Revolver storage and shooting across state lines

[orpington]

Can my uncle travel across state lines with a revolver and shoot it at my local gun club, and, upon firing it, clean and store it in my safe until the next time he visits and wishes to shoot? He no longer has access to the land he used to shoot at, as it was sold. He would not fire it anywhere else as he no longer has anywhere else to do so. It simply makes sense as it is easier to do so than to travel with it a few times a year. Also, just curious, but would it make a difference of it was the same scenario, above, but a friend and not a relative? Lastly, he is in good health now, but a generation older than I am. Presumably he will some day predecease me. What are the legal implications of having his firearm in my safe across state lines if willed to me, or if not willed to me? This is for future reference as he has this firearm in his possession now, but would prefer to travel 3 milea to my range rather than a few hundred miles with it and then the 3 miles to my range. One other thing--can he legally fire his own firearm at my gun club if not a resident of this state?

 

[Speedo66]

Since you haven't mentioned what state you're in, how could anyone possibly answer your question?

Generally, he cannot leave it in your possession, it then becomes an out of state transfer which needs to be done through a FFL. If you do that, assuming it's legal for you to possess, you need to check your state laws about having other people use your gun when he comes to visit.

 

[orpington]

I am in Pennsylvania.

 

[v35]

Can my uncle travel across state lines with a revolver and shoot it at my local gun club, and, upon firing it, clean and store it in my safe until the next time he visits and wishes to shoot?

Strictly speaking, no. It's the concept of "possession" that complicates matters, and you specifically proposed leaving it in your possession. That makes it an interstate transfer fraught with problems for both of you, and in which case ownership would have nothing to do with it.

So, have your uncle take it with him in compliance with the commonwealth's transport requirements (excerpted below) and be sure to take it back with him upon returning home. Don't leave it in any particular person's possession.

I suppose your uncle could rent a storage facility and leave it there, as long as he is without question the only person with access to that storage facility and no one else, but even that suggestion is getting out of my comfort zone.

One other thing--can he legally fire his own firearm at my gun club if not a resident of this state?

Whereas PA has no prohibition against bringing one's personally owned firearms into the state, carrying on or about your person is another matter altogether. As long as your uncle complies with 18 PA Common Statute §6106 which enumerates several exceptions to requirements for a carry permit, it's my opinion as a layman what he is proposing to do is OK. In part, that statute reads you don't need a PA issued carry permit if you are "... engaged in target shooting with rifle, pistol, or revolver, if such persons are at or are going to or from their places of assembly or target practice and if, while going to or from their places of assembly or target practice, the firearm is not loaded."

I'd interpret that to mean he's going directly to and from the range -- no diversions -- but I'm probably being overly cautious there.

Also, just curious, but would it make a difference of it was the same scenario, above, but a friend and not a relative?

No.

 

[MedWheeler]

So, this isn't about standing in one state and shooting at targets in another?

 

[Frank Ettin]

...store it in my safe until the next time he visits and wishes to shoot?...

We recently discussed in this thread the issue of storing a gun with someone in a State other than one's State of residence. See post 3 in that thread.

 

[v35]

... if willed to me, or if not willed to me?

If your uncle has expressed the desire to leave his firearms to you after his death, I'd certainly encourage you -- as tactfully as possible -- to have him so state in a will. If he were to die without one, ownership of his firearms and everything else in his possession would pass according to his state's intestate succession rules. That might make subsequent disposition of them inconvenient and / or expensive for his heirs.

If he designates you as their beneficiary, you would need the services of a FFL to legally complete the transfer. Unless you were to move to his state (whatever that is) I don't believe there is any way around that. The fees could be paid from his estate, as long as he specifies that in the will. Those are the sorts of details for which you should seek, and pay for, proper legal counsel.

 

[Sav .250]

As to your question. There are times it`s actually fun to look up information.
More often then not you learn other things along the way. J s/n.

 

[orpington]

As to your question. There are times it`s actually fun to look up information.
More often then not you learn other things along the way. J s/n.

Well I did indeed look this up before I posted this thread, and the answers confirm what I believed to be the case all along. I did not wish to steer the conversation in the direction I wanted it to go. I wanted to see what others stated before I responded.

I just don't know why presidential candidates preach about gun control, like it is sorely lacking! Look how restrictive the laws are already!

Long and short of it--Uncle needs to leave his gun at home. It seems like even before the myriad of problems that could arise travelling in my state with the firearm, to and from the range, or otherwise, what if he stuffs the revolver in a duffle bag and hides it under the bed, and returns home for several months without it. It even seems like to me that it is illegal for his firearm to be on my property if he isn't. What if he leaves the property to go get gas, the revolver is in the bedroom where I have access to it and he is down the road a few miles? That's why I asked and the responses just confirmed what I already thought.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...Long and short of it--Uncle needs to leave his gun at home. It seems like even before the myriad of problems that could arise travelling in my state with the firearm, to and from the range, or otherwise, what if he stuffs the revolver in a duffle bag and hides it under the bed, and returns home for several months without it....

I'm not sure how you've reached that conclusion. He would generally be okay if he keeps his revolver in a locked case to which you don't have the key or combination. He could store that locked case in your safe.

He would really want a locked case in any event -- for transporting the revolver (unloaded) to your home and for transporting the revolver (unloaded) to wherever in Pennsylvania he would be shooting.

Is it really too much of a burden for him to keep the gun locked up in his case to which you don't have the key or combination when he's not around?

 

[au_prospector]

Why not have him transfer it to you legally, then when he visits your state the two of you can go shooting together and have fun? Then when he passes, the firearm is already yours, no?

 

[medalguy]

^^^ Sounds like a good idea.

 

[MedWheeler]

v35 writes:

If he designates you as their beneficiary [of a will], you would need the services of a FFL to legally complete the transfer.

Receiving firearms by the letter of the will of a deceased person is one way a FFL transfer is not required. Once the death of the (previous) owner occurs, the beneficiary is the then-current owner. He needs only to go fetch them (local and federal laws regarding actual transportation of them would still apply, of course.)

 

[Frank Ettin]

Receiving firearms by the letter of the will of a deceased person is one way a FFL transfer is not required. Once the death of the (previous) owner occurs, the beneficiary is the then-current owner. He needs only to go fetch them....

Not exactly. The beneficiary gets them from the executor of the estate.

Here's roughly how inheritance works:

1. When there's a written will, it normally must be submitted to probate in court.
   
   
   • The will ordinarily designates an executor (i. e., the personal representative of the decedent). That person is not the executor unless and until the will is admitted to probate in the proper court and the court issues Letters Testamentary recognizing that person as executor.
     
     
   • The executor once qualified then proceeds to identify and account for the assets of the estate. He may need to collect debts owed the decedent and manage property or other assets of the estate. He might also need to sell assets of the estate to raise funds to pay debts of the decedent and/or taxes. He or she then pays debts and taxes of the decedent under court supervision.
     
     
   • The executor then handles, again under court supervision, distribution of the assets of the estate in accordance with the terms of the written will.
   
   
2. Intestate succession when someone dies without a will is not some informal dividing up of the decedent's property amongst the relatives. It's a highly formalized procedure.
   
   
   • First, someone has to go to the proper court and apply to be named the administrator (i. e., the personal representative of the decedent to wind up the estate) of the decedent's estate.
     
     
   • Once the court has issued an order designating someone as the administrator, that person proceeds to identify and account for the assets of the estate. He or she then uses those assets to pay any remaining debts of the decedent and any taxes due. This is all done under the supervision of the court.
     
     
   • After the debts and taxes are paid, the administrator, under court supervision, will distribute any remaining assets to those relatives entitled under the applicable statutes to a share of the estate. Only those relatives specifically identified in the applicable statutes are entitled to a share of the decedent's property, and only in the proportion set out in the applicable statutes.

 

[Buck13]

Not exactly. The beneficiary gets them from the executor of the estate.

In a state (like Washington) in which ALL transfers have to go through an FFL (and the law is written so that it may be that simply handing a gun from one person to another in your home is a transfer), it would seem that both the transfer to the executor and to the heir require an FFL. Is that correct?

 

[Frank Ettin]

Not exactly. The beneficiary gets them from the executor of the estate.

In a state (like Washington) in which ALL transfers have to go through an FFL (and the law is written so that it may be that simply handing a gun from one person to another in your home is a transfer), it would seem that both the transfer to the executor and to the heir require an FFL. Is that correct?

Perhaps. But I wouldn't really know without doing the necessary research, and I don't plan to do that.

Anyone in such a position would be well advised to engage the services of a lawyer for direction.

 

[Buck13]

Since I-594 has been in effect for something like a year and a half, there must be plenty of experience with this issue by now. Maybe a WA attorney will happen along and enlighten us.

 

[v35]

Receiving firearms by the letter of the will of a deceased person is one way a FFL transfer is not required. Once the death of the (previous) owner occurs, the beneficiary is the then-current owner. He needs only to go fetch them (local and federal laws regarding actual transportation of them would still apply, of course.)

I'd be careful with applying that provision to Pennsylvania. PA law requires a FFL for all transfers, even within the Commonwealth. That is unusual.

 

[v35]

I just don't know why presidential candidates preach about gun control, like it is sorely lacking! Look how restrictive the laws are already!

You're learning.

 

[MedWheeler]

Frank, it's true that will executorship rules play a role. Perhaps I oversimplified it, but I thought we were discussing Federal laws regarding the receiving of firearms by bequest across state lines. I didn't realize those laws could also dictate the carrying out of a decedent's will; I thought those rules were left to the states.

Oh, and yes, there are certainly states that have laws that stipulate that a transfer by FFL would be required in circumstances in which federal laws do not, such as WA and PA.

 

[Crawdad1]

I'd be careful with applying that provision to Pennsylvania. PA law requires a FFL for all transfers, even within the Commonwealth. That is unusual

For ALL transfers in Pennsylvania?

Where did you read that?

Personal sales of long arms are legal without a FFL transfer the last time I read the law.

"In Pennsylvania, an unlicensed seller may only sell a handgun or short-barreled rifle or shotgun to an unlicensed purchaser at the place of business of a licensed importer, manufacturer, dealer or county sheriff’s office.1 The licensed importer, manufacturer, dealer or sheriff must comply with all of the dealer regulations set forth in the Pennsylvania Dealer Regulations section, including a background check on prospective purchaser.2 These requirements do not apply to transfers between spouses, parents and children, or grandparents and grandchildren.3 These requirements also do not generally apply to transfers of long guns."


"Transfers of handguns between spouses, parent and child, grandparent and grandchild or between active law enforcement officers are exempt from the above requirements. Rifles and shotguns may be transferred between unlicensed individuals. Antique firearms are exempt from the requirements regarding transfer of firearms through dealers."