Collecting a friend's guns after a restraining order..

Based on your position, it would also be just as illegal to bring any non licensed person to a gun club to shoot, since possession is illegal if not licensed.

MGL has an exception for an individual receiving shooting instruction under the direction of a licensed person. This pertains to rifles/shotguns/handguns only - there is no exemption allowing the temporary transfer of a machine gun at a range.

The MA exception does NOT immunize one from the prohibition on transferring a gun to a federally prohibited person.

So, T. Former's position is technically accurate; consistent with state and federal law; and does not state that shooting in the presence of an LTC holder is unlawful.

One should check their facts VERY carefully before telling T. Former he is wrong. I'm not saying it can't happen, but catching him in a legal mistake is about as likely as an unconnected person getting a machine gun license in Brookline.
 
One should check their facts VERY carefully before telling T. Former he is wrong. I'm not saying it can't happen, but catching him in a legal mistake is about as likely as an unconnected person getting a machine gun license in Brookline.

No truer statement has ever been posted on NES.
 
Based on your position, it would also be just as illegal to bring any non licensed person to a gun club to shoot, since possession is illegal if not licensed.

No, federal law does not use licensing. MA allows supervised possession in narrow circumstances but does not scope this solely to those capable of getting an LTC where federal law does create a definitive class of people allowed to possess.
 
Specifically, what is the difference between a person who has been served with a RO and a person who has no firearms license as it pertains to shooting with a gun owner at a gun club? Both are restricted from possession. If in fact if the possession restriction doesn't apply to one while at a gun club range, why would a restriction apply to the other since they both are restricted from possession to begin with?
 
Think of it this way, M60. NRA-certified basic pistol courses worth their salt have a live-fire training component in MA . This student is unlicensed but the instructor is your temporary license to possess for that specific time and has likely checked you against a database to make sure that you're not subject to any federal disqualifiers.

An RO makes you at least temporarily disqualified. The questions on Form 4473 alone will pretty much tell you if you're disqualified.
 
Think of it this way, M60. NRA-certified basic pistol courses worth their salt have a live-fire training component in MA . This student is unlicensed but the instructor is your temporary license to possess for that specific time and has likely checked you against a database to make sure that you're not subject to any federal disqualifiers.

An RO makes you at least temporarily disqualified. The questions on Form 4473 alone will pretty much tell you if you're disqualified.

Serious question:

Inquiring minds want to know . . . please tell us what database that is that I (as an Instructor) can use to verify that a potential student isn't subject to any federal disqualifiers??
 
Specifically, what is the difference between a person who has been served with a RO and a person who has no firearms license as it pertains to shooting with a gun owner at a gun club?
If the person has had a change to defend themselves against the RO in court, that individual is a federally prohibited person while the RO remains in effect. Big difference.

If the individual has not yet had a chance to defend him/herself in court, the person is a state prohibited person but not a federal prohibited person. Note - it is "had a chance to", not "actually did" defend in court.

If in fact if the possession restriction doesn't apply to one while at a gun club range, why would a restriction apply to the other since they both are restricted from possession to begin with?

The MA exemption does not override federal prohibited person status.
 
Serious question:

Inquiring minds want to know . . . please tell us what database that is that I (as an Instructor) can use to verify that a potential student isn't subject to any federal disqualifiers??

With a signed release, I believe a CORI would be the best database other than an involved LE-level inquiry. Commercial service criminal background checks may not contain accurate info, but I would be reluctant to believe any objective disqualifiers such as a felony conviction would not show up.

If there is some other database I am forgetting, then I apologize.
 
With a signed release, I believe a CORI would be the best database other than an involved LE-level inquiry. Commercial service criminal background checks may not contain accurate info, but I would be reluctant to believe any objective disqualifiers such as a felony conviction would not show up.

If there is some other database I am forgetting, then I apologize.

Good luck to you if you are an instructor and institute that as your policy. Also who is going to pay for the background checks? People are very price-sensitive about training, migrating to the 1/2 off deals on Groupon vs. quality training for full but reasonable price. Adding more expenses to the instructor side is a financial disaster. Not to mention that sometimes people sign up at the last minute and you don't have time to do backgrounds on them even if you wanted to do so.

Nobody can legally run the LE level BOP for non-LE purposes.
 
I have been reading this thread with much interest. There is a lot of experience and knowledge by those posting here.

I realize that what is being discussed is focused on MA specifically. What would happen in another state without a licensing system like MA has? If a RO was issued and the gun owner became a temporarily Fed PP, would the LEO local to that jurisdiction show up and take the guns? I understand you could not purchase anything, but what happens to what you already have?
 
I have been reading this thread with much interest. There is a lot of experience and knowledge by those posting here.

I realize that what is being discussed is focused on MA specifically. What would happen in another state without a licensing system like MA has? If a RO was issued and the gun owner became a temporarily Fed PP, would the LEO local to that jurisdiction show up and take the guns? I understand you could not purchase anything, but what happens to what you already have?

The Lautenberg Act requires confiscation and that is a Fed Law. In most other states, it isn't done until AFTER a hearing where both parties can defend their position and only if the judge rules that the RO should remain in force. In those other states, as soon as the RO is lifted, the PD will return the guns. In MA, many cases where the chief refuses to reinstate the LTC and refuses to return the guns (in the rare case that they didn't ship them all off to a bonded warehouse). Once they hit a bonded warehouse (a MA only issue) essentially they are gone forever.
 
The Lautenberg Act requires confiscation and that is a Fed Law. In most other states, it isn't done until AFTER a hearing where both parties can defend their position and only if the judge rules that the RO should remain in force. In those other states, as soon as the RO is lifted, the PD will return the guns. In MA, many cases where the chief refuses to reinstate the LTC and refuses to return the guns (in the rare case that they didn't ship them all off to a bonded warehouse). Once they hit a bonded warehouse (a MA only issue) essentially they are gone forever.
I was able to have a friend's guns transferred from "The" bonded wh to me after he settled up with them. But, that was in 2000, and things may be different now. Jack.
 
<span style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); background-color: rgb(233, 233, 233);">The Lautenberg Act requires confiscation and that is a Fed Law. In most other states, it isn't done until AFTER a hearing where both parties can defend their position and only if the judge rules that the RO should remain in force.</span>
The Lautenberg act only requires confiscation once the subject has a change to appear in court to argue against the restraining order. MA imposes no such limitation. Just another example of how MA goes one step further.
 
I was able to have a friend's guns transferred from "The" bonded wh to me after he settled up with them. But, that was in 2000, and things may be different now. Jack.

It is still legally possible but the fees make it financially non-feasible for a lot of people. Thus, my comment that they are "gone" once they hit the bonded warehouse (especially the two big ones).
 
By the same token, nobody can legally take a prohibited person through the live-fire portion of a course. I'm sure this felony has been committed by some instructors maybe unwittingly or maybe clouded by $$$.

The federal felony requires that the individual providing the firearm knows that they are providing it to a PP. If you create a form that says "You claim you aren't a PP by signing here:", then you would reasonably protect yourself I would think.
 
Back
Top Bottom