• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

KY Court Calls Foul On Cop Who Seized a Gun to Run the Serial Number

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,278
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP 527.010 Definitions for chapter.
The following definitions apply in this chapter unless the context otherwise requires:

(2) "Deface" means to remove, deface, cover, alter, or destroy the manufacturer's serial number or any other distinguishing number or identification mark


So, every S&W that ever left the factory with the Goncalo Alves target grips is illegal in KY??
http://www.terapeak.com/worth/smith...ips-goncalo-alves-wood-original/360754394434/
Oh, ho, ho, ho!

The only possible motive for criminalizing covering a gun serial number is to defeat the 4th Amendment.

Think about it. If a cop has probable cause to believe the gun is stolen or was used in a crime, he can apply for a telephonic warrant to remove the covering from the serial number. Heck, he can likely squeeze in under the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant clause--a person could just throw the gun in a river.

There are too many avenues for any cop who legitimately has probable cause to suspect a gun. The only possible reason to criminalize covering the serial number is to defeat the 4th Amendment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,278
Location
Fairfax Co., VA

Don't highjack this thread. If you want to discuss this minutiae, start your own thread. This is what the Ky. law says. If you don't like it, stay out of Ky. and you will not be effected by it.
Ummm. I started the thread. And, since when is discussing the minutiae a hijacking?

If you really want to stick exactly and only precisely to the thread topic, then guns and self-defense are out of the question. The court opinion adds up to a rejection of the defendant's disorderly conduct conviction. The pro-gun comment of the court is dicta, not holding.

Or, would you rather some newbie mistakenly think he can defeat a warrantless search of his serial number in KY by covering the serial number and end up in jail?
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Don't highjack this thread. If you want to discuss this minutiae, start your own thread. This is what the Ky. law says. If you don't like it, stay out of Ky. and you will not be effected by it.
Yeah... I kinda got the feeling that ANY state you choose will have the same prohibition against "covering, defacing, altering or destroying" a serial number. Many probably say the same thing about automobile VIN's, or any other item that bears such a number. I'm also willing to bet that mere tape isn't sufficient to trigger the law anymore than covering the serial number with paint or oil... or for that matter a box, or grips.

0f1199364b9aa5e95e0954d37bd04a12.jpg
Illegal in Kentucky? It's covering the serial number.
 
Last edited:

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
Correct ! "Here, give me your gun that you have to protect yourself from me!"
503.080
The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable
under subsection (1) only when the defendant believes that the person against whom
such force is used is:

2(b) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary, robbery, or other felony
involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to
KRS 503.055, of such dwelling;

(3) A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she
has a right to be.



503.055(4)
A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's
dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent
to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

Seems to be the attempted robbery of a deadly weapon qualifies. In fact I might write up an article on the laws of all 50 states to defend themselves against the robbery of their firearm or removing anything from their person unless there is lawful cause to. This also extends to illegal searches or arrests with are assault and as the officer is armed it would be quite clear that attempts to resist would result in death of the victim or a greater crime. Therefore extreme measures can be taken to nullify the threat to the citizen.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,415
Location
White Oak Plantation
Ummm. I started the thread. ...
Uh...are you sure you started this thread? It seems there is some disagreement. Ya shouldn't believe everything you read on the Interwebz...by the way.

Anyway, a belief that a discussion on covering a serial number to prevent a unlawful serial number check after a equally unlawful property seizure is not highjacking a thread. My advice is to cover the serial number with a set of grips and when you are stopped, your gun unlawfully seized, and then get arrested for covering your serial number, knowingly by the way, this nitwit law will be fixed via the courts.

Sorry to highjack the OPs thread...
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,170
Location
earth's crust
503.080
The use of deadly physical force by a defendant upon another person is justifiable
under subsection (1) only when the defendant believes that the person against whom
such force is used is:

2(b) Committing or attempting to commit a burglary, robbery, or other felony
involving the use of force, or under those circumstances permitted pursuant to
KRS 503.055, of such dwelling;

(3) A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she
has a right to be.



503.055(4)
A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's
dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent
to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

Seems to be the attempted robbery of a deadly weapon qualifies. In fact I might write up an article on the laws of all 50 states to defend themselves against the robbery of their firearm or removing anything from their person unless there is lawful cause to. This also extends to illegal searches or arrests with are assault and as the officer is armed it would be quite clear that attempts to resist would result in death of the victim or a greater crime. Therefore extreme measures can be taken to nullify the threat to the citizen.
I would add that under natural law you have the right to defend your property (including yourself); as such, any rules or regulations are void. So, any force can be used. One has to be true to our rights even if the result of exercising them leads to results that may shock people.

Its the government who wishes to limit our rights. Its not unexpected - that's what tyrants do.

Don't want to be shot? Don't covet thy neighbors goods.
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,170
Location
earth's crust
My first court appointed public defender asked for his help in the original hearing. The first appeal I wasn't at all involved in and it was mostly an automatic thing they did. After the first appeal Mr. Mills moved on to better things and Mr. Potter took over. His briefs were pretty much the same as Mr. Mills with the exception of more flair and added cites. The entire process from start to finish has taken approximately 2 years.
As an FYI, the states attorney's (SA) office is an executive branch. As such, subject to FOIA and common law requests.

You may, if you wish, begin your own investigation asking for records of the police and SA to dig deeper than discovery allows to gather evidence useful in examining if a civil case can be supported against the state and various individuals.

Violate my 4th amendment or other rights? Well the state already knows what happens .. a lawsuit. I have a few pending...one I got a default ... other one I am preparing to file for a default judgment. And I am preparing a few more.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,773
Location
here nc
Uh...are you sure you started this thread? It seems there is some disagreement. Ya shouldn't believe everything you read on the Interwebz...by the way.

Anyway, a belief that a discussion on covering a serial number to prevent a unlawful serial number check after a equally unlawful property seizure is not highjacking a thread. My advice is to cover the serial number with a set of grips and when you are stopped, your gun unlawfully seized, and then get arrested for covering your serial number, knowingly by the way, this nitwit law will be fixed via the courts.

Sorry to highjack the OPs thread...
yepper, citizen' moniker is right there w/a 1 on the far right side...

ipse

ps: this is what hijacking a thread looks like...:p
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,381
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
There are no court cases in Ky addressing 527.010 or 527.030. However, the statute that is used is 527.050.
527.050 Possession of defaced firearm.
(1) A person is guilty of possession of a defaced firearm when he knowingly possesses a defaced firearm unless he makes a report to the police or other appropriate government agency of such possession prior to arrest or authorization of a warrant by a court.
(2) Possession of a defaced firearm is a Class A misdemeanor.
This is the statute of choice when prosecuting felons involved in robberies and/or drug cases. The courts usually don't mention the statutory number. The courts usually mention only the title of the statute, Possession of defaced firearm.

I'm just say'n....
 
Top