New Rifle gifted and regifted :(

[Nitrofuse]

Hi Folks, I have one for you, Hypothetical of course......

Question: Man(A) who is a Mass Resident is given/gifted a brand new rifle (still in box) from his elderly father(B) in CT. Man(A) brings it back to Mass w/no paper work. Man then decides to give it to his son(C) (over 21) as a gift before Man(A) moves out of state. What can son(C) do to make this rifle legal in Mass? No paper work anywhere, but wants it to be legal.

(Let's say originally the Rifle was given to elderly Father(B) as a gift from the gun manufacturer which he worked for many years, told Man A you don't need any paper work for it, take it. Still new in box never has been fired)

Also say elderly father didn't know about gun laws between states nor did Man(a) obviously...(both are old timers)

Son(C) doesn't want to touch rifle until legit. Rifle may not be Mass Compliant either

If this question was real the rifle would be a Colt CR6724..

What should Son(C) do?

[Aguila Blanca]

What should Son(C) do?

Ask a lawyer who practices in Massachusetts.

[dogtown tom]

A & B both committed a federal crime by illegally transferring a firearm. The age of A & B is immaterial.....they violated a law that has been on the books since 1968.

They will compound this "error" by involving C. So far C is the only one with a lick of sense.


Consult a hypothetical attorney.

[Edward429451]

D) Take possession of rifle and move back to the united states?

[bitttorrrent]

Some states have a clause that if say A has passed, B could act as the estate holder and transfer to B, then to C.
There is more leniancy in family estate it looks to me. Especially if it has neve been registered.

But I am no lawyer and think the powers should be concentrating on how so many firearms end up on the south side of chicago firing in the middle of the night without a FOID card to be seen anywhere.

[FrankenMauser]

Originally Posted by dogtown tom

A & B both committed a federal crime by illegally transferring a firearm. The age of A & B is immaterial.....they violated a law that has been on the books since 1968.

They will compound this "error" by involving C. So far C is the only one with a lick of sense.


Consult a hypothetical attorney.

Wrong. Consult your own attorney.
Gifting of firearms is legal under Federal regulations. ...And it doesn't matter how many times it changes owners. (Some restrictions may apply, but not in this scenario.)

Individual State laws may differ.

[JustThisGuy]

So far I don't see anything that the BATFE would not do, except maybe that C is not a Mexican drug gang.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Research your local and state laws regarding ownership of the weapon in question. Mass must have some crazy restrictive firearms laws, this wouldn't even be an issue in GA.

[Stressfire]

Lawyer, definitely. An say nothing more about it until you talk to one.

Sometimes they can work with an "oops," especially if the parties involved are trying to make it right.

[dogtown tom]

FrankenMauser

Wrong. Consult your own attorney.
Gifting of firearms is legal under Federal regulations. ...And it doesn't matter how many times it changes owners. (Some restrictions may apply, but not in this scenario.)

Individual State laws may differ.

Wrong? It's not even a close call........

Reread the OP....."A" & "B" are residents of different states, meaning ANY transfer of firearm whether as a gift, purchase, sale, trade.....is illegal. If a long gun they could go to a licensed dealer and transfer possession there.

While "gifting" IS allowed under Federal law...... a transfer of possession between residents of two different states is CLEARLY NOT allowed under Federal law.

Doesn't matter if they are father/son, brother/sister or two guys who have never met........transferring possession of a firearm is illegal unless BOTH parties are residents of the same state. This has been Federal law since 1968.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by dogtown tom

dogtown tom has it right. In addition, A violated 18 USC 922(a)(3) when he took the rifle, given him in Connecticut, home to Massachusetts.

This is a potential, giant hairball, and C really needs the help of a qualified attorney.

[NJgunowner]

I'd look up what it takes to register an unregistered firearm and then transfer it properly.

Wait, they don't register rifles anyway. That thing is not full auto or anything right? Don't know anything about that rifle.

[FrankenMauser]

dogtown tom has it right. In addition, A violated 18 USC 922(a)(3) when he took the rifle, given him in Connecticut, home to Massachusetts.

Ah. I missed the interstate connection. Sorry, Tom.

Yea, "B" boogered things up a bit.

Doesn't matter if they are father/son, brother/sister or two guys who have never met........transferring possession of a firearm is illegal unless BOTH parties are residents of the same state. This has been Federal law since 1968.

Inherited firearms can be transported across state lines, as soon as the (nonresident) recipient takes possession. No FFL involvement is required (State laws may differ).

Firearms purchased before 1968 can be transferred across state lines, legally, as well.



Skip the lawyer. Just have "A" legally transfer the rifle to "C", and be done with it.

[Wag]

Still not correct.

Original transfer was done in CT. This is perfectly legal.

THEN, the rifle was imported back to MA. It is this point which needs to be resolved in the MA state law.

A quick cursory unofficial glance at MA law shows that no permits are required for ownership of long guns AND that private sales do not require an FFL for the transfer.

By extension, nothing illegal has occurred at this point.

Since the rifle is presently legal (no paperwork required) the over 21 son can keep the rifle as is. No further documentation or action is needed.

Gifting a firearm is perfectly legal. Straw purchases are not. There is a difference.

Also, the convoluted laws in various states have everyone running around like mad, worried that they have to register every transfer of every gun, no matter how it was acquired. There are still a few states with draconian laws on the books and it's distressing to see the angst that goes along with transfer of firearms.

Always good to ask, but I think this situation is already good.

EDIT: info is based on a quick cursory search on line. Do your own homework, please!

--Wag--

[Hardcase]

18 USC 922 (a)(3) addresses this situation.

Because the gun was not obtained from an FFL in Connecticut, it cannot legally be brought into Massachusetts. Since it isn't supposed to be there in the first place, it can't legally be given to anybody else.

Now, from my totally non-lawyer point of view, what I would do to make all of this kosher is trundle back to Connecticut, get grandpa to go to his friendly local FFL and do the transfer to dad. That being done, take the gun home. Then dad can give the gun to son and all is legal.

Now, if, god forbid, grandpa has since passed on, then I suppose that it could be said that dad has inherited the gun, in which case, no FFL transfer is required.

There's no reason to not do this the legal way.

[hermannr]

At no time has the OP stated what year this happened in. I have a Colt revolver that was given to me by my FIL, he lived in NYS, my home of record (I was in the Army at the time) was WA, this was all completed in 1967, before any GCA-68. Absolutely nothing illegal done even though the Colt was registered in NYC.

Don't jump all over this until you know when this all transpired...a lot of us crusty old guys outdate that stupid GCA-68 by quite a few years. Most of the firearms I own came to me before 1968.

My suggestion is the same as another's..get that gun out of MA. (if possible, you too) welcome to the civilized parts of the United States. Maine or NH would work if work compells you to stay in MA.

Alteratively, get a lawyer.

[Technosavant]

Generally speaking, those saying A and B committed a crime are correct.

A firearm cannot change ownership across state lines (that's states of residence, mind you, not just where it changes hands) without going through a FFL.

Now, that does not attach itself to the firearm in question. Therefore, the rifle itself is not illegal, nor is C's possession of it illegal. Any repercussions would be solely on A and B.

Depending on when this happened, it could be past the statute of limitations. I believe the statute of limitations on federal crimes is 5 years unless otherwise delineated in the statute (which section 922 isn't), so if this happened 5 years ago, I believe it would be a nonissue.

However, I am NOT a lawyer, this is NOT legal advice. Go talk to one if you want to be sure.

[Hardcase]

Originally Posted by hermannr

Don't jump all over this until you know when this all transpired...a lot of us crusty old guys outdate that stupid GCA-68 by quite a few years. Most of the firearms I own came to me before 1968.

I figured that since the hypothetical gun in question is a Colt CAR-15, it probably post-dates the GCA.

Originally Posted by Technosavant

Now, that does not attach itself to the firearm in question. Therefore, the rifle itself is not illegal, nor is C's possession of it illegal. Any repercussions would be solely on A and B.

The only problem that I can see is that if A illegally transferred the rifle to B, then C shouldn't have possession (in the eyes of the government), so it could potentially "go away". But, yes, I agree that C has not done anything wrong (except that he seems to have a pretty good idea that what A and B did was not legal...putting him in some sort of perilous position.)

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Wag

.....Original transfer was done in CT. This is perfectly legal....

Wrong. Transferor was a resident of Connecticut and transferee was a resident of Massachusetts. A transfer of a gun from a resident of one State to a resident of another without benefit of FFL violates, in most circumstances, 18 USC 922(a)(5).

Originally Posted by Wag

...THEN, the rifle was imported back to MA. It is this point which needs to be resolved in the MA state law.

No, that violates federal law, specifically 18 USC 922(a)(3).

Originally Posted by Wag

... nothing illegal has occurred at this point.

Actually, two federal statutes were violated, one by the first transfer and another by the importation of the gun into Massachusetts.

Originally Posted by Wag

...Since the rifle is presently legal (no paperwork required) the over 21 son can keep the rifle as is. No further documentation or action is needed....

Since there are several legal issues with the rifle, this isn't clear by any means.

Originally Posted by Wag

...Gifting a firearm is perfectly legal. Straw purchases are not. There is a difference....

Yes, but that has nothing to do with the legal complications here.

Note also that there wouldn't be a problem if the first transfer occurred before 1968. But I don't think this particular model rifle (Colt CR6724) was made before 1968.

[dogtown tom]

FrankenMauser:....Inherited firearms can be transported across state lines, as soon as the (nonresident) recipient takes possession. No FFL involvement is required (State laws may differ).

True, but according to the OP everyone was alive and kicking.

Firearms purchased before 1968 can be transferred across state lines, legally, as well.

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean as Federal law makes no distinction as to date of purchase when transferring a firearm.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by bitttorrent

Some states have a clause that if say A has passed, B could act as the estate holder and transfer to B, then to C.
There is more leniancy in family estate it looks to me. Especially if it has neve been registered.

In order for the bequest provision to apply, the owner of the firearm must have died. In this case, it was specifically stated that the grandfather in CT "gave" the firearm to his son in MA. There is no possible way this can be construed to fall within the bequest provisions of Federal law.

Originally Posted by FrankenMauser

Consult a hypothetical attorney.
Wrong. Consult your own attorney.
Gifting of firearms is legal under Federal regulations. ...And it doesn't matter how many times it changes owners. (Some restrictions may apply, but not in this scenario.)

Individual State laws may differ.

Dogtown Tom is correct. The original owner was in Connecticut. The person to whom he gave it is in Massachusetts. The "gifting" part is allowed by law, but the gift nonetheless involves an interstate transfer. I am quite certain that neither CT nor MA allows face-to-face transfers without paperwork, nor does Federal law. Under Federal law, the recipient must take possession by transfer through an FFL in his (or her) state of residence.

Originally Posted by Wag

Original transfer was done in CT. This is perfectly legal.

No, it was not legal because the giver was a resident of CT and the recipient was a resident of MA. The gift was an interstate transfer and, as such, was subject to Federal law.

[Sgt Pepper]

#1: If rifle's aren't registered, how the hell is anyone going to know or bother to inquire about it anyway? Aside from using it during the commission of a violent crime, in what situation would this ever come up? Not trying to be cheeky, but these are not titled properties, like cars, stock, real estate, etc.

#2: Why does C even have to own it at this point? Can't he just be using it on loan? Temporarily for sporting purposes until perhaps the time of inheritance?

Note for flame purposes: I am not suggesting that anyone commit a crime.

[sigcurious]

OP, don't forget to find out if the rifle is even legal in MA. I did a little looking around but all I could find was that the MA assault weapons ban is similar to the old federal one. If that is true, that specific model of Colt is has a decent chance of not being legal in MA even if there were no questions about the legality of the transfers.

[Wag]

I have to apologize for not fact checking better. Rather, I regurgitated things I've heard over the years and now I find it's incorrect.

I'm embarrassed.

But more better edumacated. Thanks for the fixes, guys.

--Wag--

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by sigcurious

OP, don't forget to find out if the rifle is even legal in MA. I did a little looking around but all I could find was that the MA assault weapons ban is similar to the old federal one. If that is true, that specific model of Colt is has a decent chance of not being legal in MA even if there were no questions about the legality of the transfers.

And to further muddy the waters, Connecticut also has on the books a state AWB that closely echoes the now-expired Federal AWB. Depending on when the first owner acquired the rifle in CT, it might have been pre-ban and thus legal from that perspective, but I think Connecticut required registration of pre-ban "assault weapons" as a condition of keeping them. (Not sure on that.) Depending on configuration and date of manufacture, this rifle may not be legal in either CT or MA.