80% receivers and US citizens w/o a current perm residence established

[rodregier]

Background: US citizens present in the United States but without a current established permanent residence location in a specific state are not eligible to acquire firearms thru an FFL. (GCA'68).

80% receivers can be acquired in the United States without transacting thru an FFL.

For the purposes of this discussion assume the purchaser is *not* a prohibited person.
(Non-felon, not adjudicated as mentally defective etc).

With that as background:

What US law(s) would be violated if such a person inside the United States makes a complete firearm starting with a purchased 80% receiver?

 

[pdsmith505]

Not a prohibited person, therefore allowed to possess a firearm.
No transfer of a firearm is being conducted, so residency concerns don't matter.

I can't think of a Federal law that would be violated.

HOWEVER, certain states, such as California, require registration of home-built firearms. I couldn't find anything in CA penal code 29180 about residency requirements for such registration though.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB857

 

[denton]

"Residence" is not as restricted as "domicile". You can have multiple residences, and move between them as you please. As far as I know, there is no required amount of time required to establish a residence. It need not be permanent, though I think you might have a hard time if claimed residence based on a few hours on a park bench.

"Domicile" is a different matter. You can only have one domicile.

Federal firearms laws refer to residence rather than domicile as far as I know.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...As far as I know, there is no required amount of time required to establish a residence. It need not be permanent, though I think you might have a hard time if claimed residence based on a few hours on a park bench....

Some States do require being present for a certain period of time in order to be considered a resident, at least for some purposes. But for the purposes of the Gun Control Act, while there's no stated period of time requires, one must be present (27 CFR 478.11):

...with the intention of making a home in that State...

It can be problematic for some folks who have decided to live a rather nomadic existence continually traveling from place to placed, often by motorhome, to convincingly establish that they have made a "home" at each place of temporary sojourn. As far as I know, the federal courts haven't looked at the question.

 

[Twiki357]

Even the folks, as Frank says, living in a “nomadic existence continually traveling from place to placed, often by motorhome”, they would still need a driver’s license. That would permit them to purchase a firearm in the state that issued the license, assuming no additional proof of residency is required such as in California. I have no idea what address they would have to enter on a 4473, or for that matter what address would be on their DL if they don’t maintain a permanent physical residence.

I’m curious to see where this thread goes.

 

[rodregier]

The other group (which numbers in the millions) are US expats (who still maintain US citizenship)
who have permanent residence out of country and no US driver's license.

GCA'68 rescinded their Second Amendment rights thru FFL's with the state-of-residence requirement.

Those persons cannot purchase a firearm thru a FFL while visiting the United States.

 

[Theohazard]

Even the folks, as Frank says, living in a “nomadic existence continually traveling from place to placed, often by motorhome”, they would still need a driver’s license. That would permit them to purchase a firearm in the state that issued the license, assuming no additional proof of residency is required such as in California.

Not necessarily. Keep in mind that while a drivers license is a way to prove residency to an FFL, it doesn’t establish residency. If the address on someone’s drivers license isn’t the address where they actually live, then it’s a potential felony to put that address on the 4473.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Not necessarily. Keep in mind that while a drivers license is a way to prove residency to an FFL, it doesn’t establish residency. If the address on someone’s drivers license isn’t the address where they actually live, then it’s a potential felony to put that address on the 4473.

See --

• The Seventh Circuit affirmed Matthew Queen's conviction for making a false, material statement on a 4473 when he listed as his current address an address at which he no longer lived (U.S. v. Queen, 408 F.3d 337 (Fed. 7th Cir., 2005)).
  
  
• The Eleventh Circuit affirmed David Garrity's conviction for making a false, material statement on a 4473 (United States v. Garrity (No. 16-10930, 11th Cir., 2016). Garrity bought a gun at a Gander Mountain in Florida listing a Florida address as his current address. That address matched the address listed on his Florida commercial driver's license. He also registered and insured two vehicles at that address in Florida, and he voted in Florida. However, it turned out that Garrity's home was actually in New Jersey, where he lived with his family. The Florida address was that of a friend with whom he stayed when his work as a truck driver took him to Florida.
  
  
• The points (at least in the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits) of the cases I cited are:
  
  
  • One's residence address is material to the purchase of a firearm from an FFL
    
    
  • Claiming on the 4473 an address at which one doesn't live or make his home to be his residence address is a false statement in violation of 18 USC 922(a)(6) and thus a federal crime.
    
    
  • The fact that one might occasionally stay at an address when temporarily in a place doesn't make that address his residence address.
    
    
  • The fact that an address is shown as one's residence address on a driver's license, a vehicle registration, or vehicle insurance, or is the address shown on voting records, doesn't make it one's residence address if it is not where he actually makes his home.
    
    
  • The other misdeeds of Queen and Garrity are irrelevant to those points. Those misdeeds are not elements of the crime for which each was convicted, i. e. making a false, material statement on a 4473 in violation of 18 USC 922(a)(6).

 

[MachIVshooter]

Not a prohibited person, therefore allowed to possess a firearm.
No transfer of a firearm is being conducted, so residency concerns don't matter.

I can't think of a Federal law that would be violated.

HOWEVER, certain states, such as California, require registration of home-built firearms. I couldn't find anything in CA penal code 29180 about residency requirements for such registration though.

I'm no attorney, but have to agree. Residency requirements for transfer/commerce don't apply to possession or non-licensee manufacture at the federal level

 

[BSA1]

Hummm. This has the makings of a great Supreme Court case.

To be a natural citizen I must prove I was born in the United States. It is not a requirement that my parents have a residence in the U.S. This is most commonly done by a birth certificate listing the location I was born which is usually a hospital.

As a citizen I now have the protections of the Bill of Rights. The Constitution does not require residency as a requirement to receive those protections.

The Government is infringing on my right to own a firearm by requiring me to prove I live in a Government approved residence.

For example living in a tent in the woods with a P.O. Box for mail does not meet the Government standards even though I am not breaking any laws.

A life style that is becoming more and more popular with retirees is too sell their home and land, buy a RV and roam visiting places and the kids. My wife and I have started discussing doing this when she retires in a few more years. We have kids in Texas and Maryland and the idea of driving back and forth spending a few months with each of them is appealing. In fact both of our kids have purchased homes with a extra bedroom just for us. We don't even have to stay in the RV!

The can of worms this lifestyle opens is what State to get my drivers license in. I can use my kids residence in Texas to get a Texas D.L. and to get mail. However the argument becomes is whether that satisfies the BATFE. In todays cashless, wireless society I don't need snail mail. A snail mail address is becoming obsolete.

This seems to be a hold over from old Jim Crow laws that were used in the past to suppress voting and discriminate against the poor and minority groups.

 

[dogtown tom]

…... For example living in a tent in the woods with a P.O. Box for mail does not meet the Government standards even though I am not breaking any laws..

A PO box doesn't work for anyone.
The requirement is to show your current residence address on the Form 4473 and provide government issued documentation showing that address.
If you live in a van down by the river.....get a document that shows that address. There is no requirement that the address be on a street with numbers. A Rural Route is acceptable.
GPS coordinates anyone?

 

[GRIZ22]

Another factor to consider are there are states where where one would need a state "manufacturers license" like NJ.

A NJ resident could legally take a 80% receiver, cross the Delaware River into PA, complete the receiver, and bring it back to NJ.

 

[rodregier]

{intentionally purged by author for supersede}

 

[rodregier]

Griz22, sounds like an inspiration for a modern version of a ..."crossing the Delaware" painting

 

[RickD427]

Another factor to consider are there are states where where one would need a state "manufacturers license" like NJ.

A NJ resident could legally take a 80% receiver, cross the Delaware River into PA, complete the receiver, and bring it back to NJ.

Griz,

I'd be careful with this idea. I'm not familiar with NJ law, but California has several nutso laws that have much in common with NJ. California has a statute that makes it a felony for a resident to personally import into the state any handgun acquired (including acquisition by manufacture) from another state. Violations involving long guns are a misdemeanor. I would not at all be surprised if NJ doesn't have a similar statute.

 

[GRIZ22]

Griz,

I'd be careful with this idea. I'm not familiar with NJ law, but California has several nutso laws that have much in common with NJ. California has a statute that makes it a felony for a resident to personally import into the state any handgun acquired (including acquisition by manufacture) from another state. Violations involving long guns are a misdemeanor. I would not at all be surprised if NJ doesn't have a similar statute.

NJ has no such statute. If you legally acquire any firearm that's legal in NJ out of state it is legal to bring into the state and there is no registration of those firearms in NJ. If you build that AR in PA, you build it in compliance with NJ's "assault weapon" law and bring it back to NJ you've committed no crime.

I don't have the inclination to do so but if I did I'd add a serial number and make sure I'd have proof I assembled the rifle in PA.

Many NJ shooters acquire their long guns of all types in PA or DE to avoid the defacto registration that occurs with long guns. There is a state "Certificate of Elgibility" filled out when you transfer a long gun. If it's a ftf private sale you can just use it to start a fire as there is no requirement to maintain them. If you buy a gun from an FFL, the FFL is required to maintain a copy. Not sure what the FFL does with those when they go out of business but guessing they go to the state.

Added info:

Found out those "Certificates of Elgibility are shredded by the FFL when he goes out of business. They don't go to the state.

 

[BSA1]

If you live in a van down by the river.....get a document that shows that address. There is no requirement that the address be on a street with numbers. A Rural Route is acceptable.
GPS coordinates anyone?

Are there still Rural Route addresses? Man that is going way back. The County renamed all of our roads 30 years ago.

Why not GPS coordinates? Back when the Country was founded folks living on the frontier did not have addresses. Most mail was General Delivery.

 

[rodregier]

I don't recall GPS coordinates mentioned in the context of FFL proof of residence location protocols.

I suspect most jurisdictions are trying to roll out "real" civic addresses for all locations even if they aren't getting USPS deliveries.

Makes is *far* easier to perform 911 dispatch, especial from a few call centers in State or Provincial jurisdictions that could be a large distance away
from the reporting location. I know they did that for my current province of residence - Nova Scotia. I think they have every occupied building
on a Geographical Information System (GIS) for such purposes.