Handing over a long gun to a fellon

[Soonerpesek]

Update
He passed the night that I posted.

My opinion that’s prolly worth less than $0.02…..

He trusted the gun to be with you, and unfortunately passed…….
I would say you are the owner now….
Treat it as you would with any of your other firearms…
The kid doesn’t have any claim to it…


……and…..

See sentence #1 of this post…..

 

[RickD427]

Just because the person who asked him to temporarily look after the gun dies does NOT default the guns to bring his property. You are wrong. Next, I sincerely doubt that his son is the only surviving and living family member. It's not the OP's property to just do as he pleases, and personally, I think it's very disrespectful to keep the property without first talking it over with the family. At the very least, he should contact the son and work something out with the son with regards to the sale of the son's gun and property. It doesn't stop being his property just because he's not allowed to process it.

The guns still belong to the son, and the OP should consult the son with his reservations and then come to a legal solution, or the OP should give the firearms to whomever controls the estate if possible. Just keeping it for himself is and a betrayal in my opinion.

When a friend entrust me with something passed away, becomes sick, etc., it would eat at my soul if I didn't do everything in my power to do right by them by doing the right thing. I understand that most people on this planet aren't like me, e.i., they lack morals and loyalty.

Mr Styx,

With all due respect you're making a major mistake with your posting.

You are treating the "Ownership" of the weapon as being synonymous with the "Possession" of the weapon. They're not the same. The federal statutes being discussed here address the "Possession" of the weapon and exist irrespective of the ownership of the weapon.

18USC922(g)(1) is violated if a person transfers "Possession" of a firearm to a convicted felon, even if the felon is the legal owner of the firearm.

This situation is a pretty good example of the quandaries that one faces when dealing with someone else's firearms.

 

[Styx]

Mr Styx,

With all due respect you're making a major mistake with your posting.

You are treating the "Ownership" of the weapon as being synonymous with the "Possession" of the weapon. They're not the same. The federal statutes being discussed here address the "Possession" of the weapon and exist irrespective of the ownership of the weapon.

18USC922(g)(1) is violated if a person transfers "Possession" of a firearm to a convicted felon, even if the felon is the legal owner of the firearm.

This situation is a pretty good example of the quandaries that one faces when dealing with someone else's firearms.

I'm not confusing the two. The OP is in possession of a weapon that he doesn't own. If I am charged with a felony tomorrow and I my wise ask a friend to temporarily take possession of all my weapons and ammo, it's still my weapons and ammo they're in possession of.

 

[Styx]

The OP is the one who is currently, legally in possession of the weapon and is the one who would be in trouble if he handed it to a felon. The original possessor dying has nothing to do with it.

No one has disputed this. The OP is in fact in possession of the firearms that he wasn't gifted. He was asked to temporarily hold on to them. Yes, I agree that he can't legally give the weapons back to the son, but he shouldn't steal them from the son either. He should contact the son, and work it out with the son with regards to selling the son's property that he's in possession of.

Maybe. There are plenty of folks who only have one kid and no extended family. That would certainly simplify things though.

Yes, but the OP didn't say that was the case, and that's not a common case. In any event, if a family member or someone who is responsible for the estate can't take possession, then the OP should work contact the son about what he wants done with his guns (within the confines of the law to f course).

Not sure if that was a misprint or not. The son is not only not allowed to "process" the gun, he's not allowed to possess or even touch the gun at all. We don't know for sure till we hear more from the OP, but the fact that he has possession of the gun currently because his friend was concerned that the son would steal it might lead one to have a sneaking suspicion that the son might not be 100% reasonable and easy to work with on this issue.

Very respectfully, what does this have to do with what I posted? I didn't suggest that the OP give the son back the the firearms. Other than that, unless there's some evidence that leads the OP or any rationale person to believe that another family member will give the son the firearms, that's just a baseless accusation, conjecture, and assumption. In either case, the firearms still belong to the son. The son with a still the owner of the guns. The father gave someone else's property to the OP for safe keeping. It's not the OP's property to keep no matter which way you try to rationalize it.

Also, consider that, as far as we know, the son doesn't know that the OP has the gun. I, for one, would not be in a big hurry to inform a felon who was likely to steal guns from his own family, that I have a gun that he might consider to be his.

And knowing his father had the guns and now the guns are missing, the son would have every right to report them stolen even if he doesn't have the right to possess the firearms. The fact still remains that it wasn't the father's property to gift to the OP. I know I would if I was the son. The OP would be arrested and booked first, and it would be sorted out in court later.

I know about every gun I purchased and about what I paid. I know they're worth money. It would be at the forefront of my mind that they're missing if the person who I thought took possession of them died. I would inquire about them, and if not found, I'd assume a dishonest family member or someone else stole them, and I'd act accordingly whether I'm a felon or not as I lost possession NOT OWNERSHIP of MY firearms.

 

[dogtown tom]

OP is in lawful possession of the firearm.
OP does not have an ownership interest in the firearm.
The friends estate is the lawful owner.
His friend, transferred possession for the stated purpose of keeping the son from stealing the gun. Son is already a convicted felon.
Subsequently the friend passes.

No one has disputed this. The OP is in fact in possession of the firearms that he wasn't gifted. He was asked to temporarily hold on to them. Yes, I agree that he can't legally give the weapons back to the son, but he shouldn't steal them from the son either. He should contact the son, and work it out with the son with regards to selling the son's property that he's in possession of.

Literally the worst idea in this thread.
KNOWING the son is a convicted felon, any effort to transfer the firearm to the son is conspiring to commit na felony. It's dumb.
The executor of the estate is the one who determines who gets what, not the son, not you, not me.

..... In either case, the firearms still belong to the son. The son with a still the owner of the guns. The father gave someone else's property to the OP for safe keeping. It's not the OP's property to keep no matter which way you try to rationalize it.

The son may have an ownership interest, but cannot under federal law ever take possession.

And knowing his father had the guns and now the guns are missing, the son would have every right to report them stolen even if he doesn't have the right to possess the firearms.

Ummm.............the gun is not stolen. The owner willingly transferred possession to the OP for a specific purpose. If the firearm is not transferred to the decedents estate, the executor could claim "conversion". That's keeping the property of another with the intent to deprive them of it. Thats NOT AT ALL the situation the OP has described.

If the convicted felon son calls the police and reports "MY GUN WAS STOLE!" ..........he's a bigger idiot than he already is.
If the executor of the estate calls the police and says "OP won't give back decedents property"...........he has a valid case.

The fact still remains that it wasn't the father's property to gift to the OP.

Well, factually the firearm WAS the fathers property and he sure as heck could gift, transfer, sell or trade that firearm to anyone he chose.
But that's not what happened. Friend entrusted a firearm to OP for the express purposes of keeping it from being stolen by his convicted felon son.
OP has made that clear. At no point in this thread has OP insinuated that the firearm was gifted to him.

On the father passing, his property is his "estate", and disposition of that estate is by an executor or probate court.

I know I would if I was the son. The OP would be arrested and booked first, and it would be sorted out in court later.

Yeah, the cops ain't going to do that. Its a civil matter, not criminal.

....I know about every gun I purchased and about what I paid. I know they're worth money. It would be at the forefront of my mind that they're missing if the person who I thought took possession of them died. I would inquire about them, and if not found, I'd assume a dishonest family member or someone else stole them, and I'd act accordingly whether I'm a felon or not as I lost possession NOT OWNERSHIP of MY firearms.

You wouldn't have lost possession because you never had possession.
Lawful ownership isn't determined by you, but by the executor or the court.
Lawful possession id determined by federal and state law.

 

[ballman6711]

A few years back a friend asked me to hold 2 long guns for him. He didn't want his son to be able to steal them. The son is a convicted felon. He took one back to get it appraised and another friend is holding it now.

In either case, the firearms still belong to the son. The son with a still the owner of the guns. The father gave someone else's property to the OP for safe keeping

The son doesn't own the gun. The father, who passed away, was the owner of the gun. Now the OP has the gun, and it can't be given to the son for legal reasons. The gun could be returned to a different family member, if said family member exists, but we don't have that information.

The father may have had a will, a wife that survived him, multiple children, or a multitude of other possibilities. We just don't know. But in any case, the OP can't give the son, a convicted felon, the gun without committing a crime himself.

chris

 

[rust collector]

At this point it seems that we have gone as far as we can on the facts we have. Some may be operating under the assumption that the guns belonged to the son at some point, but that has not been stated. Some may be assuming facts not in evidence.

Let's pause at this juncture to let OP supply additional information if desired. Otherwise, we risk providing bad advice based upon incomplete or misunderstood facts.

I will leave the thread open for the OP's supplementation only. If someone else posts before OP provides further clarification, it will be time to roll up the sidewalk.

 

[Styx]

Literally the worst idea in this thread.
KNOWING the son is a convicted felon, any effort to transfer the firearm to the son is conspiring to commit na felony. It's dumb.
The executor of the estate is the one who determines who gets what, not the son, not you, not me.

Where in what you quoted did I suggest the OP give the son the firearms? That's not what I suggested the OP do. I stated that he contacted the son about going about getting the firearms sold instead of giving it back.

The son may have an ownership interest, but cannot under federal law ever take possession.

Yes, I agree with you, and that's been my argument.

You wouldn't have lost possession because you never had possession.
Lawful ownership isn't determined by you, but by the executor or the court.
Lawful possession id determined by federal and state law.

Within context, if I have possession of my firearms today, am charged with a felony tomorrow and am no longer allowed to possess firearms, I have lost the right to have possession of my firearms.

The son doesn't own the gun. The father, who passed away, was the owner of the gun. Now the OP has the gun, and it can't be given to the son for legal reasons. The gun could be returned to a different family member, if said family member exists, but we don't have that information.

The father may have had a will, a wife that survived him, multiple children, or a multitude of other possibilities. We just don't know. But in any case, the OP can't give the son, a convicted felon, the gun without committing a crime himself.

chris

The father did NOT own the firearms. He took possession of his son's firearms.

 

[Styx]

Yeah, the cops ain't going to do that. Its a civil matter, not criminal.

If guns are missing and reported stolen, they do not yet know it's a civil matter. The original premise was that the son and no one else knew where the guns that the dad had possession of disappeared to.

 

[Styx]

Well, factually the firearm WAS the fathers property and he sure as heck could gift, transfer, sell or trade that firearm to anyone he chose.
But that's not what happened. Friend entrusted a firearm to OP for the express purposes of keeping it from being stolen by his convicted felon son.
OP has made that clear. At no point in this thread has OP insinuated that the firearm was gifted to him.

On the father passing, his property is his "estate", and disposition of that estate is by an executor or probate court.

I disagree that it was the father's property, but I 100% agree at the very least that it should go to the father's estate. It's not the OP's to keep.

At this point it seems that we have gone as far as we can on the facts we have. Some may be operating under the assumption that the guns belonged to the son at some point, but that has not been stated. Some may be assuming facts not in evidence.

Let's pause at this juncture to let OP supply additional information if desired. Otherwise, we risk providing bad advice based upon incomplete or misunderstood facts.

I will leave the thread open for the OP's supplementation only. If someone else posts before OP provides further clarification, it will be time to roll up the sidewalk.

Sorry, I got the notification that I was quoted and respond to the quotes before I seen your post. I wouldn't have responded otherwise. You can just delete my post please.

 

[rust collector]

This may be a learning opportunity. It is off the primary subject, but please permit me a momentary diversion. Please consider

• Before responding to a thread, reading the thread to make sure you understand the subject, are not repeating other posts and have the latest and best information.
• Before submitting your response, checking just above to see if other posts have come in since you last checked. If they have, view them before posting.
• Please resist the natural human impulse to respond to every statement or position that you do not agree with.

I know that is asking a lot, especially when there are 50 or more posts up thread, but the time it takes can save confusion, hard feelings and frustration. I appreciate the apology and this is not a criticism, but I put it out there for everyone's consideration.

Thank you. Now let's see if we hear more from the OP.

 

[dogtown tom]

The father did NOT own the firearms. He took possession of his son's firearms.

Nothing posted by the OP says that was the situation.

 

[rust collector]

We're done.