|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
August 5, 2012, 06:18 PM | #51 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
State law is the applicable thing to look at. Since these "household" agreements are just intrastate "transactions" for lack of a better term, it's not a Federal legal question. There are 50 states, and probably 200 answers depending on what authority you ask. Willie . |
August 5, 2012, 07:41 PM | #52 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
How about, "Yes." As it happens, I work with a young man who recently obtained his carry permit. So did his wife. Neither of them has had much experience with firearms and they expressed an interest in getting in some range time to practice and get a feel for what's comfortable before spending money on one or more handguns they might soon decide aren't right for them. The wife, in particular, is very slender, not very strong, and is greatly intimidated by centerfire handguns. But she shoots a .22 pretty well. I own a Ruger 22/45 that I dislike intensely and never use, so I offered to lend it to them for the wife to use as practice while she becomes more accustomed to shooting. Being generally law-abiding types, we agreed that the offer was contingent upon legality. So I called the state agency that issues carry permits and runs the background checks for gun sales. I described the situation as exactly as I could, including that at the time I made the call the kids were still awaiting final approval and issuance of their permits. The state told me that once they had their permits I could legally lend them the firearm ... without transfer papers. Of course, there are 49 other states out there. |
|
August 5, 2012, 07:57 PM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 22, 2011
Location: OKC
Posts: 502
|
Quote:
|
|
August 5, 2012, 08:14 PM | #54 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,076
|
Quote:
Quote:
You state that I can leave and come back in the same day with no "4473/NICS required"...Neither of those have anything to do with the scenario I posed...The Smith is only required to log in/out in his 'Bound Book', and no 4473/NICS is required as long as I am the one that dropped off the gun and picked it up the next day... Q: Is an ATF Form 4473 required when a gunsmith returns a repaired firearm? No, provided the firearm is returned to the person from whom it was received. [27 CFR 478.124(a)] My real question is why does ATF consider it fine to leave the gun for the business day, but not fine to leave it overnight (unless logged)... It reminds me of the 'lending for a day' issue that was being discussed earlier... At the very least, it certainly appears that BATF finds leaving a gun with someone overnight to be much more serious than leaving it with them for a few hours during the day...Business, or not... I'm simply trying to grasp everyone's understanding of the laws so that I never run afoul of them... |
||
August 5, 2012, 08:28 PM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
|
"if leaving a gun overnight with someone is not a 'transfer', then why does a Gunsmith have to log the 'acquisition' in, and the 'disposition' out, if he keeps a gun overnight? "
The gunsmith is in business. The gunsmith has a license issued by the regulating authority. The bound book is required by said regulating authority. Follow the regs or lose your license. Surely you know this. Surely you also know that us common non-gunsmith folk don't have an FFL and aren't bound by those ATF regs. My uncle borrowed a Marlin .444 from his brother in law and hunted with it for 7 years. When his BIL wanted it back it was returned. There isn't a court in the country that would find this to be anything other than a loan. That's just one example. John |
August 5, 2012, 08:35 PM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 6, 1999
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
Posts: 6,004
|
"We can argue this until the cows come home"
No we can't. You appear to have no understanding of the law. You seem to be making this stuff up as you go along. John |
August 5, 2012, 09:04 PM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,076
|
Quote:
My question is, at what point does it stop being a 'loan' or is in another's constructive 'possession'... A person may loan or rent a firearm to a resident of any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes, How long is 'temporary' according to the ATF?...Is that a week?...A month?...Or is it overnight for everyone like it is in the case of a licensee? As I said...Not looking to argue...Trying to understand... |
|
August 5, 2012, 09:26 PM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
|
Quote:
Another example is a cash loan or cash verbal or even written contract. Someone can admit to a loan and to owing money, but their legal contract might say they will "pay when they can" or they will pay "when they have enough money to do so". A judge is going to side with the plaintiff and explain that a loan isn't indefinite, it has been shown the money is owed, you have had a reasonable time to pay the debt, and you need to pay the money. Another different example is punishments. You can't give punishments to people whether thru court systems or even a higher ranking soldier in the military saying as an example: "well, this is going to stay this way until I see changes and/or until I am satisfied". This does happen but it is not correct especially with official punishments. The IG would stop this. It is up to a judge to determine when that loan is no longer a loan anymore..............sooner than later would be my guess(so the longer it has been the easier it is to sayso I mean). *wasn't trying to focus on courts; it just sortof fit with the example...court isn't always necessary...I myself don't enjoy going to court unless needbe* ***another answer is calling it in stolen if you have to. I mean someone borrows a car. OK, "how come you still have it 2 1/2 days later?" states the cop to the person in cuffs...
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864 |
|
August 5, 2012, 09:39 PM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
IMO: Its unlikely the former wife or son of the OP would sue. Lawsuits between folks living in different states usually involve big ticket items. Methinks very few judges would hand guns over to a convicted felon or to his mother in whose house the felon lives.
|
August 5, 2012, 11:16 PM | #60 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 12, 2006
Posts: 1,512
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
August 5, 2012, 11:41 PM | #61 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 26, 2012
Posts: 1,066
|
"No we can't. You appear to have no understanding of the law. You seem to be making this stuff up as you go along"
Apparently we *can*, as I called a friend earlier who was a prosecutor here for about a decade. I asked him a hypothetical question or three, and he was of the opinion that if I "lent" a firearm and was not in immediate supervision of the object in question, IE: I allowed it to be taken home to the household of the person to whom I lent it, he would consider it a "transfer" in respect to the laws regarding posession and transfer of firearms in our state (Wisconsin). As a follow on to the hypothetical, he stated that if that person was a prohibited person and I was knowlagable of that fact, I could be prosecuted for violation of Wisconsin firearms laws for transferring a firearm to a prohibited person. His comment was that even if I expected to get it back tomorrow, I was not able to contol it's disposition any longer, and thus I had conducted a transfer. This was his unambiguous opinion. It also does not address the concept of "ownership", simply compliance or lack of compliance with state laws REGARDING GUN SALES AND TRANSFERS. For the life of me I cannot imagine why anyone is not differentiating between the two subjects, and that I am not commenting AT ALL on the contractual basis of ownership v/s exectations of return after temporary posession. Willie . |
August 5, 2012, 11:43 PM | #62 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
In this case, the son could credibly claim that the father is preventing him (or his mother) from selling his guns. IANAL but I think this would be something akin to "theft by conversion." I really think the OP needs to consult an attorney. |
|
August 6, 2012, 07:31 AM | #63 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
|
Quote:
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864 |
|
August 6, 2012, 07:27 PM | #64 | ||||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
August 6, 2012, 09:42 PM | #65 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
|
1)
Quote:
2) Quote:
3) Quote:
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864 |
|||
August 6, 2012, 10:01 PM | #66 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 28, 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,231
|
Do your son a favor and keep them. If they want to take civil actions I'm pretty sure once you explained the situation to the judge or official it would be dead in the water. Or cut the guns up and end the argument. I don't think your ex understands the seriousness of being a felon in possession of a firearm. or she is in serious denial.
__________________
Have a nice day at the range NRA Life Member |
August 7, 2012, 12:30 AM | #67 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
I understand the moral issue, but what's morally correct here is different from what's legal. If the guns do not belong to the father (and he has acknowledged that they do not), then he has NO legal right to refuse to send them to whatever non-prohibited person the owner of the guns tells him to send them to. |
|
August 7, 2012, 07:32 AM | #68 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 30, 2007
Location: Stafford, VA - transplanted from upstate New York
Posts: 119
|
A small side-point to all of this - my son has never verbally expressed to me his desire to release these rifles to his mother - neither by telephone, e-mail, face-to-face, smoke signal or otherwise. All I have is the word of his mother, which, in my experience isn't worth a nickle. (But I'm a bit biased.... )
So, if he really, really, reallllllllly wanted me to do this, you'd think he'd at least be on the phone discussing it. As such, it seems I don't have a trustworthy directive of what to do with them. So, in my safe they'll sit (excepting maybe the occasional trip to the range - you know...to make sure they're still functioning properly. ) Another small point, I happen to know that his mother's new husband has a gun that he keeps in the house, unsecured at that. Not faulting them for that - they do live out in the country and have no small children visiting. The PROBLEM is that my felon son visits the house on a daily basis, and they both (son and mother) know the law concerning his being in the presence of a firearm - that it is illegal. It doesn't seem to bother them in the least. That shouldn't surprise me, since blatant disregard for the law is kind-of what got him into this mess to begin with. It is this disregard for the law that they both exhibit which gives me pause over placing weapons in their hands. If they(or he - same difference) pursue the matter in court, and the judge is wacky enough to order me to transfer the rifles to her - I'll request that I be allowed to hand them to an officer of the court/deputy/whatever - so long as I am not the one placing them in her hands. Her receipt of those guns, if it happens, will directly result in my son's re-incarceration. I just cannot bring myself to be a part of that. |
August 7, 2012, 08:03 AM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
|
thx for the update fxdrider, that was one of my reads on this. he probably has no clue what to do(1st step being call you about it), and he knows he is in the wrong so doesn't even have that mindset right now...aka: it is the least of his worries and he knows you are taking care of them. the mom mentioning it might get a tfl thread but anything else is few and far between. that is why I told Aguilar I disagree andor don't see any point in you paying for lawyer advice(I think they give fifteen minutes for free)....the ball isn't really in your court unless you decide to be generous.....back to my other point though, this is a serious situation and does desever thought before action.
all the best
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864 |
August 7, 2012, 08:56 AM | #70 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 5,261
|
Is there a gun buy back program in your state?
Take the rifles there, get the $25.00 for them and a receipt, send the $25.00 and a copy of the receipt to your son, and you won't have to deal with this anymore.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading. |
August 7, 2012, 02:32 PM | #71 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
|
pretty sad that he is living by a different "code" at this time and he can't just write a certified, notarized letter explaining why he feels the guns are his(in a non-threatening way).
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864 |
August 7, 2012, 03:43 PM | #72 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
|
|
August 8, 2012, 10:03 AM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,254
|
Quote:
I still think they are his at this point, but I wouldn't risk it. Besides, giving the gun grabbers guns validates what they are doing. Horrible idea. |
|
August 8, 2012, 10:49 AM | #74 |
Junior Member
Join Date: July 11, 2012
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 4
|
Sounds to me like a lawsuit may be brewing. What she is going to argue is that she paid for one, so she should get that one. What he'll argue is that he was in ownership of them both and they he should decide who gets them (obviously, the topic of your post).
I would say that she may have legitimate claim over the one she purchased, however, it's not like there are any receipts for either. You feel that if she gets the guns, she'll hand them right to him, which you could argue in court, but you'd have to show that this would be the case. What she needs to be aware of is that if she knowingly gives the firearms to a person that cannot legally possess a firearm (as I see it, it's no different than handing it to a random child on the street), then she may be committing a crime herself. If it were me, I would say keep the guns and tell her that your son is not to have anything to do with firearms any more, and she isn't going to get them because all she's going to do is harbor his problems. If they really want them back, let them get a lawyer and spend their money first before getting your own. Chances are, they won't do anything about it.
__________________
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” - Patrick Henry |
August 8, 2012, 02:19 PM | #75 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 30, 2007
Location: Stafford, VA - transplanted from upstate New York
Posts: 119
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
If you are finished, unload and show clear.... |
||
Tags |
dad , felony |
|
|