[JohnKSa]

It totally depends on local laws as to how the inheritance takes place.

For it to be an inheritance for the purpose of skirting the federal requirement for an FFL to be involved in the transfer, it must be a bequest in a will. The father is not dead so it's not going to qualify as an inheritance for the purposes of this federal law. It is a gift (or sale--doesn't really matter) and therefore an FFL must be involved.

I still wonder since this is between the OP's father and himself, who would know the difference unless there is an ownership record or registration showing his father as the owner?

That is an issue of whether or not it would be possible to prosecute the persons involved, it has no bearing on whether or not what they do is legal.

It's possible, depending on a number of circumstances that they might be able to make the transfer without ever getting caught, but that's moot to the initial question of legality. If they make the transfer (other than as a bequest in a will) then they have committed federal felonies.

I mention this because my understanding is that if the father sells 10 or more firearms in a year, he's "in the business" of dealing in firearms.

I don't believe that there is a 10 firearms per year limit, and my understanding is that it is perfectly legal to sell as many firearms as you have legally acquired in your private collection as rapidly as you see fit. In other words, if you've amassed a couple of hundred firearms over several decades and get tired of guns & decide to take up knitting, you can sell them all in one day if you want. What's going to get you into trouble is if it becomes clear that you're making a living or significant income by buying and selling firearms on a regular basis.

On a related matter, I recently sold a revolver face to face to another Kansas resident.

If you are both Kansas residents and you had no reason to believe he was disqualified from owning/purchasing the firearm in question then you broke no laws.

I cannot recommend breaking any law either, but I think we as a society have gone crazy.

I'm certainly not saying I agree with the laws, but in the interest of staying out of jail, it's important to understand them and abide by them.

Humor aside -- it sounds to me like the OP can legally carry his own guns from VA to FL.

Given the way federal law reads, the guns aren't legally his since he obtained them via an illegal transfer.

Is he only going to get in trouble if he happens to be found carrying the guns and he blurts out "my father just gave these to me the other day" instead of just saying "I own these guns and am taking them home."

I can see him getting stopped with a car full of guns (or having a car accident with a car full of guns) and being asked to explain his situation. If they do any checking on his story (which may or may not be likely) he could be in some serious trouble--and so could his dad.

I suppose it is safe to presume that at least some of the guns to be given to the OP were either registered to his father or are of such recent vintage to be registered to someone. Therefore the paper trail needs to be made accurate.

Because the charter of TFL is the discussion and advancement of responsible firearms ownership, it's against TFL rules to advocate illegal behavior.

To answer your question, a thing is illegal because it's against the law and a thing is legal because it's not against the law. In other words, the criterion for legality is the law. It's NOT whether or not you are likely to get caught.