Posted: 8/6/2025 7:21:13 PM EDT
|
VICTORY! Amazing ruling today from the Minnesota Supreme Court: https://www.startribune.com/minnesota-supreme-court-rules-it-is-legal-to-possess-ghost-guns-without-serial-numbers/601450628 Some excerpts: “The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled in a split decision Wednesday that it is legal for Minnesotans to possess ghost guns without a serial number because current state law does not clearly restrict it. Justice Paul Thissen’s majority opinion delves into the intersection between federal law around what firearms require a serial number and the Minnesota legal statute for felony possession of a firearm without a serial number.” —————— “The opinion focuses on how Minnesota’s legal statute came to lean on federal law to interpret the phrase “serial number or other identification” and how, in the absence of clearer state laws, the court needs to use federal laws to consider whether the possession of a ghost gun without a serial number is a felony.” —————— “Minnesota’s legislation around serial numbers on firearms was passed in 1994 at the same time as a “wide-reaching federal statutory scheme” for placing serial numbers on certain firearms. Thissen wrote that Minnesota’s statutory language of “serial number” is clearly based on federal law and also set out to emphasize punishment for the “obliteration of serial numbers or identifying marks.”” —————— ““As recently as 2022, the State of Minnesota itself sold firearms that did not have serial numbers,” Thissen wrote, pointing to an auction of confiscated hunting and fishing equipment by the Department of Natural Resources. He said if the court ruled that all firearms without a serial number were illegal it “would have the unfortunate and unnecessary effect of turning a large group of currently law-abiding Minnesotans ... into unsuspecting criminals.”” |
|
Quoted: Seems obvious. That which is not explicitly illegal is legal by default. But this is 2025, so I guess that's not obvious to most, anymore. MN has a statute that seems that it was intended to prohibit destroying or removing already existing serial numbers. In MN Statute there is a vague reference to marking requirements contained in the NFA. Anti-2A prosecutors were using it to charge people with crimes for possessing completed 80% receivers, which led to this litigation to the MN Supreme Court. |
|
Statement by Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus: “In a case we've been watching for two years, the MN Supreme Court ruled today in State v. Vagle that MN statutes only require a serial number on a firearm when the firearm must have a serial number under federal law. This case will have broad implications for dozens of prosecutions across the state where individuals have been charged with felony crimes for possessing a personally manufactured firearm without a serial number. This is a big win for 2A in Minnesota and clarifies an area of state statute that prosecutors, the AG, and the anti-gun clinic at the UMN law school have been misinterpreting for years.” |
|
I would think anyone in MN with an old pre-1968 with no serial number is breathing a sigh of relief as well. From the article: ...The driver was charged with possessing a firearm without a serial number and filed a motion to dismiss the charge. An Anoka County judge agreed, ruling that state law was “unconstitutionally vague.” The state appealed that ruling; the Court of Appeals reversed the decision and said Minnesota’s legal statute prohibiting possession of a firearm without a serial number “plainly applies to any firearm.” The Supreme Court disagreed. |
|
Quoted: Statement by Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus: “In a case we've been watching for two years, the MN Supreme Court ruled today in State v. Vagle that MN statutes only require a serial number on a firearm when the firearm must have a serial number under federal law. This case will have broad implications for dozens of prosecutions across the state where individuals have been charged with felony crimes for possessing a personally manufactured firearm without a serial number. This is a big win for 2A in Minnesota and clarifies an area of state statute that prosecutors, the AG, and the anti-gun clinic at the UMN law school have been misinterpreting for years.” Big win! |
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter