walking/ shipping question

[JonathanE]

MedWheeler,
Thanks for the solution, but personally...
My concern with your suggestion is that I'm asking an FFL to be an FFL to UPS, but to not be an FFL as pertains ATF.
I understand your assertion that no one is likely to be in trouble, I'm just not sure I'm comfortable asking someone to stick out their professional neck for me.

 

[Red Wind]

Arizona, hmm? Not the climate or terrain I'm accustomed to hiking, but I'll start giving it some thought!

I walked the extreme northern part of the Arizona Trail in September,2005, from the Utah border to the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. The North Rim usually closes by mid to late September because of the enormous early autumn snows.

So planning is crucial if you want to do that portion. I had always planned to go back and start from the Canyon and walk it all the way to Mexico. But something always got in the way. And almost 800 miles is a long trek.

Perhaps you can succeed where I faltered, Jonathan! You've got time (age) on your side. Also, Paria Canyon in southern Utah and extreme northern Arizona is another great adventure. Only 37 miles, but there is risk and proper planning is crucial as regard to timing because of any rain possibility. Since 1900, dozens have died in that Canyon..

My son and I did it in 4 days in October ,2004. It was a wild, scary experience, filled with quicksand and towering cliffs.

Again, good hiking on whatever and wherever you decide. As AZAndy opined, you will have no gun problems in Arizona, or Utah for that matter.

Paria Canyon. Utah.

 

[MedWheeler]

JonathanE,

UPS requires you ship to an FFL (or licensed importer or manufacturer.) It says nothing about requiring that the FFL actually receive it into his logged inventory.

The ATF says you can ship to yourself, even across state lines.

I can't find anything that says a FFL receiving a package addressed to another person (or even to himself) at his address is required to open it, or to even know what it contains.

Those are the key points in the workaround I mentioned. Maybe someone else here knows something more, but my suggesting considering this included talking beforehand to the FFL. I would hope he would know if this was a legal option or not. I would also hope he'd decline if he thought it was not.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I can't find anything that says a FFL receiving a package addressed to another person (or even to himself) at his address is required to open it, or to even know what it contains....

Perhaps you should try doing some actual research.

See 27 CFR 478.125(e), emphasis added:

(e) Firearms receipt and disposition by dealers.

Each licensed dealer shall enter into a record each receipt and disposition of firearms. ... The record required by this paragraph shall be maintained in bound form under the format prescribed below. The purchase or other acquisition of a firearm shall, except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, be recorded not later than the close of the next business day following the date of such purchase or acquisition. The record shall show the date of receipt, the name and address or the name and license number of the person from whom received, the name of the manufacturer and importer (if any), the model, serial number, type, and the caliber or gauge of the firearm....

With regard to the exception noted, 27 CFR 478.125(g) allows the FFL to delay entry of receipt of a gun for not more than seven days when an FFL has a commercial record of the firearm received and that record includes all the information required to be maintained in the bound book. A commercial record could be an invoice, a packing list, a bill of lading, or something similar, but to allow the delay of entry of acquisition, that record must include:

...the date of receipt, the name and address or the name and license number of the person from whom received, the name of the manufacturer and importer (if any), the model, serial number, type, and the caliber or gauge of the firearm....

If you send a gun to an FFL he must record its receipt and disposition as required under 27 CFR 478.125(e).

Please clarify whether you are seriously suggesting that one fail to disclose, or lie, to the FFL about what is in the package and thus put the FFL at risk of committing a regulatory violation and putting his licenses and livelihood at risk.

 

[JonathanE]

Gorgeous, Red Wind.
Thanks for the idea, and thanks again for your encouraging words.

 

[MedWheeler]

Frank, what you added was what I was looking for, but I'm still left with some questions.

If the common carriers prohibit anything on the outside of the package identifying its contents as a firearm, is the shipper required by law to notify the FFL of its contents beforehand?

Is the FFL required by law to open a package addressed to someone else, the contents of which he is unaware, if it arrives at his address? If he chooses not to open it, has he committed a criminal act, even if the package does not contain a firearm?

Does the law consider a package sent to someone else at his address to be "his", or the property of "the someone else?"

Are the answers to any of these questions spelled out in the law, in case history, or both?


These are genuine questions, posed for further education, and nothing more.

 

[X-Rap]

I'm rather shocked that our esteemed barrister has allowed this lawlessness to continue. We are after all talking about Federal felony violations by a knowing sender and an innocent FFL.
High Road indeed.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Frank Ettin]

.......Are the answers to any of these questions spelled out in the law, in case history, or both?.....

Phooey! Unless you have answers to those questions, supported by solid legal authority, validating your perfidious, conniving scheme, you have no business suggesting such disgraceful chicanery.

 

[Wisco]

Why is Frank allowed to talk to people like this? Certainly not very high road.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Why is Frank allowed to talk to people like this? Certainly not very high road.

Well let's review MedWheeler's suggestion.

1. The desired result is that X, a resident of State A, will send his handgun to FFL in State B. He intends to then retrieve his handgun from FFL, so he can have it in his possession while in State B. However --
   
   
   • If a gun is delivered to an FFL he is required under federal law to log it into his records within 24 hours of receipt.
     
     
   • An FFL is required by federal law to have a 4473 completed and a background check done before delivering a gun to a person (except when returning to the owner a gun on which gunsmithing services were performed).
     
     
   • An FFL is prohibited under federal law from delivering a handgun to anyone who is not a resident of the State in which the FFL's business is located (except when returning to the owner a gun on which gunsmithing services were performed).
     
     
   • An FFL who violates federal law puts his license, and therefore his livelihood, in jeopardy.
   
   
2. MedWheeler's fix is for X to send the gun to FFL in a package without telling FFL that there's a gun inside -- expecting FFL to hold the package unopened. X will then pick up the package intact.
   
   
   • by failing to disclose to FFL that there's a gun in the package X would be inducing FFL to --
     
     
     • violate federal law by acquiring a gun and failing to make the required record of receipt; and
       
       
     • violate federal law by delivering a gun [on which gunsmithing services have not been provided] without the necessary formalities; and
       
       
     • violate federal law by delivering a handgun [on which gunsmithing services have not been provided] to a person who is not a resident of the State in which FFL does business.
     
     
   • Furthermore, MedWheeler has made that suggestion without being able to cite any legal bases upon which to believe that FFL can be excused those violations because he was successfully tricked by X.
     
     
   • In addition, X, by inducing FFL to act contrary to FFL's obligations under federal law, X could have his own legal liability under 18 USC 2, which provides:

     (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.
     
     (b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

   
   
3. Thus as far as being "High Road", MedWheeler's scheme is anything but. And it is fairly described as: perfidious; conniving; disgraceful; chicanery; and I'll throw in shabby.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

There are a lot of carriers out there. Are there any lesser known carriers who will ship an handgun (to yourself within the law)?

Mike

 

[Frank Ettin]

There are a lot of carriers out there. Are there any lesser known carriers who will ship an handgun (to yourself within the law)?

That's an excellent question, and if anyone has a good answer I'm sure we'd all be grateful.

 

[pintler]

"except when returning to the owner a gun on which gunsmithing services were performed"

I've heard people suggest that you could ship your gun to the gunsmith, and ask that gunsmith services be performed ("clean and oil well" or "inspect screw tightness" or whatever). I take no position on the legality because a)I get nervous about amateur lawyering; b)as a practical matter I expect it might be hard to find an FFL willing to go along - if you're hiking the AT, you don't have a lot of geographical choice and c) the Continental Divide trail is a much nicer trail anyway


p.s. If one thinks that getting an FFL to hold an unopened package is kosher, one might want to write the ATF and explain what you propose and ask if that's OK. If you get a letter with an affirmative response, that might go a long way towards convincing an FFL that it's a legit idea.

 

[JonathanE]

Arizona Mike,
Since getting an answer to my original question, I have been looking online to see if another common carrier will ship a handgun to "myself" c/o someone in another state... I have been coming up empty.
I look forward to finding out about one who will!

 

[orpington]

I don't know if I would actually do this, but shouldn't the following be an option, and, if not, why?

How about carrying a firearm manufactured prior to 1899, as, by definition, it isn't even a firearm at all, but rather, an "antique"? You could carry a percussion revolver even manufactured today and it isn't even considered a firearm. The best choice, I would think, if a cartridge revolver is desired, might be a Colt 1895 revolver manufactured before 1899. Cheap and functional! However, you would need proof that it is an antique, such as a factory letter or serial number table carried with you at all times...'cause you're gonna get asked lots of questions!

Don't try this at home, boys and girls!

 

[pintler]

"How about carrying a firearm manufactured prior to 1899, as, by definition, it isn't even a firearm at all..."

IANAL, and not planning to hike the AT, so I only invested one google search in this, but I'd be vewy, vewy careful. My one search for 'new york state antique firearm' found the following. Note the 'any unloaded' qualification. That might make the antique less useful for defensive purposes.

"An "antique firearm" is defined as any unloaded muzzle-loading pistol or revolver with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system, or a pistol or revolver that uses fixed cartridges that are no longer available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade."
source: https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-gun-laws/new-york/

 

[Frank Ettin]

How about carrying a firearm manufactured prior to 1899, as, by definition, it isn't even a firearm at all,.....

Not necessarily.

If a gun satisfies the definition under federal law of an antique firearm (found at 18 USC 921(a)(16)), it's not a firearm for the purposes of federal law regulating the transfer and shipping of firearms.

However, that doesn't mean that it won't be a firearm or dangerous weapon for the purposes of state laws regulating the possession or carrying of firearms or dangerous weapons. State laws will need to be properly researched.

 

[X-Rap]

I think you'll find even single shot black powder being highly regulated by NYS.
You might check laws regarding a 22 rifle with a folding stock.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Tom488]

Not necessarily.
However, that doesn't mean that it won't be a firearm or dangerous weapon for the purposes of state laws regulating the possession or carrying of firearms or dangerous weapons. State laws will need to be properly researched.

For example - NJ statute 2C:39-5b states "Any person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun without first having obtained a permit to carry the same [...] is guilty of a crime of the third degree"

 

[redneck]

There are lots of national hiking trails to choose from. Some do require a little planning because in state parks/forests they may not like you camping outside of designated areas which means you'll have to plan accordingly. I would think you could come up with a trip that meets your expectations and doesn't go through states where you can't carry a gun.
You could hike the north country trail from Michigan to Pennsylvania for example and probably cover similar distance to the AT.

Here's a map:
https://www.nps.gov/nts/maps/National Trails map.pdf

 

[orpington]

For example - NJ statute 2C:39-5b states "Any person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun without first having obtained a permit to carry the same [...] is guilty of a crime of the third degree"

Isn't, by definition, an antique handgun, NOT a gun at all, but just an "antique"?

 

[Red Wind]

I believe Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine are quite honorable gunwise, and definitely in a northeasterly direction!

They out Pennsylvania,Pennsylvania!

 

[Frank Ettin]

For example - NJ statute 2C:39-5b states "Any person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun without first having obtained a permit to carry the same [...] is guilty of a crime of the third degree"

Isn't, by definition, an antique handgun, NOT a gun at all, but just an "antique"?

No. Where do you get that notion?

Federal law (the Gun Control Act of 1968) excepts certain firearms, defined for the purposes of that law as "antiques", solely for the purpose of excluding such "antique" firearms, as defined at 18 USC 921(a)(16), from certain federal laws relating to the transfer and shipment of firearms.

So an "antique" handgun is still a gun. It's just not subject to certain federal laws relating to guns.