- Messages
- 1,671
- Reactions
- 1,286
except that the point of the case was a gun that had a serial number that was obliterated,Except... the common use test is based on types of firearms commonly possessed... not on a specific cosmetic differentiating it into another class within the same class of those that are commonly owned and protected.
and that if one removes the serial number it is no longer covered under the 2A because it is not a common practice and is also
unlawful to remove a serial number.
it is plain and simple "can you use a gun to defend ones self ?" yesAs others previously stated. The firearm is protected under the 2A. Obliterating the serial number falls under a criminal act.
The plaintiff was challenging it under the 2A so that's what the judge dreamed up to rule against his 2A claim. Plain and simple, IMHO.
"can one use a gun that had the serial number removed to defend ones self?" yes but
the gun it's self is in violation of the LAW and you can not keep it.
the case is really that simple, has nothing to do with guns you make at home for your self that have no serial number.
the thread tittle should be fixed from
Non serialized firearms are not "Arms" under the 2A(??)
to