-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/Pioneer Valley Arms February Giveaway ***Smith & Wesson SD9VE 9MM***
Storage of out-of state owned firearms
- Thread starter BillO
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 57,087
- Likes
- 21,282
Nickle said:
Yes, but this ONLY applies to dealers! mere citizens can't do 4473s or NICS Check (police do NCIC checks
![[smile]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/001.gif "Smile [smile]")
).However, to rent guns, you MUST be a dealer as you are in Business according to BATFE.
LenS said:Yes, but this ONLY applies to dealers! mere citizens can't do 4473s or NICS Check (police do NCIC checks
However, to rent guns, you MUST be a dealer as you are in Business according to BATFE.
The relevance goes to the intent of the law. Mass could easily warp this into what they want.
Also, this whole thing is 100% irrelevant in many states, including mine.
![[grin]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/041.gif "Grin [grin]")
Cross-X's original answer to this question is correct.
However, the concern that such a device could be employed as, or construed as, an evasion of the regulation on transfers is not invalid. Therefore, I recommend to people (as LenS suggested) that the recipient of the weapon give the donor/owner of the weapon a receipt acknowledging that he is taking possession of the weapon for safe storage purposes only and without acquiring any right, title or interest in the weapon for himself.
However, there is a problem with such an arrangement, and that has to do with undoing it at the other end. If you have consenual possession of the property of another, you are obliged to give it back to him on demand. However, you cannot give physical possession of a weapon to an unlicensed person. So if Fred comes to you a few years hence and says "Give me my gun back, please," or "Please deliver my gun to George," and Fred or George isn't licensed, what are you going to do? For this reason, the receipt should go one to say that the recipient will, whenever so directed by the owner, deliver the weapon to any person who possesses and displays a valid and outstanding license of the class necessary to possess such weapon, and not otherwise.
However, the concern that such a device could be employed as, or construed as, an evasion of the regulation on transfers is not invalid. Therefore, I recommend to people (as LenS suggested) that the recipient of the weapon give the donor/owner of the weapon a receipt acknowledging that he is taking possession of the weapon for safe storage purposes only and without acquiring any right, title or interest in the weapon for himself.
However, there is a problem with such an arrangement, and that has to do with undoing it at the other end. If you have consenual possession of the property of another, you are obliged to give it back to him on demand. However, you cannot give physical possession of a weapon to an unlicensed person. So if Fred comes to you a few years hence and says "Give me my gun back, please," or "Please deliver my gun to George," and Fred or George isn't licensed, what are you going to do? For this reason, the receipt should go one to say that the recipient will, whenever so directed by the owner, deliver the weapon to any person who possesses and displays a valid and outstanding license of the class necessary to possess such weapon, and not otherwise.
The concern about how the firearm could be returned legally seems to overlook the question of how it came to be here in the first place. If the out-of-state owner doesn't have a MA non-resident license, then he or she certainly can't hand deliver it to someone here. It can't be shipped by common carrier, with or with out the LTC, since they operate on the assumption that shipment == transfer, which requires that on party be an FFL. That leaves the Mass resident traveling to the other state to take possession and returning with it, all perfectly legal (assuming this would be legal under the laws of the other state). Since that's presumably how it got here in the first place, couldn't it be returned in the same manner? Nobody needs a Mass LTC to possess a firearm in another state; most state's don't require any sort of license to simply possess a firearm.
Ken
Ken
Not necessarily. The recipient could have carry authority in another state in which he took possession for storage. Or, as often happens, a person dies and his executor or administrator asks a licensed person to take possession of the firearms until some decision on disposition can be made; in the latter case, the donee is usually asked to deliver them to a dealer for sale or to a legatee. It is the latter situation that might well need to rely on the "possesses and displays" clause of my form.
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2005
- Messages
- 57,087
- Likes
- 21,282
Ken,
Better yet. Lender and Borrower both drive to NH to go shopping!![[wink]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/002.gif "Wink [wink]")
Gun is handed off there.
In this case, Lender doesn't need a MA LTC, is perfectly legal driving thru MA under FOPA, anyone (not prohibited) can transport a gun in a car in NH with no permits required.
Substitute VT here if you wish, same idea.
Return of same can go the same way.
Better yet. Lender and Borrower both drive to NH to go shopping!
Gun is handed off there.
In this case, Lender doesn't need a MA LTC, is perfectly legal driving thru MA under FOPA, anyone (not prohibited) can transport a gun in a car in NH with no permits required.
Substitute VT here if you wish, same idea.
Return of same can go the same way.
I happened to be very good friends with our Public Defender. In fact he did many of the closings on our officers home purchases. We went out many times after court was over to throw a few back.One of our police unions biggest off duty job was security at a large NJ law firm. Seems the lawyers couldn't set the alarm without setting it off. But after 20 years of working there, you see, like every other profession, they have good and bad ones. What was weird was that many of the lawyers hated to low life slezzes that give them a bad name.
