Can my wife use my gun?


PDA






CountGlockula
November 16, 2006, 12:31 AM
Hi guys. Wondering about this.

Since I purchase my firearm, what of my wife?

What if, heaven forbid, I was out of town on business, my wife confronts a bad guy in our home and she fires the pistol at the BG to protect her own life?

She fired her husband's gun. Is there anything wrong with that?

Thanks.

If you enjoyed reading about "Can my wife use my gun?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
gbran
November 16, 2006, 12:44 AM
Can I give a firearm to my spouse or registered domestic partner? Can he/she give it back to me later?
Yes, as long as the person receiving the firearm is not in a prohibited category [PDF 10 kb / 1 pg] and the firearm is not an assault weapon, the transfer of a firearm between a husband and wife or registered domestic partners is exempt from the requirement to use a licensed dealer to perform the transfer. However, if the firearm is a handgun, the recipient must submit an Report of Operation of Law or Intra-Familial Handgun Transaction [PDF 481 kb / 2 pg] and $19 fee to the DOJ within 30 days.

(PC sections 12076(f), 12078(i))

btsyshsbnd
November 16, 2006, 12:49 AM
If your wife doesn't have a f.o.i.d. (firearm owners i d) card and she uses your gun even if it's for self defense she'll be in more trouble then the b.g. if he lives. you'll also lose your gun and maybe have your f.o.i.d. card revoked. this is what I was told by a local street cop

CountGlockula
November 16, 2006, 01:28 AM
Thank you gbran. I'm having her fill out the paperwork.

Librarian
November 16, 2006, 01:36 AM
You can also lend it to her, with no paperwork and no problem, presuming she isn't legally prohibited from having a firearm. If you need to lend it to her for an extended period, maybe it's time to buy her her own.

EOD Guy
November 16, 2006, 09:56 AM
Hi guys. Wondering about this.

Since I purchase my firearm, what of my wife?

What if, heaven forbid, I was out of town on business, my wife confronts a bad guy in our home and she fires the pistol at the BG to protect her own life?

She fired her husband's gun. Is there anything wrong with that?

Thanks.

Absolutely nothing wrong with it as far as California law is concerned. As a matter of fact, since you're in California, the handgun is community property anyway.

CountGlockula
November 16, 2006, 10:03 AM
So does my wife HAVE to fill out the form?

TexasRifleman
November 16, 2006, 10:06 AM
I'm sorry, and I will get in trouble for this, but this practically BEGS a California bashing party.

A wife cannot use a husbands firearm in their own home to protect herself?

Dave P
November 16, 2006, 10:09 AM
"Excuse me dear, but don't touch that pistol until you complete the forms!" :barf:

Lonestar
November 16, 2006, 10:22 AM
That's Crazy:what:

So they expect that with a BG with a knife walking up the stairs and my wife in my bedroom filled with various handguns all in my name to say, "I can use any of these guns, there not in my name, and I did not fill out the paperwork, let me use this lamp to fight this guy instead."

Gun laws are suppose to protect citizens, not fine them for defending themselves.

DrewH
November 16, 2006, 11:05 AM
Sounds like those forms apply to formally transfering possession (giving) the handgun to your wife (or other relative) not lending it to her. Letting her use it when you are gone would be lending, in my view. So she should be OK in the scenario you described without filling out those forms.

DrewH
November 16, 2006, 11:10 AM
Furthermore by filling out that form you are telling the State of California you are giving your gun to your wife :) Maybe she should get her own :)

Mainsail
November 16, 2006, 11:19 AM
OMG California sucks.

ceetee
November 16, 2006, 11:21 AM
I'd rather declare bankruptcy and go visit my wife in jail once a week, than bring flowers to her grave for the rest of my life...

Big Calhoun
November 16, 2006, 11:32 AM
Wow, community property laws wouldn't come into play here?

I think this is a good question and honestly never have given it much thought beyond reminding the wife which gun is where.

CDH
November 16, 2006, 11:47 AM
What if, heaven forbid, I was out of town on business, my wife confronts a bad guy in our home and she fires the pistol at the BG to protect her own life?

She fired her husband's gun. Is there anything wrong with that?

The only serious consequences I can imagine would be if she were to miss.

Carter

Tim James
November 16, 2006, 11:49 AM
Don't forget to fill out the Intra-Person Handgun Transaction form when shooting weak handed at the range. You'll also need to submit a $7 fee within 60 days.

EOD Guy
November 16, 2006, 12:32 PM
So does my wife HAVE to fill out the form?

NO! That is only if you want to transfer custody to her permanently.

Ed Ames
November 16, 2006, 12:49 PM
I'm sorry, and I will get in trouble for this, but this practically BEGS a California bashing party.

A wife cannot use a husbands firearm in their own home to protect herself?

Actually, it begs a btsyshsbnd bashing party.

*** is a FOID card? And what does it have to do with CA? There's no such thing in California, and there is NO NEED TO FILL OUT ANY PAPERWORK. You aren't giving her a firearm in the scenario you've stated... she's using (borrowing it).

Too much bogus information in this thread. Maybe not bogus in Illinois (which is, I suspect, where the FOID BS comes from) but certainly bogus for CA. Bottom line is unless you want her to have the gun at a separate residence for more than 30 days, there is simply no issue here, and certainly no paperwork. If there is a reasonable threat of harm, or if the force is reasonable to prevent a violent felony (rape, burglary, etc) she is legally justified to shoot in CA. CA is a castle doctrine state and so long as she is defending human life (hers or someone else's) her legal issues will be small potatoes compared to the psych implications of shooting someone.

I would suggest you get her a copy of the DOJ handgun safety cert (HSC) guidebook, which spells out all the legal issues. You can get it at any gun shop for pocket change, or download and print it yourself. It answers these sort of questions pretty clearly and provides basic handling instructions. You should have read it before buying your first handgun (assuming you bought recently) anyway and none of the info it contains will harm you in any way.

glummer
November 16, 2006, 03:05 PM
Gun laws are suppose to protect citizens, not fine them for defending themselves.Yeah, and Jim Crow was just a show of respect towards dark-skinned people.
And Dachau was supposed to be subsidized housing for Jews.
Try not to swallow the Kool-aid so quickly.

Gun laws are intended to stigmatize and persecute gun-ownership. Period.

vynx
November 16, 2006, 03:20 PM
In California in your own house no worries but don't lend it to your neighbor if the SHTF.

I knew of a guy who lent his Mom a .45 Norenco 1911. She lived in a separate residence - miles away. His nephew or cousin got out of the Rangers and was living with his Mom, he got into a bar fight, was drunk, went home got the 1911 and went back to the bar, cops had been called and were there, someone saw him and said "that's him" - he was searched, they found the gun, he was arrested - police phoned my friend asked about the gun registerred in his name, he told them it was for his Moms protection and of course he never knew that his dumb relative would take it - they gave it back to him! His dumb relative spent a year in prison. True story 1995 or 96 Los Angeles, CA.

So don't worry about your wife or family using your handgun in/on your property - probably appies to anyone staying at your residence.

bender
November 16, 2006, 03:28 PM
I see FOID mentioned several times in this thread.

what the .... is a "firearms owners ID card :confused:

Shield529
November 16, 2006, 03:52 PM
FOID is Firearm Owner Id Card. In IL. if you own a gun the state and Chicago PD own you.

Move to a state with normal gun laws and you will never have to worry about nonsence like your wife with a gun anymore.

bender
November 16, 2006, 03:57 PM
ok, thanks. I'm in Texas. Its just that I've seen "foid" several times on this board, but did not really know what it was (fortunately for me, it seems :) )

vta33
November 16, 2006, 04:24 PM
These California DOJ pamphlets in PDF format can be downloaded. Deadly force can be used to defend yourself and retreating is not required. Read page 30. It doesn't answer your original question but I seriously doubt that a wife who defends herself with her husband's handgun would be prosecuted. The "community property" concept seems valid.


http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2006.pdf

The is the Handgun Safety Certificate Study Guide in PDF.

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/hscsg.pdf

Green Lantern
November 16, 2006, 04:42 PM
Actually, it begs a btsyshsbnd bashing party.

"Pay...AH say...pay attention!" ;) He plainly says in the title of his post that all this FOID mess is in Illinois

- a state that just won out over California for "places to NEVER live as a firearms owner" in my book! I'm sure Roddy will be so proud...:barf:

Ed Ames
November 16, 2006, 05:32 PM
I'm paying plenty of attention... it is because I was paying attention to the location of the OP that I think mentioning a foid card in this thread was extremely bad form. It sent the OP on a wild goose chase, thinking they'd have to fill out paperwork that flat doesn't exist. Why do you think it was a good thing?

I read the horror stories of CCW holders not being allowed in bars, not being allowed all sorts of other places... citizens not allowed to defend rape victims or stop crimes in progress... gun owners actively pleading for their legislatures to grant simple rights like self defense (i.e. castle doctrine)... and I seriously wonder how anyone can bash CA gun laws with a straight face. CA may make it tough to buy certain guns but at least Californians have a right to have a gun in their homes, a right to use it to defend themselves or their neighbors from muggers or rapists or murderers, and a CCW law that really allows CCW holders to carry day-to-day instead of, "unless I'm going to church, or out to eat, or to a football game, or ..."

Misplaced indignation doesn't grant you free license to bash what you don't know about. If your bashing were based in facts I'd say Bash on... but most of the bashing is based entirely on ignorance and unchecked imaginings. It doesn't make any points... in fact, it does the opposite... it makes the basher sound ignorant, lazy, and irrational. Why should I ignore or encourage that?

greener
November 16, 2006, 06:13 PM
Sheesh, what a mess when someone has a legitimate concern that the use of deadly force in self defense could result in legal problems. I'm somewhere in the middle of the bell curve of the guys who seem to feel they need well-placed firearms all about the house, car, boat, whatever, for self-defense and those who don't believe it's justified. I've used firearms for about 55 of my 60 years. I've even had an "uncle" who thought it necessary to see that I knew how to commit very violent acts with all sorts of weapons up to (seriously) small nukes. There isn't anything I have that I would consider the loss worth taking a life. However, if I believed the life of any of my family or even my neighbor two doors away was really threatened, then I would use any means available to remove that threat (knives, hammers, bats, firearms). If I were giving up 20-40 years to the bad guy, then close encounter weapons would be the last consideration.

The guy who wants to turn his house into Fort Apache, repleat with claymores, concertina, and shooting pits really doesn't worry me. I can avoid him. The folks who don't believe that I have the right to defend myself in life-threatening situations plain worry the heck out of me.

btsyshsbnd
November 17, 2006, 02:42 PM
When I joined the high road it was so I could share and receive information about firearms and topics related to firearms, which is the reason I responded to this thread.
Iím sorry my post offended your obviously delicate sensibilities. Maybe from now on when someone posts a question they should specify only people who live in their state need apply because anything else will muddy the waters. As to the FOID mess, I didnít create it, donít condone it, and canít wait till Iím back in a state with common sense gun laws.

GunGeek
November 17, 2006, 04:48 PM
and a CCW law that really allows CCW holders to carry day-to-day instead of, "unless I'm going to church, or out to eat, or to a football game, or ..."

Yeah the CCW law is great... if you can get one. Fat chance if your not rich, famous, or both.

- California Escapee

EOD Guy
November 17, 2006, 05:04 PM
Quote:
and a CCW law that really allows CCW holders to carry day-to-day instead of, "unless I'm going to church, or out to eat, or to a football game, or ..."

Yeah the CCW law is great... if you can get one. Fat chance if your not rich, famous, or both.

It depends on your county of residence. Some counties are what amounts to "shall issue." Unfortunately, the majority of the people in this state live in more populated counties in which is is very hard to obtain a CCW unless you are in one of the Sheriff's "favored classes."

Ed Ames
November 17, 2006, 06:33 PM
Selfedit...I was drifting off the point.

Saying a Californian can't get a CCW unless they are "rich, famous, or both" is the same as mentioning foid cards in this thread... yes, foid cards exist... yes, CCWs are hard to get in San Francisco... but neither is relevant to ME because I don't live in Illinois or San Francisco. The information is misleading and will prevent Californians who can easily get a CCW from even trying. Why do you want to do that?

Green Lantern
November 18, 2006, 10:00 AM
Ed- I can see your point about GunGeek's post. But if you're defending California firearms laws, you should be GLAD that bts posted that info. As it makes California look GOOD by comparison. (not something that's easy to do, btw! :evil: ) But I guess a quick browse can be misleading....!

And besides, while there is plenty of good info on here, shouldn't most people expect that "the info you get from the 'net is worth EXACTLY what you PAY for it?" :banghead:

Anyhow, sorry if I got on your bad side (the "pay attention" quote was from one Foghorn Leghorn, btw and meant mostly in jest).

What say that we all bash states with crummy laws all day long, but quit bashing each other? :)

Ed Ames
November 18, 2006, 11:11 AM
Defend CA gun laws :what: heck no! I fight 'em every chance I get. I'm just of the opinion that people should know what they're actually up against instead of fighting imaginary monsters.

Bashing individuals was bad form and I'm sorry for my part in doing so. And I didn't really take "ah say" as anything but a jest. It's just that so much of the "Cali Bashing" on THR is completely off base. As in, based on imagined wrongs instead of actual wrongs. I get tired of it after a while. I get tired of it because there are so many actual, factual, real problems to bash and people make up stuff. :banghead:

So, in short... someone wants to bash the HSC law which mandates an absurdly simple test (as in you'd have to be a drooling idiot not to pass it and anyone who has even glanced at the pamphlet and gets less less than 100% had better not tell ME 'cause I'll laugh in their face) every 5 years to buy handguns and basically amounts to harassment and a $5/yr tax -- go right ahead! Someone wants to bash the law which made all .50BMG rifles "assault weapons" with a registration period (now past) and all sorts of absurd restrictions but doesn't say a word about a ".50 NOTBMGTRUSTME" that just has a .05" shorter chamber so you must resize the cases before they'll go in -- again, bash away. Wanna say something about a law that considers the Walther P22 to be an assault weapon unless you loc-tite the barrel on and round off the barrel nut? BE MY GUEST! I'll join in. But if people go on about how we aren't allowed to shoot to defend our kids, or how we need to fill out paperwork in case our wife uses our gun while we're on a business trip, or the other garbage that floats around, I'll bite my tongue for a bit and then weigh in... weigh in against the people who are tilting at windmills (and encouraging others to do so by spreading misinformation) instead of fighting the real fight.

Kentak
November 18, 2006, 11:19 AM
I'm confused. Why all the talk about transferring and forms, blah, blah, blah. The husband bought a gun. It's in the household. Is there a law that says it can't be available for use by other members of the family for defense in the home? Unless the spouse is prohibited by being a felon, etc., why would it even be an issue? Perhaps the OP should be asking on a CA gun owners forum.

K

Librarian
November 18, 2006, 04:26 PM
Perhaps the OP should be asking on a CA gun owners forum.Some of us are already here, and have contributed to the thread. "Yes, his wife can use the gun without paperwork" has already been asserted, because it's true. A transfer would be different, but that's not the question asked.

If you enjoyed reading about "Can my wife use my gun?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!