Transfer Legality - yet another FA-10 (related) question.

[drgrant]

The other day I overheard at a gun store a person who was talking about
transferring guns from a person who did not want to bother getting their
LTC after moving into the state.... the person said something like "Oh, just
take the guns and then register them with FA-10s". Presumably the
"buyer" has the appropriate license, but the seller does not.

My gut reaction was to say "That's not legal" but I just let them keep
blathering, as it really wasn't my conversation to intrude on, and the
guy parroting this advice did not strike me as a type of person who would be
overly receptive to being corrected.

My question is.... in that situation, -who- is violating the law/is legally
responsible?

-Is it the seller, because selling guns privately WITHOUT an LTC/FID
(whichever is needed) is verboten, because sellers must be licensed,
with the sole exception being an ESTATE transfer?

-Or is it both the seller AND the buyer, because the buyer is purchasing
the gun from someone not authorized to sell it?

I guess the question is, if these people were caught doing that (somehow, although
the mechanics of the discovery aren't really clear ) who
would be prosecuted (Buyer, Seller, both) and under what part of MGL
would they get hit with?

-Mike

 

[drgrant]

Upon further digging, it looks like the -SELLER- would be in
violation of C140 Sec 128A. And the buyer would potentially be
in violation of C140 128B, unless they were honest on the FA-10
form. 128B seems to exclude the buyer from culpability if the transaction
is reported, which is strange. (Or I could be washed up on that and not
reading it correctly... )

-Mike

 

[Scrivener]

Upon further digging, it looks like the -SELLER- would be in
violation of C140 Sec 128A. And the buyer would potentially be
in violation of C140 128B, unless they were honest on the FA-10
form. 128B seems to exclude the buyer from culpability if the transaction
is reported, which is strange. (Or I could be washed up on that and not
reading it correctly... )

Both are violating both state law, which you did catch, and, possibly, FEDERAL law, which you did not.

As the sale is of guns which came from outside the state, by a person who has no license from this state, I see an interstate sale of firearms w/o an FFL. While the seller is now, apparently, a Mass. resident, BATFE may have a different interpretation of this already-illegal sale.

NOT good.

 

[dwarven1]

So to be legal in selling these guns, the person moving in would have to get an FID (or LTC, if they were hand guns), OR they'd have to involve an FFL. That could be an FFL here in MA, couldn't it?

Do I have that right?

 

[Len-2A Training]

If they are handguns, many MA FFLs wouldn't touch them unless they are on the EOPS List and AG-compliant . . . or they would offer bottom-feeder prices if they had to move them outside MA.

Best that the person get a MA LTC then sell them legally, privately and do whatever they want in the future. They will likely make more money than it will cost them to get licensed + amt that a dealer would give them on an outright sale.