Can you keep a gun in another state without a license in your home state?

[LuvDog]

I didn't grow up in this commie place, so I do understand that not all of the country is as messed up.

But with the Vegas episode and the media continuing to link these types of stories and issues together, it's not just Healey that we have to worry about... Look at the post on here about all the new bans and regulations that have been proposed in the last week all across the country.

 

[42!]

Ok, so let's take purchasing and residency out of the question.

Let's say you are a MA resident, no MA license, no property in NH, but while you are physically in NH you are loaned a firearm. You rent storage space in NH and never cross the state line with the firearm. Have you broken any laws?

Question 2 for all you bump stock owners. You don't own property in NH so you rent some storage space and keep your stock there. Have you broken any laws?


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Kevin_NH]

for all you bump stock owners. You don't own property in NH so you rent some storage space and keep your stock there. Have you broken any laws?

A stock is just a piece of plastic, not (currently) subject to any Federal law, not subject to any NH state law.

Ok, so let's take purchasing and residency out of the question. Let's say you are a MA resident, no MA license, no property in NH, but while you are physically in NH you are loaned a firearm. You rent storage space in NH and never cross the state line with the firearm. Have you broken any laws?

At the point where a "loan" becomes a "transfer", both parties have violated Federal law (interstate private sale). New Hampshire doesn't care, but the Feds might.

 

[JayMcB]

Ok, so let's take purchasing and residency out of the question.

Let's say you are a MA resident, no MA license, no property in NH, but while you are physically in NH you are loaned a firearm. You rent storage space in NH and never cross the state line with the firearm. Have you broken any laws?

Question 2 for all you bump stock owners. You don't own property in NH so you rent some storage space and keep your stock there. Have you broken any laws?


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

'loaned' a firearm? why would you store a loaned firearm in storage. Doesn't pass the smell test.

as far as the bump stocks, possession is legal in NH (for now). Mine are heading there this weekend.
It will live in the same place as my Ruger BX-25's, 30 and 40 round Pmags, AR's with flash hiders and unpinned upper , tannerite, and 50BMG APIT rounds.

 

[drgrant]

'loaned' a firearm? why would you store a loaned firearm in storage. Doesn't pass the smell test.

Why couldn't, or wouldn't you keep a loaned firearm in storage?

Example: .mil friend is being deployed to some anti gun shithole and doesn't want to take his personal guns with him. I take possession "a loan" and put them into storage in NH. done. What's so "odd" about that?

I have plenty of other friends that have had long term loans of firearms from other friends, nothing illegal about it. (example- dude starts dating some moonbat chick, he gets pussywhipped into not having gun in house, loans gun to friend for safekeeping until issue gets smoked out one way or another). Nothing illegal about storing the loaned gun in their safe, etc, either.

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

I didn't grow up in this commie place, so I do understand that not all of the country is as messed up.

But with the Vegas episode and the media continuing to link these types of stories and issues together, it's not just Healey that we have to worry about... Look at the post on here about all the new bans and regulations that have been proposed in the last week all across the country.

At the fed level the antis will be lucky to get even a "mostly clean" bump stock ban through, mid terms are coming and most pols dont want to get eviscerated over a stupid gun law.

The media is trying to push all kinds of narratives but it is failing miserably.

They tried to push the narrative that trump was insane, and this and that, and so on, blah blah
blah. He won because nobody believed that narrative.

Same thing is happening with the MM Talking about gun laws/issues/etc... Most people are ignoring
it or won't remember it a month from now.

Most of the noise you're talking about- is coming from all the usual suspects, MA, CA CT, etc, all the usual anti shithole states. Just like with Sandy Hook, etc. Same thing. Anyone that lives in these states, lived through 2012 and thinks these states won't get worse organically is deluding themselves. (I haven't punched out yet, because its too convenient for me to live here, but I'm already coming up with a plan for getting property in NH or ME- so I can basically "hedge" my opportunities. After Sandy Hook and Healeyban, I think the writing is pretty much on the wall... as I explained to someone else, the only reason this state isn't full blown NJ/NY/CA garbage level in terms of gun control is because ethe MA moonbats don't really want to spend the money to make it happen- advanced levels of gun control cost lots of money. )

Honestly due to the relatively low dead children count (any victims under a teenager, even?) here this will mostly be forgotten about, in a memetic sense. The antis were probably despondent that this guy didn't shoot up (insert some venue with a bunch of small children here) instead. If that happened we'd be hearing "Save the orphans" for 100 years, and they could milk it for all its worth.

This was a pretty big deal, but in a memetic sense, Sandy Hook was actually 100 times worse for gun owners, because the antis got to dance on lots of warm toddler corpses, while a raving moonbat was the president. If Obama hadn't blown all his political capital on Obamacare, we may have been completely and utterly screwed. In anti gun memetics, 1 toddler corpse is worth like 30 adult corpses, at least.

-Mike

 

[caboose84]

IIRC NYC is different and does require a license for long guns. Not my expertise but I do recall reading that somewhere.

NYC does require a license/permit for long guns. You have to register all long guns as well.

NYC is almost it's own state as far as firearms. For example carry permits issued in NY state outside of NYC are invalid in NYC.

 

[boiler_eng]

Why couldn't, or wouldn't you keep a loaned firearm in storage?

Example: .mil friend is being deployed to some anti gun shithole and doesn't want to take his personal guns with him. I take possession "a loan" and put them into storage in NH. done. What's so "odd" about that?

I have plenty of other friends that have had long term loans of firearms from other friends, nothing illegal about it. (example- dude starts dating some moonbat chick, he gets pussywhipped into not having gun in house, loans gun to friend for safekeeping until issue gets smoked out one way or another). Nothing illegal about storing the loaned gun in their safe, etc, either.

-Mike

'loaned' a firearm? why would you store a loaned firearm in storage. Doesn't pass the smell test.

as far as the bump stocks, possession is legal in NH (for now). Mine are heading there this weekend.
It will live in the same place as my Ruger BX-25's, 30 and 40 round Pmags, AR's with flash hiders and unpinned upper , tannerite, and 50BMG APIT rounds.

Granted its not the "scary" gun type of thing but it is fairly common for someone to loan the old trap gun they are selling to a buddy on a mid term basis for the purpose of really trying it and getting a feel for if it works for them. Also, if someone has to send their old failthful gun for work to be done someone might lend them a gun to shoot for the weeks (or months) while they wait for the gun to come back. In this case the person on the receiving end is caring for and storing it the same way they would treat it if they had ownership of it.

 

[Hardwired]

This topic is a federal/national thing though, not MA garbage law thing. MA and Healey "cannot make dual residency firearm ownership illegal" no matter how much they grimace, and flap their arms, and whine, snort and blare.

Also- despite BATFE being flexible it's really NOT "easy", but it's not "hard" or "impossible" either. Theres a bunch of this law that needs to be changed to make things less absurd, actually. There's no logical reason why RKBA should be contingent on residency at all, but that's a whole other ballgame. There might even be some federal court cases in the mill on this issue. (I know there was one claim, where there was a guy who was a US citizen, but lived in Canada, who was trying to legally buy a handgun in the US to keep here, but did not assert a US residency claim so could not buy a handgun) I dunno what happened with his case. It may have been knocked down but he may have appealed, etc. The blockade at that point is fundamentally unconstitutional- the 2nd amendment doesn't ask for a "State of residency" to exercise ones RTKBA.

Bear in mind that while talking about this- the citizens of like 45 something states, as long as they have clean, generally non felon, or non PP records, are 18+ or 21+ (for handguns, PGO shotguns, lowers, etc) and have a drivers license (or some other suitable state identification document or other satisfying document or permit) can walk into a gun store and buy a handgun, rifle, or shotgun if they pass the background check. That's not exactly some kind of a hidden secret, particularly anywhere outside of the garbage states.

-Mike

Well said. This deserves repeating time and time again.

 

[42!]

Ok, so let's take purchasing and residency out of the question.

Let's say you are a MA resident, no MA license, no property in NH, but while you are physically in NH you are loaned a firearm. You rent storage space in NH and never cross the state line with the firearm. Have you broken any laws?

Question 2 for all you bump stock owners. You don't own property in NH so you rent some storage space and keep your stock there. Have you broken any laws?


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

'loaned' a firearm? why would you store a loaned firearm in storage. Doesn't pass the smell test.

I thought it was pretty obvious from the question. Give it another read. With no license in MA and no residence in NH you can't buy a gun in either state. But buying, owning, and possessing a firearm are different things, and you are allowed to borrow a gun. Another way to put it would be if you are a resident of MA and not of NH, and you have access to a firearm in NH, can that be considered "Possession?" under MA law?

as far as the bump stocks, possession is legal in NH (for now). Mine are heading there this weekend.
It will live in the same place as my Ruger BX-25's, 30 and 40 round Pmags, AR's with flash hiders and unpinned upper , tannerite, and 50BMG APIT rounds.

This works as long as it's a residence (part or full time) as that would qualify you as a resident in NH. But my question 2 applies to those that aren't so lucky, and need a place to keep a bump-stock without violating MA law. It's the tricky way MA defines "possession". If you have a storage unit in Townsend, then it's "possession". Walk north to a Brookline, NH storage unit, is it still considered "possession" in MA? And would the same answer apply if MA completely banned AWs and you simply moved your MA registered gun to a NH storage unit?

And to Kevin_NH's comment. So when does a loan become a transfer? Sounds like one of those laws you have to prove intent. If both parties are clear that "ownership" remains with the owner then are you GtG? Is there law or caselaw on this?

 

[Rob Boudrie]

and you are allowed to borrow a gun.

If you borrow a gun when out of state, it must be for "sporting purposes"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.97

 

[Kevin_NH]

18 U.S.C 922(a)(5)

Another way to put it would be if you are a resident of MA and not of NH, and you have access to a firearm in NH, can that be considered "Possession?" under MA law?

Massachusetts cannot restrict MA residents firearms possession or other actions when they are in another state.

Despite the beliefs of the Mass AG, the constitution is clear on the boundaries of state law.

And to Kevin_NH's comment. So when does a loan become a transfer? Sounds like one of those laws you have to prove intent. If both parties are clear that "ownership" remains with the owner then are you GtG? Is there law or caselaw on this?

Nobody wants to be a test case for 18 U.S.C 922(a)(5), which says a person may loan or rent a firearm to a resident of any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purpose.

If you borrow a gun when out of state, it must be for "sporting purposes"

I doubt BATFE will accept that stashing a "borrowed" firearm in a storage locker to which the borrower has exclusive access, for an indefinite period, is either temporary, or a lawful sporting purpose.

 

[42!]

If you borrow a gun when out of state, it must be for "sporting purposes"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.97

This is for FFL holders "A licensee". It's under "27 CFR Part 478, Subpart F - Conduct of Business".
What about just normal people? Billy Bob, loans a gun to Buba Jim? No business involved.

 

[AKOK74]

Another way to put it would be if you are a resident of MA and not of NH, and you have access to a firearm in NH, can that be considered "Possession?" under MA law?

no

Walk north to a Brookline, NH storage unit, is it still considered "possession" in MA? And would the same answer apply if MA completely banned AWs and you simply moved your MA registered gun to a NH storage unit?

no

 

[Kevin_NH]

Why couldn't, or wouldn't you keep a loaned firearm in storage? Example: .mil friend is being deployed to some anti gun shithole and doesn't want to take his personal guns with him. I take possession "a loan" and put them into storage in NH. done. What's so "odd" about that? I have plenty of other friends that have had long term loans of firearms from other friends, nothing illegal about it. (example- dude starts dating some moonbat chick, he gets pussywhipped into not having gun in house, loans gun to friend for safekeeping until issue gets smoked out one way or another). Nothing illegal about storing the loaned gun in their safe, etc, either.

Question remains, when does a "temporary loan" become a transfer?

If both parties are residents of the same state (say NH, which doesn't regulate resident-to-resident transfer), it's unimportant, but when one is a non-resident, 18 U.S.C 922(a)(5) applies:

(a) It shall be unlawful— for any person ... to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person ... who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in ... the State in which the transferor resides; except that this paragraph shall not apply to... (B) the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes

Anybody find a simple example of a prosecution under this clause?

This is for FFL holders "A licensee". It's under "27 CFR Part 478, Subpart F - Conduct of Business".
What about just normal people? Billy Bob, loans a gun to Buba Jim? No business involved.

See 18 U.S.C 922(a)(5) above, and https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/whom-may-unlicensed-person-transfer-firearms-under-gca

 

[42!]

Question remains, when does a "temporary loan" become a transfer?

If both parties are residents of a state (say NH, which doesn't regulate resident-to-resident transfer), it's unimportant, but when one is a non-resident, 18 U.S.C 922(a)(5) applies:

Anybody find a simple example of a prosecution under this clause?


See 18 U.S.C 922(a)(5) above, and https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/whom-may-unlicensed-person-transfer-firearms-under-gca

I know we are playing with the details. But in my example both parties are "Residents" of MA and the "loan", not a "transfer", of the firearm takes place in NH.

The way I read it (yup it's convoluted).
No MA State laws have been violated because the action took place in NH. Even though the receiver does not have a MA license. And it's a loan, not a transfer.
No Fed law has been violated because you can loan a firearm and the law doesn't consider where the action takes place.
Sporting purposes would certainly include going to/from a range for practice. As for CC, that's a state thing so it would be OK in NH as long as you aren't violating Fed law (i.e. it's for Sporting Purposes).

Would love to see some caselaw on this.

 

[namedpipes]

NYC does require a license/permit for long guns. You have to register all long guns as well.
...

Can a NYC subject buy a long arm outside the city but inside the state? And then transport it directly to their second residence inn another state?

 

[Kevin_NH]

Maura would file charges anyway, as spitefulness trumps constitutionality in her mind

I know we are playing with the details. But in my example both parties are "Residents" of MA and the "loan", not a "transfer", of the firearm takes place in NH.

Regardless of whether this is a loan or a transfer, in the situation where both parties are MA residents, the firearm changes hands while both parties are visiting NH, and the firearm never returns to MA, it does not appear any laws would be violated.

Doesn't mean Maura Healey wouldn't try to prosecute anyway, purely out of spite.

 

[drgrant]

Nobody wants to be a test case for 18 U.S.C 922(a)(5), which says a person may loan or rent a firearm to a resident of any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purpose.

It's worth noting though that while nobody wants to be a test case that's another one of those somewhat outwardly dubious laws that BATFE doesn't really want to see get tested in a court of law either, because if pressed, by the right people, it could become invalidated or at least partially gutted. (For example, look at what happened with US v Lopez, has there ever been another GFSZ case since that one? the gov sort of "won" that case, but in the process also got somewhat constrained in how it can apply and enforce that law... ) Much like that whole "An FFL can only transfer as long as its lawful in the person's home state" BS. In practice this never gets prosecuted and only used as part of an administrative armbar against a licensee; The feds do not want to see either one of those go full court press up the fed court chain because those laws violate a whole bunch of preexisting legal precepts, also including the 2nd amendment. So there's this weird sort of "detente" regarding these types of laws, to the best of my knowledge. Or at least I've never personally seen or heard about any good case law generated by fed indictments on this sort of thing. Also, given the fact that the feds usually don't just bring one lone charge against someone, these are exactly the type of tack-on charges that they'd apply up front and then likely drop as the case progresses, lest they get caught with their pants down. These charges are probably used to induce pleas and so on, and the person actually gets convicted of something else. It's pretty much impossible to breathe these days without committing at least one fed felony; the feds don't have to look very far to other parts of CFR that they can reliably prosecute without worrying about pissing in the well, so to speak. I think this is the primary reason why things like this part of CFR, USC 922R, and a handful of other "somewhat dubious" pieces of federal gun law rarely or never actually get fully prosecuted- they simply don't want to go there if they can avoid it. Of course there's a lot of cases where this stuff gets used as an armbar. Example, Joe Smoe lets his brother Jay Smoe one state over borrow an shotgun. Jay smoe , unbenknownst to his brother, is a felon, and ends up using that shotgun to shoot a home invader, which isn't a "sporting purpose". Jay Smoe gets arrested and bagged for FIP- BATFE, for whatever reason, cannot prove that Joe smoe actually supplied the shotgun originally, but they"re "pretty sure" that he did- so they throw that whole "sporting purposes" bit out there as leverage to get him to throw his brother under the bus, etc. Not the best example but you probably see what I'm driving at. Those kinds of esoteric fed laws are rarely (or even ever?) prosecuted, but I would bet retty much anything that they get used as leverage in combination with other charges up front... and since most people plea out or take the easy way out, they make for good throwaway charges that will reliably get dropped come plea time.


-Mike

 

[drgrant]

If you borrow a gun when out of state, it must be for "sporting purposes"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.97

Have you guys seen any case law or attempted prosecutions on this? I have not- I am genuinely curious, because if a case does exist, the circumstances would be pretty interesting, etc.

-Mike

 

[Qwikdraw45]

I thought residency was tied to where you spend the majority of your time? How does dual residency work? He does own the property in PA. (Kalash)

Just owning property isn't enough. You need to intend to reside there. The example that the ATF gives is owning (or renting) a residence in two states, and, for example, you live in one during the week, and at the other during the weekends. During the workweek, you are a "resident" of that address if you intend to reside there; during the weekends, you are a "resident" of the other. A case in point is AZ. We had numerous people who had a second home there, and were "residents" during the winter, but then returned to "reside" in another state such as Minnesota or New Hampshire for the winter.

i thought FFL in selling state has to be sure it's legal for buyer to possess in their state of residence. (Squib308)
If you are buying it in your current "state of residence" then that is your "state of residence" for the purchase. Now, the ID is the hardest part. AZ gave a non-driver ID, with local address" for those who were there as a "second" home. I'm sure some states (such as NH) are touchier about issuing an ID. VT doesn't have a problem, since it actually required out-of-state students to get a VT ID for purchasing alcohol.

 

[caboose84]

Can a NYC subject buy a long arm outside the city but inside the state? And then transport it directly to their second residence inn another state?

Not sure. There are very few gun shops in NYC. If buying a gun upstate, your ID would show a NYC address. The dealer would most likely have to see the NYC long gun permit to complete the transaction or risk trouble with the state. That said pretty sure registering long guns for NYC falls upon the owner, not the dealer.

 

[dcmdon]

If he has a part time residence in PA does that make him a part time resident of the state? I would think that would have more bearing as opposed to whether or not he has a license in the state his other (main) residence is located in.

There is no such thing as a part time resident as far as the ATF is concerned. When you are at your vacation home, you are a resident of that state and have all the rights to purchase and possess firearms as a full time resident.

I know several people who live in NYC and have summer homes in CT. They have a CT RESIDENT pistol permit and have the same rights as any other CT resident.

Google ATF form 4473, then go to the instructions starting on page 4 and look for the answers to questions 2 and 18. (I think)

- - - Updated - - -

Related question:

If a person does not have a license in any state- can they keep a gun in PA, NH, or VT?

Like in storage or a relatives home?

Yes. In most of the o****ry, no license is needed to possess any firarms. You are affected by the laws of the state you are in, not where you reside.

 

[dcmdon]

Instructions for Question 2 on 4473,, which asks for your residence.

Question 2. Current Residence Address: A rural route (RR) may be accepted provided the transferee/buyer lives in a State or locality where it is considered a legal residence address. County and Parish are one and the same.

If the transferee/buyer is a member of the Armed Forces on active duty, his/her State of residence is the State in which his/her permanent duty station is located. If the service member is acquiring a rearm in a State where his/her permanent duty station is located, but resides in a different State, the transferee/buyer must list both his/her permanent duty station address and his/her residence address in response to question 2.

If the transferee/buyer has two States of residence, the transferee/buyer should list his/her current residence address in response to question 2 (e.g., if the transferee/buyer is purchasing a firearm while staying
at his/her weekend home in State X, he/she should list the address in State X in response to question 2).

 

[dcmdon]

Question 18 on the 4473, asking what form of ID was used to identify the purchaser.

Question 18.a. Identi cation: Before a licensee may sell or deliver a rearm to a nonlicensee, the licensee must establish the identity, place of residence, and age of the transferee/buyer. The transferee/buyer must provide a valid government-issued photo identi cation document to the transferor/seller that contains the transferee’s/ buyer’s name, residence address, and date of birth. A driver’s license or an identi- cation card issued by a State in place of a license is acceptable.

Social Security cards are not acceptable because no address, date of birth, or photograph is shown on the cards. A combination of government-issued documents may be provided. See instructions for question 18.b. Supplemental Documentation.

If the transferee/buyer is a member of the Armed Forces on active duty acquiring a rearm in the State where his/her permanent duty station is located, but he/she has a driver’s license from another State, the transferor/seller should list the transferee’s/ buyer’s military identi cation card and of cial orders showing where his/her per- manent duty station is located in response to question 18.a. Licensees may accept electronic PCS orders to establish residency.

Question 18.b. Supplemental Documentation: Licensees may accept a combina- tion of valid government-issued documents to satisfy the identi cation document requirements of the law.

The required valid government-issued photo identi ca- tion document bearing the name, photograph, and date of birth of transferee/buyer may be supplemented by another valid, government-issued document showing the transferee’s/buyer’s residence address.

This supplemental documentation should be recorded in question 18.b., with the issuing authority and type of identi cation presented.

For example, if the transferee/buyer has two States of residence and is trying to buy a handgun in State X, he may provide a driver’s license (showing his name, date of birth, and photograph) issued by State Y and another government- issued document (such as a tax document) from State X showing his residence address.

A valid electronic document from a government website may be used as supplemental documentation provided it contains the transferee’s/buyer’s name and current residence address.

 

[amm5061]

^ And we're done here. Straight off the 4473.

But seriously, tell your friend to go to the PA DMV and get a photo ID card. They cost like $30 and problem solved. No awkward questions when buying in PA, and keep the stuff not NY compliant in PA.

 

[Skysoldier]

Man I'm glad I don't live in Massachussetts.......

 

[jayhitek]

^ And we're done here. Straight off the 4473.

But seriously, tell your friend to go to the PA DMV and get a photo ID card. They cost like $30 and problem solved. No awkward questions when buying in PA, and keep the stuff not NY compliant in PA.

If you're a MA resident with a ME vacation house.. All you need in Maine to buy a firearm is a realstate tax bill and a utility bill to prove you live there and have a house on the property. You're drivers license would still be in MA.

 

[M125X]

This topic is a federal/national thing though, not MA garbage law thing. MA and Healey "cannot make dual residency firearm ownership illegal" no matter how much they grimace, and flap their arms, and whine, snort and blare.

Also- despite BATFE being flexible it's really NOT "easy", but it's not "hard" or "impossible" either. Theres a bunch of this law that needs to be changed to make things less absurd, actually. There's no logical reason why RKBA should be contingent on residency at all, but that's a whole other ballgame. There might even be some federal court cases in the mill on this issue. (I know there was one claim, where there was a guy who was a US citizen, but lived in Canada, who was trying to legally buy a handgun in the US to keep here, but did not assert a US residency claim so could not buy a handgun) I dunno what happened with his case. It may have been knocked down but he may have appealed, etc. The blockade at that point is fundamentally unconstitutional- the 2nd amendment doesn't ask for a "State of residency" to exercise ones RTKBA.

Bear in mind that while talking about this- the citizens of like 45 something states, as long as they have clean, generally non felon, or non PP records, are 18+ or 21+ (for handguns, PGO shotguns, lowers, etc) and have a drivers license (or some other suitable state identification document or other satisfying document or permit) can walk into a gun store and buy a handgun, rifle, or shotgun if they pass the background check. That's not exactly some kind of a hidden secret, particularly anywhere outside of the garbage states.

-Mike

All good points. My one question, when you run a Background check in, for example, NH, would it be a red flag when you give a "new address" being your other home of residence and not where you typically buy your firearms (in MA)?

 

[Spanz]

a little off topic, but if a MA resident buys a rifle in another state and leaves it there....say for hunting out west....if you ever plan on returning that gun to MA, you really need to have filled out the MA form a few days after the purchase.