Shipping rifles to Alaska???

[Frank Ettin]

Remember that ATF has said that you could ship a gun to yourself, and if it's received by someone else, that person can not open the package.

But with respect to all this cute business about getting someone else to ship a gun directly to you, you are betting FFL fees against 5 years in federal prison (plus lifetime loss of gun rights).

 

[BSA1]

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

I am currently working out of state. If the job works out I plan on selling our home and moving my family to join me. Since it is not wise to have guns in the house while it is on the market and not wise for me to have the guns with me do to my temporary living arrangements I plan on storing them with a relative in my home state until we get moved and settled in our new place.

So because my relative has possession of my legally owned firearms I cannot return back to my former home state and simply take them back with me. Instead I will have to have them shipped to a FFL in the state I am currently living?

 

[smalls]

So because my relative has possession of my legally owned firearms I cannot return back to my former home state and simply take them back with me. Instead I will have to have them shipped to a FFL in the state I am currently living?

Well, I guess I've been corrected. So as long as those guns are locked up, your relative is technically not in possession of them, as long as they don't have the key or combo.

I'm still not 100% convinced, though. The BATFE is giving a lot if trust to those family members that they won't either have the key/combo, or won't cut the locks. The BATFE just doesn't seem like the kind of agency that trusts many people.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I plan on storing them with a relative in my home state until we get moved and settled in our new place...

If you are truly storing them and want to do so in a way that avoids risk of violating the federal interstate gun transfer laws, you need to store or pack them in a way that your relative does not have access to them, e. g., a locked cabinet to which he doesn't have a key or combinations, locked cases to which he doesn't have keys, packed in securely sealed crates, etc.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...The BATFE is giving a lot if trust to those family members that they won't either have the key/combo, or won't cut the locks...

It's not so much a matter of trust, but rather the realities of pursuing a charge related to a violation of the federal interstate transfer laws.

If the evidence is that the guns were locked up or in sealed containers, it becomes the burden of the prosecutor to prove that the person having custody of the stored property had keys or was otherwise given access by the person storing the property.

 

[BSA1]

I find this too be simply absurd.

To follow the logic what difference would it make if a relative kept my guns for one day, one week, one month or one year? He had possession of them.

Likewise nobody has discussed loaning the gun. If I were to loan him a gun say for hunting season then a FFL transfer would be required since he was in possession of it.

Of course this is what the anti's want to see happen.

Any case law on this matter?

 

[Frank Ettin]

I find this too be simply absurd...

Whether you find it absurd is irrelevant.

...Any case law on this matter?...

I haven't seen any, so it looks like for now we'll need to rely on the plain language of the statutes. Are you volunteering to be a test case?

...Likewise nobody has discussed loaning the gun. If I were to loan him a gun say for hunting season then a FFL transfer would be required since he was in possession of it...

Well, possibly not actually.

Let's look at the applicable statutes again:

1. 18 USC 922(a)(3), which provides in pertinent part (emphasis added) as follows:

   (a) It shall be unlawful—
   ...
   
   (3) for any person, ... to transport into or receive in the State where he resides ...any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State,...

   
   
2. And 18 USC 922(a)(5), which provides in pertinent part (emphasis added) as follows:

   (a) It shall be unlawful—
   ...
   
   (5) for any person ... to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person ...who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in ... the State in which the transferor resides; except that this paragraph shall not apply to
   
   

   (A) the transfer, transportation, or delivery of a firearm made to carry out a bequest ..., and
   
   (B) the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes;​

   ..

You may go to another State where (under 18 USC 922(a)(5)) a friend may loan you a gun to, for example, go target shooting or hunting with him, or an outfitter may rent you a gun for a guided hunt. Of course if you were to take the gun back to your home State with you, you would be violating 18 USC 922(a)(3), which has no "loan" exception.

 

[BSA1]

Will I volunteer to be a test case?

In the absence of previous court decision(s) sure will, when and if we decide to move.

This regulation has apparently not passed any type of judicial review. What is happening here, at least on THR, is the BATF is intimidating gun owners with a uninforcable rule that I can think of several challenges too.

Laws will not be changed until men of conviction and courage challenge them.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...What is happening here, at least on THR, is the BATF is intimidating gun owners with a uninforcable rule that I can think of several challenges too....

Nope. What's happening is that people who want to accomplish their purposes without making a "federal case" of things are making prudent decisions based on the plain language of some statutes.

Will I volunteer to be a test case?

In the absence of previous court decision(s) sure will, when and if we decide to move....

Good for you. You're willing to risk 5 years in prison. Now you just have to wait for someone who has a few million dollars he's willing to put up to fund litigation to clarify this question.

 

[BSA1]

Frank,

5 million dollars huh? Dang there is always a catch somewhere. ;-)

 

[Frank Ettin]

5 million dollars huh? Dang there is always a catch somewhere.

Litigating a major case up through argument and decision in the U. S. Supreme Court will usually cost in excess of $1 Million.

 

[Cosmoline]

Forget about the BATF for a moment. Yes their regs are intrusive and absurd. There are much more immediate and realistic concerns. I've never heard of the feds busting someone for leaving a rifle with their dad, but I do know of cases where "dad" or the relative/friend in question decides that the rifle is his now. Or where some third party sells it off or tosses it. That sort of thing happens every day and causes a lot of strife. It's happened in my own family, where certain people decide that loans were pre-death gifts when a grandparent passes away.

And that isn't even getting into the safety issues.

When it comes to firearms, locked cases are a minimum for your own iron. That keeps confusion to a minimum and also helps to clarify the transfer issue.