(emphasis added):
Quote:
...As for the evidence, that was clearly sufficient once it is understood that any alteration that works against legibility is enough; ...The pistol was presented to the jury. The case agent testified at trial that he could read the six digits of the serial number but with difficulty. At oral argument, Adams's counsel asked that this court examine the original pistol, and we now report the results.
...
Of course, judgment as to the degree of impairment was for the jury. But a reasonable jury could easily conclude that this pistol had been altered so as to make it appreciably more difficult to read the serial number. Indeed, a reasonable jury could hardly reach any other conclusion...
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dashunde
...Frank, while you may be right to the fine print, it seems absurd for any court or agency to persue a criminal case on a law-abiding ordinary Joe who simply inherited such a pistol,...
|
Whether it seems absurd to you is beside the point and will be no help to the OP if it doesn't seem absurd to the United States Attorney. Remember, mere possession is the crime (and it seems to be stretching a point to call someone law-abiding who is knowingly in possession of gun on which the manufacturer's serial number has been removed, obliterated or altered, when such possession is a federal felony).
And the OP is risking five years in federal prison (plus the lifetime loss of gun rights). Do you really think he should risk that on what you think is absurd?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
...Actually, it is my understanding that Turnbull is one of a very few restoration gunsmiths that the BATFE trusts to raise and restore "lost" serial numbers...
|
I wasn't aware of that. If Turnbull would/could take it on, that would solve the OP's problems. It would be expensive, but Turnbull's work is absolutely first class.
And whatever Turnbull is likely to charge for the restoration of both the gun and the serial number will certainly be less than it would cost the OP to deal with a charge of violating 18 USC 922(k).