Can I CCW a pistol that is registered to my wife?

[SW 586]

With all the unaswered questions regarding the new Missouri CCW law, I thought I would ask another.
I plan to get a CCW permit when all the questions are answered, but the handgun that I would prefer to sometimes carry is a Taurus 605 that was purchased by and registered to my wife with whom I'm still happily married.
Would this be allowed or should I just go and get the thing transferred over to me? There is the possibility that my wife may at some point get her CCW and at times want to carry this same gun.
Can a husband and wife carry the same gun when it is registered to only one spouse?

 

[Thumper]

What is this registration of which you speak?

I wasn't aware that MO's new CCW law was S# specific.

 

[cordex]

Can a husband and wife carry the same gun when it is registered to only one spouse?

No. They cannot. The problem is not a legal one, but a practical one.

I guess you could always tell people that you are twins joined at the hip, but you'd have to have a custom holster made, and drawing would be problematic.

 

[deanf]

SW 586, you're assuming that the new law makes the permit specific to a certain piece. Are you sure that's the way it is? In many states, you can carry anything (and as many of them at one time) as you like.

 

[CasualShooter]

Missouri's Law requires you to qualify with both a revolver and a semi-auto pistol; but, there is nothing in it that requires you to carry any particular weapon.

Missouri has no provision for registering handguns.

Missouri DOES, however, require a transfer permit, obtained from your county sherriff, before obtaining each and every hand gun.

You could find yourself in trouble if you were found carrying a handgun which was NOT legally acquired (by permit-it might be a good idea to carry a copy of that permit to answer any questions by law enforcement, should any arise).

Since only one of you can obtain the permit and legally own any given handgun, it could be problematic for both of you to try to carry the same gun.

Look at the bright side. Now you've got a good reason to buy a new gun!

 

[SW 586]

Perhaps "registered" was not the correct term. I was referring to the fact that to purchase the handgun, my wife had to go to the county sheriff and apply for a permit to purchase. At that time, there was up to a 7 day waiting period to run a background check on her. When she came back clear, the permit was given to her to present to the gun shop (which in this case was Bass Pro). She filled out the yellow federal form, the gun was purchased, the make, model, and serial no. was recorded on the permit to purchase, and she was given a copy of it. I assume the original permit to purchase was forwarded on to the county sheriff and that if at some point in the future, a records check was done on the gun, it would come back as "registered" to my wife. Am I way off base here?
And, no, I do not know if the new Mo. law is specific to a certain piece.

 

[deanf]

I assume the original permit to purchase was forwarded on to the county sheriff and that if at some point in the future, a records check was done on the gun, it would come back as "registered" to my wife.

So now the question becomes: Is it illegal to posses a gun that has someone else's name recorded on it's papers?

It may not be.

 

[Augustwest]

I would e-mail, or better still write, to the AG or Department of Public Safety (State Police) in MO and ask. Packing.org has helpful links/info for many states.

My experience has been that the state cops I've interacted with on various permitting issues/questions are very courteous and helpful. Never applied in Missouri though.

 

[CasualShooter]

So now the question becomes: Is it illegal to posses a gun that has someone else's name recorded on it's papers?

It is a violation of Missouri Law for a Missouri Resident to obtain or acquire a handgun without first obtaining a permit from the Sherrif of the County of Residence.

The only way you can legally transfer a handgun to any one in Missouri other than a Federal Firearm Licensed Dealer, including a family member, is for the receiving party to first obtain the handgun permit from the County Sherrif.

Thus, if you are a life-long Missouri Resident, you had better be able to produce the applicable permit for any handgun in your possession if you are challenged.

I believe that the only exception would be for you to have acquired the handgun legally before you moved into Missouri and established residence. In either case, it would be wise to keep copies of the applicable permit/papers handy in the event that you are challenged.

Years ago, you would likely not have to worry much about it unless you got into serious trouble for something else. Today, however, it is a different world.

Now-a-days you can find yourself in big trouble for firearms infractions alone. And what's even worse, you could be faced with the loss (or denial) of your right to own firearms.

It's not worth the risk! Squeeky Clean is your best policy.

 

[SW 586]

I think we may be missing the point of my original post that started this thread.
The gun WAS legally acquired. I was with my wife at the sheriff's office when she applied for the permit to purchase. I was with her when she picked up her approved permit to purshase. I was with her at the counter of the gun store when she selected the gun. I only wrote the check to pay for it.
I JUST WANNA KNOW IF I CAN LEGALLY CARRY IT AS A CCW!
Aw, forget the whole thing. I'll just call the sheriff's office and ask them.

 

[CasualShooter]

The permit was issued to your wife, not you.

Your wife legally aquired the gun, not you.

The gun belongs to your wife, not you.

Your wife, with the proper CCW permit, can carry the gun, not you.

You need to acquire your own gun. What's wrong with that?

 

[AZRickD]

So, if a robber breaks into their house, she is the only one who can use "her" gun to shoot him?

Y'all need to change some more laws in MO. That's as bad as Michigan's handgun registration law.

Rick

 

[Standing Wolf]

Missouri has no provision for registering handguns.
Missouri DOES, however, require a transfer permit, obtained from your county sherriff, before obtaining each and every hand gun.

Sounds awfully registered to me. If the make, model, and serial number are ever recorded by a government agency, it's been registered.

 

[Edward429451]

"Steers don't sign treaty's with meatpackers"

Robert Heinlein (Puppetmasters)

 

[Edward429451]

It IS registration.

"How many legs has a cow?"
"Four."
"Now suppose we call the tail a leg, How many legs now?"
"Five."
"Wrong, Four. Calling a cows tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."

Abraham Lincoln

(They can call it what they want, its STILL registration.)

 

[CasualShooter]

This is starting to get rediculous; but, I'll try this one last time.

So, if a robber breaks into their house, she is the only one who can use "her" gun to shoot him?

I don't think any body said that. The question was whether a fellow could grab his wife's (or anyone else's handgun) and go packin' it around the state (assumeing he had the proper CCW permit).

I believe that the short answer is "NO!" and here's why.

For many years Missouri State Law has required individuals to obtain a permit from the sherriff of the county within which they reside before acquisition of a handgun. A separate permit, each at a cost of $10.00, is required for acquisition of each handgun. If you want to obtain 2 handquns, 2 transfer permits are required at a cost of $20.00.

571.080. 1. A person commits the crime of transfer of a concealable firearm without a permit if:

(1) He buys, leases, borrows, exchanges or otherwise receives any concealable firearm, unless he first obtains and delivers to the person delivering the firearm a valid permit authorizing the acquisition of the firearm; or

(2) He sells, leases, loans, exchanges, gives away or otherwise delivers any concealable firearm, unless he first demands and receives from the person receiving the firearm a valid permit authorizing such acquisition of the firearm.

<http://www.moga.state.mo.us/statutes/chapters/chap571.htm>


Now, Missouri's new CCW permit, or Concealed Carry Endorsement as it is called in the new State Statute, permits the carry of concealed weapons including handguns; but, it Does Not change the previous law which still requires a permit from the County Sherriff before acquisition of each and every concealable firearm. This includes "borrowing" as stated in the State Statute quoted above.

The Concealed Carry Endorsement or permit does NOT authorise the carrying of a concealable firearm which was not legally acquired. So even though someone may be in possession of a Missouri Concealed Carry Endorsement (or permit) they may still be in violation of Missouri Law if the handgun is borrowed or obtained without first obtaining the transfer permit from the County Sherriff.

(They can call it what they want, its STILL registration.)

Now, if you should move to Missouri with your handgun collection and go to your local police department to "Register" your handguns, they will tell you that there is no provision in Missouri Law to do so.

While the make, model and serial number of the handgun may be recorded on the transfer permit which is returned to the County Sherriff after you take delivery of the gun, and while the Sherriff IS required to KEEP all returned permits I do NOT believe there is any provision in Missouri Law for putting that information into a State Registry or Data Base.

Finally, in light of all of the above, IMHO anyone wanting to get a Missouri CCW permit and carry a gun SHOULD GET THEIR OWN GUN AND LET THEIR WIFE KEEP HERS. And whats wrong with that? If I had an excuse THAT GOOD to buy a new gun, I'd buy one tomorrow!

 

[chaim]

I won't get into MO law since I'm not a lawyer and I know nothing about it. I wouldn't do it for other reasons (related to information that I was long ago given, by a lawyer in the family, about cars being used by multiple drivers).

I'm thinking it is probably a bad idea from a liability standpoint. I've long been advised with cars, for an example, to keep the one you drive in your name and if married have hers only in her name (based on this it is also a good idea to not lend your car or borrow someone else's). That way you can't both be named individually in a lawsuit should you be in an accident that is your fault (I have no idea if that would really matter in the end since most states would probably consider all the property in a marriage the property of both spouces, but maybe not). From a similar standpoint, if I was in a CCW state I'd want every gun I'd carry to only have my name attached to it (paid for with cash or a credit card account with only my name on it, if registered it will be registered to me) so that should I be in a self defense shooting and with the way things are these days I'd assume I'd be sued there may be some extra protection that only I could be sued (and if it is after I'm married maybe some of the "community property" could be saved if a bleeding heart jury heard from the attacker's parents during the case).

 

[SW 586]

CasualShooter,
O.K. now I get it, thank you. I was not aware of the statute concerning the loaning or borrowing a gun without the obtaining the proper permit. Stupid law. I can understand the requirement in the case of selling or buying, but to loan or borrow? That's just ridiculous!

 

[CasualShooter]

SW 586,

When I was younger, nobody would likely have made a big deal about it unless you got in trouble for something else.

But, alas, today it's a different world. Now-a-days they will send you to jail (or worse) for firearms infractions alone (some of which are pretty stupid to begin with - But, that's life). It's Not worth the risk!

 

[BOBE]

As I've said before, I am so glad I live in "Sweet home Alabama". Ala Dan, what do you say?
Bob, in LA "lower Ala"

 

[Hkmp5sd]

How about this...

Can you legally have access to her firearm at home while she is not present? (For example, one restriction when talking about NFA weapons, technically, no one can have access without the registered owner present.) Is it legal for you to take your wife's handgun to the range and practice without her physically present? What is the difference between un-supervised possession of your wife's handgun at home and un-supervised possession in public?

I've always had the understanding that when married, both you and your wife have joint ownership of all property (with the exception of NFA items mentioned above). This is the reason you have to go to court to decide how the belongings are distributed when getting a divorce.

 

[CasualShooter]

It's apparent that some would like to carry this to the nth degree and split hairs on the matter.

I am not an attourney and my years as an LEO were long ago. However, I don't think there are any attourney's who can always reliaby predict what some LEO's and Prosecutors may do under some circumstances and in the final analysis, who can say what a jury may do in some cases.

I AM able to read; however, and the Statute, which I posted previously, seems to read pretty clearly.

Further, although a given LEO and prosecutor may "cut you some slack" in a given situation, that is no assurance that the next guy will do so in another identical situation.

That said, IMHO it is wise to exercise prudence in such Matters. :banghead:

Of course it's still a free country and anyone who may care to "live on the edge" and "test" such matters is certainly free to do so and can argue the matter before a Jury if they run accross the "right" LEO and Prosecutor.

Personally, I would prefer to avoid such unnecessary potential conflict AND BUY MY OWN GUN rather than borrowing someone else's anyhow.

What's wrong with that? :banghead:

 

[Hkmp5sd]

I would prefer to avoid such unnecessary potential conflict AND BUY MY OWN GUN rather than borrowing someone else's anyhow.

Me too! Excellent advice.

I also think that it is very sad that anyone even has to consider this topic. Who cares whether the gun "belongs" to one spouse or the other? And what kind of politician sits around thinking up these Mickey Mouse regulations?

 

[CasualShooter]

Hkmp5sd,

I also think that it is very sad that anyone even has to consider this topic. Who cares whether the gun "belongs" to one spouse or the other? And what kind of politician sits around thinking up these Mickey Mouse regulations?

For the most part, I pretty much agree with you. However, the Missouri State Statute, which we have been discussing, is NOT new. It has been on the books for many decades. At least, with the recent passage of the new License to Carry (LTC) and the General Assembly's Override of the Governor's Veto of same, Missouri is moving in the right direction.

As a practical matter, there are some other considerations, though, which have not been discussed.

First, it seems like we have a really tough time keeping the bad guys in prison these days. Violent Fellons are often released prior to completion of their sentences owing to over crowding of prison facilities, for example. These people typically lose their rights of gun ownership upon conviction and some people's spouses do fall in this category. This would lend argument to support the language in the Missouri Statute.

Don't get me wrong though. I mention this simply to bring some perspective to the issue.

Personally, I think Missouri could do away with their State Permit for Acquisition. Kansas has no such requirement (but does'nt have CCW yet either-that's another discussion).

No matter WHAT one's position on Gun Control, it seems to me that Missouri's State Handgun Acquisition Permit is redundant and unnecessary in light of current Federal Regulations concerning the acquisition of hand guns and I would like to see Missouri repeal it. Perhaps that is something Missourians can work toward in the future.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

and some people's spouses do fall in this category

I don't remember what state it occured in, but there was recently a story where a LEO married a woman that was a convicted felon on parole. She had her parole revoked because he left his service gun out instead of locking it in a lockbox which she could not access.

So it can happen. It's just a stupid law.