Other State Residency Purchases

[Patriot]

This topic was discussed on the old MAF a few times and I wanted to
bring it up here again. I have property in VT. and pay taxes on it. I do
not pay income taxes in VT. My question is: If I can get a gun shop to
sell me a handgun of my choice while I am on vacation (legal resident of
VT. at that time) and then I return to my home in the PRM after my vacation,
is it legal(?) to have it here. Can it then be sold in PRM via FA-10 afterwards?

I'm not looking to start importing firearms but what I am looking for is not
available in the PRM and is readily available in VT. If I can take advantage
of my dual citizenship, I would like to do it. What do you legal eagles think?

Is there any definitive body of work on the subject that I can use to
persuade a local gun shop in VT. that it is ok to sell me that elusive gun
I can't seem to find in PRM?

TBP

 

[Adam_MA]

Some good info already discussed here. http://northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=508

 

[JackO]

Usually gun shops ask for yuor drivers license. What are you going to show them, your PRM license?

 

[Patriot]

Some good info already discussed here. http://northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=508

Thanks....

TBP

 

[Nickle]

Owning property isn't enough. HOWEVER, owning a home (a camp qualifies) may be enough, depending on the particular situation.

What part of VT? It makes a difference, since it matters WHO the FFL will be. Don't mention in a post who the FFL is.

If you don't want to post the town here, you may PM me.

 

[Patriot]

Usually gun shops ask for yuor drivers license. What are you going to show them, your PRM license?

I was hoping to show them my tax bill which would identify me as a VT.
resident. The owner of the shop in the adacent town has been trying to
buy me out for a few years so he knows me somewhat. Then again he
might be pissed at me for not selling and tell me to shove off!

TBP

 

[Nickle]

I was hoping to show them my tax bill which would identify me as a VT.
resident. The owner of the shop in the adacent town has been trying to
buy me out for a few years so he knows me somewhat. Then again he
might be pissed at me for not selling and tell me to shove off!

TBP

What you're required to show is a Picture ID and proof of residency. I know a couple of dealers that will only accept VT Picture Drivers Licenses, which weren't even required until a couple of years ago.

That's part of why I need the town to make a suggestion as to who. I'll steer you away from the boneheads, and towards a better, more educated dealer. Nothing illegal, just properly educated.

Edited due to receiving info in a PM. TBP does appear to easily qualify as a "Part Time Resident" per BATFE Reg's.

 

[Nickle]

http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/2000_ref.htm

State of residence. The State in which an individual resides. An
individual resides in a State if he or she is present in a State with the
intention of making a home in that State. If an individual is on active
duty as a member of the Armed Forces, the individual’s State of residence
is the State in which his or her permanent duty stat.i on is lo cated An
alien who is legally in the United States shall be considered to be a
resident of a State only if the alien is residing in the State and has
resided in the State for a period of at least 90 days prior to the date of
sale or delivery of a firearm. The following are examples that illustrate
this definition:

Example 2. A is a U.S. citizen and maintains a home in State X and a
home in State Y. A resides in State X except for weekends or the summer
months of the year and in State Y for the weekends or the summer months of
the year. During the time that A actually resides in State X, A is a
resident of State X, and during the time that A actually resides in State
Y, A is a resident of State Y.

(5) Be a resident of the State in which the firearm purchase is made for
a period of 90 days and substantiate residency by documentation (for
example, utility bills or a lease agreement);

This one pertains to aliens living in the US. The 90 days won't apply, but the means of establishing residency should.

 

[Patriot]

http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/2000_ref.htm

Thanks Nickle,

TBP

 

[Nickle]

TBP, I had to edit it and add the quotes. Sorry for the confusion, but this antique I'm using locked me out of a .pdf search. Had to download the pdf then search it.

 

[Len-2A Training]

As good a place as any to ask this question . . .

Paging Jon . . . please check law on this if you aren't absolutely certain (and a cite would be greatly appreciated). Thx

Is it now illegal for a property owner in 2 states who resides in both for some amount of time (let's say at least 1-2 months/year solid) to obtain 2 DLs, one in each state? They still pick only 1 state for "residency" re taxes, voting, etc.

Back in 1971, when I took my first job in CT, I kept my MA DL and obtained a CT DL as well. Both my Wife and I did this, using my Parent's address (where we lived for 6 months after getting married and still had our Mail sent there) for MA. [We never filed "change of address" with USPO since we were up there at least once every other weekend as our friends/family were still in Boston area and we'd drive up Friday night and stay until Sunday night.]

I knew that we would likely move back to MA and to avoid the cost and hassle of re-licensing in MA from scratch, it was cheaper and easier for those 3 years we were in CT to be dual licensed.

Much later some laws did change due to truckers carrying licenses in many states so that when they got suspended/revoked in one state, they just drove on another state's license. Thus, they made it illegal (IIRC) for CDLs to have multiple licenses. NOT sure at all if this also applied to regular citizens with passenger car type licenses.

As much as BATFE allows folks like described by OP to buy in both states during the time said person is considered a "resident" (owner of property staying for extended time), problem is that when FFL asks for DL and it doesn't match up with state, they will usually deny sale rather than risk it being an illegal transaction. I understand their reluctance, but dual DLs in this sort of case could make that problem go away.

 

[Nickle]

Len, I can answer that question, at least in this exact scenario.

For anyone to get a VT Driver's License, they MUST surrender their current state Driver's License. They're very firm about it.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Nickle,

I can easily guess that different states have different policies.

I'm really curious if the Feds mandated that one can only have 1 DL (passenger car class license) when they did this for CDLs.

When I moved to CT in 1971, the CT DMV wanted to take my MA Reg for my car. I refused to let them do it and told them that MA will not allow you to cancel your auto insurance (I also changed companies) until you turn in your plates and reg at a MA RMV. So, if I let CT keep my Reg, I would have paid for almost 1 year of MA inflated insurance rates while also paying CT rates on the same car.

I have a "quasi neighbor" who owns a house in my neighborhood. When she retired as a teacher she started splitting the year in FL and MA (snowbird). I noticed one year that she had both valid MA and FL license plates on her car!I wouldn't have been surprised if she had 2 DLs, assuming it was legal to do, at least back then. Now she only spends about 3 months/year here, but usually the car has MA tags on it. She is no longer registered to vote in MA and doesn't send back the town census form.

I do know that MGLs say that if you spend >30 days in total/year in MA that you must drive with a MA DL and get MA insurance/tags. It certainly isn't practical for snowbirds to get new DLs in 2 states each year to meet such a requirement (assuming that you can only have 1 DL at a time).

 

[Nickle]

I'm really curious if the Feds mandated that one can only have 1 DL (passenger car class license) when they did this for CDLs.

That is correct, it is Federal, and it did happen when they mandated uniformity of CDL's.

Prior to that, any DL in VT allowed you to drive Tractor/Trailers.

But, I remember getting my Maryland DL in 1979 and getting a Class A DL. MD's system was about the same as the current system we have now.

 

[Nickle]

One question that should be resolved on this issue is how does someone like TBP deal with his FA-10 when he gets back to Mass?

Does he need to do one?

Documentation required?

What if it's a gun that's currently not on the AG's list, but legal in the other state?

 

[Len-2A Training]

ONLY if he brings the gun back to MA would he have to do an FA-10 AT THAT TIME! If he left it in VT, no FA-10. If he leaves it in VT for 5 years and then brings it to MA, he does an FA-10 at that time.

In all these cases:

- You do the FA-10 as a "registration", NOT a transfer/purchase.
- You ONLY put gun description and buyer/owner info on the FA-10. NOTHING about the source of the gun, and the date of "purchase/transfer" is the date that it crosses "Checkpoint Charlie" into MA.
- EOPS List and AG Regs are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in "registrations" of guns or any private transfers between two residents of the same state. See my prior postings on this in Gun Laws forum.
- EOPS List and AG Regs are strictly "MA DEALER" restrictions, not restrictions on possession/private transfers/what one can bring into MA (when they move in or move gun from residence in another state).

And somehow I'm certain this same question will get asked another 100 times here within the next year! Sigh!

 

[Nickle]

Len, if you knew of the substance of the PMs going back and forth, you'll understand why I asked those questions.

I think it's 100% covered now, and crystal clear. Thanks for your patience.

I suggest sticky'ing this thread.

 

[RKG]

This is not a simple question, and it is made more difficult by the use (both by state and federal firearms laws) of the term "resident" without otherwising defining what is to be meant by that term.

1. Unless specifically defined otherwise, the term "resident" in a statute means "domiciliary."

2. One can only be a domiciliary of one state at a time, and one remains a domiciliary of a state until one moves to an abode in another state with an intent to remain in that other state indefinitely.

3. Having a summer, vacation or other second abode in another state does not make one a domiciliary of that other state. Spending time -- any amount of time -- in that second abode does not make one a domiciliary of the other state absent leaving the first state with a present intent to remain elsewhere indefinitely.

4. The quoted "advice" about State X and State Y is quite incorrect.

5. Generally, one analyzes domicile this way. First, a child acquires the domicile of its parents at the time it is born. Second, that domicile remains the person's domicile until the person changes domicile -- by moving to an abode in another state with the requisite intent to remain in that other state indefinitely. No other action changes the current domicile. So what you do is track each change of abode the person has made and evaluate the state of mind at the time of the change to see if that change of abode effected a change of domicile.

6. A person can be liable for income taxes both (a) to his domiciliary state, as to all income (though mosts states grant a credit for income taxes paid to another state for income earned in that state) AND (b) to any state in which the income is earned. So, by itself, paying income taxes does not prove domicile.

7. A person is liable for ad valorem property taxes to any state in which the property is located. Paying property taxes is not a determinant of domicile.

8. In federal elections, and in most state elections, one must be a "resident" of the state in order to vote in elections in that state (or federal elections conducted in that state). Voter registration is a strong indicator of domicile (if, for no other reason, because it is a crime to vote in any state of which you are not a "resident").

ANyhow, enough lecture. I seriously advice folks that this is not an easy issue. It is not one that a layman can easily or reliably resolve on his own. If it matters for some reason -- and given the federal prohibitions about purchasing firearms outside one's domicilary state, it should matter here -- get competent legal advice.

 

[Nickle]

I seriously advice folks that this is not an easy issue. It is not one that a layman can easily or reliably resolve on his own. If it matters for some reason -- and given the federal prohibitions about purchasing firearms outside one's domicilary state, it should matter here -- get competent legal advice.

You make valid points in many situations.

Only one opinion counts. And that is the BATFE's opinion, backed up by Federal Law.

And that is EXACTLY what I quoted, from the BATFE's Federal Law book, from BATFE's own website. Anything else is irrelevant.

We're not talking driver's licenses (other than as ID for purchase) here, or voting rights, or anything else other than purchasing a firearm. And the BATFE, and the pertinent portions of the USC apply. That is LAW. That is what I quoted, not opinion.

 

[RKG]

Normally I'd agree: if BATF gets the law wrong in what is perceived to be a favorable way and publishes its opinion, ordinarily you would say take the bonus and stay quiet. However, the error in the BATF interpretation is plain and obvious to anyone who knows this area, and I have doubts that it would provide much of a defense. Don't buy handguns where you have your summer house (if that is in a different state).

I should add: BATF's mis-interpretation of "resident" is not, insofar as I am aware, in any sense of the phase "backed up by Federal law." There is no federal statute of which I am aware that defines resident for firearms purposes. There is a lot of federal court decisions that define the common law term of "resident" or "domiciliary" for many applications, and they are all the same (and contrary to the quoted BATF position).

So the questions this: Assume A is a domiciliary of Massachusetts, where his residence is and where he votes. He has a house in New Hampshire. He goes to a gun store in New Hampshire and, in reliance on the BATF quote, claims to be a NH resident and purchases a handgun from an NH FFL (or a NH resident in a private transation). He is then prosecuted for purchasing a handgun outside his state of residence, and his defense is that BATF said that was OK. What result?

I believe it more likely than not that the age-old precent that "ignorance of the law is no defense" will prevail. Likewise, there is a long list of cases holding that estoppel does not work against the government. Either way, the defendant is convicted.

Where the stakes are high, one treads carefully.

 

[Nickle]

Let's try this again. Here's the USC referenc. That would be USC 178.11:

§ 178.11 Meaning of terms.

State of residence. The State in which an individual resides. An
individual resides in a State if he or she is present in a State with the
intention of making a home in that State. If an individual is on active
duty as a member of the Armed Forces, the individual’s State of residence
is the State in which his or her permanent duty stat.i on is lo cated An
alien who is legally in the United States shall be considered to be a
resident of a State only if the alien is residing in the State and has
resided in the State for a period of at least 90 days prior to the date of
sale or delivery of a firearm. The following are examples that illustrate
this definition:
Example 1. A maintains a home in State X. A travels to State Y on a
hunting, fishing, business, or other type of trip. A does not become a
resident of State Y by reason of such trip.
Example 2. A is a U.S. citizen and maintains a home in State X and a
home in State Y. A resides in State X except for weekends or the summer
months of the year and in State Y for the weekends or the summer months of
the year. During the time that A actually resides in State X, A is a
resident of State X, and during the time that A actually resides in State
Y, A is a resident of State Y.
Example 3. A, an alien, travels on vacation or on a business trip to
State X. Regardless of the length of time A spends in State X, A does not
have a State of residence in State X. This is because A does not have a
home in State X at which he has resided for at least 90 days.

Last time I checked, counsellor, the United States Code is LAW. Am I wrong?

This isn't opinion or "I think". I understand your point, though.

Remember, I'm not your "run of the mill" gun owner. I'm on the back side of the counter, so to say, and I won't do 10 years in the slammer just so some guy can illegally buy a handgun he can't get in Mass.

But, that isn't the case here. He is legally entitled to do business in VT. That's Federal Law. There's nothing "hokey" about this.

 

[Len-2A Training]

RKG,

Point well taken. Although I am not sure that the BATFE "made a mistake" in interpretation. I think it more likely that they intentionally provided an "exception" to being a "legal resident" (as you define it) for the purposes of buying guns where they are residing (for an extended time) at that time.

Problem is . . . how does FFL know this to be "OK" without ID that they usually rely on as evidence of residency? DL is the accepted form in most states, Resident CCW permits in others.

Nothing in MGLs specifically allows a FL "legal resident" (as you define it) to get their Resident LTC in MA during their 4 month/year stay here. Nothing directly prohibits it, but I can tell you what Ron Glidden and most of his fellow chiefs have to say about it! No dice, NR LTC only (meaning you can't even legally buy ammo during your 4 month stay in MA unless you cross the state line).

RKG, thanks for the legal treatise, it is much appreciated.

 

[Len-2A Training]

Nickle,

178.11 is a CFR (Regulations, derived from USC). CFRs can't (legally) contradict USC. So RKG may still be right. You'd need to find the corresponding definition in USC to be 100% certain.

NOTE: There are many places that CFRs improperly/illegally expand USC, just as there are CMRs that improperly/illegally expand MGLs. In cases like this, a judge/jury may go lenient on someone who broke the law, but you can't/shouldn't count on it!

 

[Nickle]

My error. I should know better by now. (USC's vs CFR's)

The reference I quoted is given to every FFL as it changes. We're required to have it. I also mentioned to TBP that certain FFL's up here will NOT sell unless you have a VT DL, with a picture on it. I can tell you that a DL is NOT the only acceptable ID as well. CCW Permits, and Military ID's are 2 that I know of.

State laws also change everything in this area as well. Just because Federal Law allows it, doesn't mean certain states will honor it, or that they have to.

TBP, as it stands right now, I suggest you contact RKG or Cross-X, and get your situation exactly clarified. If they say DON'T buy, heed that advice. Both of them have excellent reputations and seem to be very competent. If they charge you $ for that advice, consider it money well spent. I would, if it was me in your situation.

 

[Scrivener]

We are being told that a mere summer home in another state somehow constitutes sufficient domicile to warrant the purchase of handgun in that other state; further, that the gun could then be brought into Mass. without running afoul of various laws. I beg to differ. Let's start with the basics, including the CFR quoted as the rationalization for this astounding conclusion:

"State of residence. The State in which an individual resides. An
individual resides in a State if he or she is present in a State with the
intention of making a home in that State."

Not a LOT of clarity, but note the key phrase "making a home." Let's explore that further:

"Domicile: The place at which a person has been physically present and that the person regards as home; a person's true, fixed, principal and permanent home, to which that person intends to return and remain even though currently residing elsewhere."

Black's Law Dictionary, 8th Ed., p. 523

So much for the "summer/weekend home" theory we've seen trotted out as a rationalization for an out-of-state purchase. By definition, a vacation home is NOT a "domicile."

Still think otherwise? Oooooooookay:

"Residence: ...residence usu. just means bodily presence as an inhabitant in a given place; domicile usu. requires bodily presence plus an intention to make the place one's home."

Id. at p. 1335.

Note again the requirement of an INTENTION to make the place one's home, as distinct from mere residence. Again, the vacation home theory is refuted.

"We're not talking driver's licenses (other than as ID for purchase) here, or voting rights, or anything else other than purchasing a firearm. And the BATFE, and the pertinent portions of the USC apply. That is LAW. That is what I quoted, not opinion."

Actually, you quoted the CFR, which is subservient to the USC, and then expressed a legal opinion thereon. You also declared,

"Only one opinion counts. And that is the BATFE's opinion, backed up by Federal Law."

You are wrong. First, BATFE opinion is just that - mere opinion and, in my experience, has been based of false assertions of law. Second, Federal law is NOT the only relevant factor.

STATE law has a GREAT deal to say about residency which, in turn, affects what is - or is NOT - a lawful acquisition of a gun brought into this state. Think not? Read these:

M.G.L.c. 50, § 1. Definitions

"Specially qualified voter", a person (a) who is otherwise eligible to register as a voter; and (b) (1) whose present domicile is outside the United States and whose last domicile in the United States was Massachusetts; or (2) whose present domicile is Massachusetts and who is:

(i) absent from the city or town of residence and in the active service of the armed forces or in the merchant marine of the United States, or a spouse or dependent of such person;

M.G.L.c. 51, § 1. Qualification of voters

Section 1. Every citizen eighteen years of age or older, not being a person under guardianship or incarcerated in a correctional facility due to a felony conviction, and not being temporarily or permanently disqualified by law because of corrupt practices in respect to elections, who is a resident in the city or town where he claims the right to vote at the time he registers, and who has complied with the requirements of this chapter, may have his name entered on the list of voters in such city or town, and may vote therein in any such election, or except insofar as restricted in any town in which a representative town meeting form of government has been established, in any meeting held for the transaction of town affairs. Notwithstanding any special law to the contrary, every such citizen who resides within the boundaries of any district, as defined in section one A of chapter forty-one, may vote for district officers and in any district meeting thereof and no other person may so vote. No person otherwise qualified to vote for national or state officers shall, by reason of a change of residence within the commonwealth, be disqualified from voting for such officers in the city or town from which he has removed his residence until the expiration of six months from such removal.

Unless you believe that Mass. law is somehow irrelevant to a Mass. resident bringing non-compliant handguns across the border based upon an illusory "residence" in a summer home, I'd say state law is germane to the discussion.

Also that your analysis is flawed and your advice erroneous. At least it was free and, therefore, not overpriced.

 

[KMaurer]

BATFE never says or implies that a person can simultaneously be a resident of more than one state. It does, however specifically address the perfectly legal and normal situation of persons who reside in different states for substantial periods of time. (While US and some state tax laws operate on the fiction that a person either is or is not a resident of a particular state for the entire tax year, that's both the exception and a legal fiction) If anything, there advice seems to be to make it clear that one can't pretend to me a resident of a state simply on the basis of spending a couple of weeks there during the summer or winter.

Let's suppose that I live six moths of each year in Massachusetts and the other six in Arizona. The respective state laws deal with where I can vote, where I need to pay income taxes, and whether I need to get a new drivers license or new firearms licenses every six months, or can keep the same ones year-round. BATFE simply appears to recognize the reality that a person might reside at different states at different times. When I'm a resident of Massachusetts, my purchase and ownership of firearms are governed by US and Massachusetts law; Arizona doesn't get any say in the matter. The reverse holds during the time I'm a resident of Arizona.

Ken

 

[Nickle]

Thank you, Ken.

For the rest of you, I've been in a very similar situation before. I was Regular Army, stationed in Texas. I was at the time a legallly Vermont address (taxes, voting), with a New Jersey DL (for a valid reason, it was legal) and owned property in Texas (and paid property taxes).

Could I buy a handgun in VT then? Yes

In Texas? Yes

Both would be legal. Federal Regs allowed it, and respective State Laws did not DISALLOW it.

An additional item. I just got off the phone with the local ATF office. I don't have a final answer from an agent, yet, but, the answer I have so far mirrors everything I've stated. When I get a full answer, I will post what they've told me.

 

[Nickle]

Just spoke to the Connecticut ATF Compliance Office.

IF you can prove residence in VT, even if only part-time, you CAN legally buy in VT. Utility bills, Property Tax receipts or proof of mailing address should suffice (I would recommend against a PO Box).

For the nay sayers, if this isn't enough proof, I wouldn't know what else would work.

If you disagree, then we'll just disagree.

 

[Scrivener]

Just spoke to the Connecticut ATF Compliance Office.

IF you can prove residence in VT, even if only part-time, you CAN legally buy in VT. Utility bills, Property Tax receipts or proof of mailing address should suffice (I would recommend against a PO Box).

Even the ATFE's own website states that mere ownership of property does NOT constitute residency and is not a basis for purchasing a handgun in that state. I own property in CA. I pay taxes and condo fees on it. I have never been there, never intend to go there, but pay for it.

Now tell me how that warrants my buying a pistol in Lala Land.

Oh - good luck getting your little phone chitchat with an unidentified functionary of unknown qualifications admitted into evidence at your trial for unlawful acquisition/possession/transportation or whatever else you are charged with.

 

[Nickle]

I have never been there, never intend to go there, but pay for it.

Guess you're not a "Resident" there are you? Guess you're not legal to buy in that state because of it are you?

It ain't what you pay, it's where you live. And when buying firearms, there is such a thing as "Dual Residency". Is that so hard to grasp? This isn't new. It's been around since GCA '68 took effect on Dec 16, 1968. That's almost 40 years ago, guys.

Think I'm new at this game? I was selling guns before many of you were born. These laws and Regs are older than you are. I'm not snubbing you, quit snubbing me.