The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Question on best temporary transfer method from ffl to related 3rd party

TDL · March 2, 2013, 09:06 PM

I think this all brings up interesting questions with all the various different state eligibility allowances for weapons types and models instead of focusing on prohibited classes of people.

for example if I lived in Maryland and was assigned (or in the military, deployed) to NY state, it is possible my Maryland legal weapon would be illgal in NY state. It seems transferring to a close friend or relative who IS both personally and locally legal to own the weapon, and then taking back ownership when returning would be a "straw" transaction. In fact that transaction is all legal persons engaging in activity specifically to insure that the weapon is kept in the hands of persons who are legal, in jurisdictions where they are allowed-- yet creating a straw!

Don't forget in quite a few jurisdictions (like mine) you must be the registered owner to be the possessor, so a a legally qualified (UBC wise) person cant just hold a weapon for you, they have to register a buyer.

Let's say I legally own an eight shot revolver in say Washington DC, and it and I am legal, and I legally own and have it registered in DC legally and am in th military. I am deployed to NY State for eight months. It seems that technically my only recourse e is to sell and give up the weapon. Transferring it to a cousin in DC who is legal can be construed to be a straw.

I think the increasing variety of laws on what is allowed in different states, along with a lot of temporary mobility is already probably causing a lot of straws where the intent is actually full compliance with the spirt of the law: ie no prohibited persons owning and no prohibited weapons possessed in a jurisdiction that prohibits that weapon.

It also brings up interesting questions about even transfers due to inheritance. I think a lot of parents may have their guns in their wills. In many states executors can only hold onto weapons for very short periods of time. if the heir is under age and another family member who can, as a person and in that locality, legally own the specify weapon until the actual heir is of age, that could be construed as a straw as well, intentionally taking ownership of weapon for the purpose of transferring it to another at a later time. In other words if you have a 5 shot SW 38 legal in 995 of juristictions, and a 19-year old son who is clear in every way except age, but your jurisdiction requires ownership for possession, you cant specify your brother holding the weapon via ownerships until your son is 21, as this would be technically a straw.

March 2, 2013, 09:06 PM	#20
TDL Senior Member Join Date: January 25, 2013 Posts: 317	I think this all brings up interesting questions with all the various different state eligibility allowances for weapons types and models instead of focusing on prohibited classes of people. for example if I lived in Maryland and was assigned (or in the military, deployed) to NY state, it is possible my Maryland legal weapon would be illgal in NY state. It seems transferring to a close friend or relative who IS both personally and locally legal to own the weapon, and then taking back ownership when returning would be a "straw" transaction. In fact that transaction is all legal persons engaging in activity specifically to insure that the weapon is kept in the hands of persons who are legal, in jurisdictions where they are allowed-- yet creating a straw! Don't forget in quite a few jurisdictions (like mine) you must be the registered owner to be the possessor, so a a legally qualified (UBC wise) person cant just hold a weapon for you, they have to register a buyer. Let's say I legally own an eight shot revolver in say Washington DC, and it and I am legal, and I legally own and have it registered in DC legally and am in th military. I am deployed to NY State for eight months. It seems that technically my only recourse e is to sell and give up the weapon. Transferring it to a cousin in DC who is legal can be construed to be a straw. I think the increasing variety of laws on what is allowed in different states, along with a lot of temporary mobility is already probably causing a lot of straws where the intent is actually full compliance with the spirt of the law: ie no prohibited persons owning and no prohibited weapons possessed in a jurisdiction that prohibits that weapon. It also brings up interesting questions about even transfers due to inheritance. I think a lot of parents may have their guns in their wills. In many states executors can only hold onto weapons for very short periods of time. if the heir is under age and another family member who can, as a person and in that locality, legally own the specify weapon until the actual heir is of age, that could be construed as a straw as well, intentionally taking ownership of weapon for the purpose of transferring it to another at a later time. In other words if you have a 5 shot SW 38 legal in 995 of juristictions, and a 19-year old son who is clear in every way except age, but your jurisdiction requires ownership for possession, you cant specify your brother holding the weapon via ownerships until your son is 21, as this would be technically a straw.