Does a felon get to decide who gets the guns he can no longer own?

[Willie Sutton]

"No we can't. You appear to have no understanding of the law. You seem to be making this stuff up as you go along"


Apparently we *can*, as I called a friend earlier who was a prosecutor here for about a decade. I asked him a hypothetical question or three, and he was of the opinion that if I "lent" a firearm and was not in immediate supervision of the object in question, IE: I allowed it to be taken home to the household of the person to whom I lent it, he would consider it a "transfer" in respect to the laws regarding posession and transfer of firearms in our state (Wisconsin). As a follow on to the hypothetical, he stated that if that person was a prohibited person and I was knowlagable of that fact, I could be prosecuted for violation of Wisconsin firearms laws for transferring a firearm to a prohibited person. His comment was that even if I expected to get it back tomorrow, I was not able to contol it's disposition any longer, and thus I had conducted a transfer. This was his unambiguous opinion.

It also does not address the concept of "ownership", simply compliance or lack of compliance with state laws REGARDING GUN SALES AND TRANSFERS.

For the life of me I cannot imagine why anyone is not differentiating between the two subjects, and that I am not commenting AT ALL on the contractual basis of ownership v/s exectations of return after temporary posession.



Willie

.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

^^ This. Its a civil property dispute. In the op's case the son doesn't have a case. The son will have a hard time explaining to the judge that he gave the guns to his mother before conviction but they have been in his father's possession and separate household for so long. Not to mention that there is the whole obvious possibility of access to the guns if they were in his mothers possession.

I disagree. I think the son certainly DOES have a case. He is not legally allowed to possess firearms, but he is still the owner of them. A somewhat similar situation might apply to a gun owner whose wife obtains a protective order during a divorce. The shop at my range had a HUGE gun safe stored on the premises for about eight months for just this reason. The owner was under a restraining order so the police required that the guns be removed from the man's house. The cops didn't want them, so the entire safe was stored at the range until the order was dissolved. To owner wasn't allowed to possess the firearms, but they were still his property.

In this case, the son could credibly claim that the father is preventing him (or his mother) from selling his guns. IANAL but I think this would be something akin to "theft by conversion."

I really think the OP needs to consult an attorney.

 

[youngunz4life]

I really think the OP needs to consult an attorney

I think this is more a family&personal issue rather than a legal issue. People might be fed up, so goodwill might not be so inclined at this time. The OP wouldn't need to seek legal advice until a legal issue was forced from the other side anyways, but maybe he could send some cash or verbally let the son's mom know he is storing for grandkids etc. Those are just examples and might not suffice either at this point, but he has a good debating tool on his side: no one is going to argue with the fact that the son is now a convicted felon + people need to take this seriously and not just 'do this or that' without proper planning. I guess you could keep the guns as repayment of just debt and call everything even now

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I think this is more a family&personal issue rather than a legal issue.

"Ownership" is a legal principle, not a family relations question.

People might be fed up, so goodwill might not be so inclined at this time. The OP wouldn't need to seek legal advice until a legal issue was forced from the other side anyways, but maybe he could send some cash or verbally let the son's mom know he is storing for grandkids etc.

What part of "They aren't his guns" don't you understand? It is NOT the OP's decision to "store them for the grandkids" if the person who OWNS them doesn't want them stored (by the prospective grandfather) for the grandkids.

Those are just examples and might not suffice either at this point, but he has a good debating tool on his side: no one is going to argue with the fact that the son is now a convicted felon + people need to take this seriously and not just 'do this or that' without proper planning.

The fact that the convicted felon cannot physically possess the firearms does not convey to the father or to anyone else (absent a court order) a right to deprive the felon son of whatever monetary value the guns may have. And it is not the father's call to unilaterally decide how much they're worth ... or to decide that he'll buy them, or sell them on Gunbroker, if the son does not want them sold. The father, unfortunately, does NOT have a good debating tool on his side.

I guess you could keep the guns as repayment of just debt and call everything even now

Where is this alleged "just debt" documented? Weren't you the person who just a sentence or two previously wrote, "people need to take this seriously and not just 'do this or that' without proper planning"? Yes, I thought you were. People can't just make up debts. Suppose I unilaterally decide that you owe me $500. If I take you to court, how far do you suppose I'll get?

 

[youngunz4life]

1)

What part of "They aren't his guns" don't you understand? It is NOT the OP's decision to "store them for the grandkids" if the person who OWNS them doesn't want them stored (by the prospective grandfather) for the grandkids.

however you want to view the situation, it seems(at least to me) that the dad has a lot of control over how this is going to end

2)

Quote:
I guess you could keep the guns as repayment of just debt and call everything even now
Where is this alleged "just debt" documented? Weren't you the person who just a sentence or two previously wrote, "people need to take this seriously and not just 'do this or that' without proper planning"? Yes, I thought you were. People can't just make up debts. Suppose I unilaterally decide that you owe me $500. If I take you to court, how far do you suppose I'll get?

I was only joking, but I said before I wasn't going to judge the dad either way. blood comes before guns but I believe - like many family relationships - it is a tangled line sometimes never undone

3)

The father, unfortunately, does NOT have a good debating tool on his side.

absent a court order or a really Loud, Convincing Female voice over the airwaves, this dad doesn't have to release these weapons legally. I believe that is why I mentioned it is more than a legal issue and more personal in my opinion. you may feel you know right is right or wrong is wrong but the bottom line is this man doesn't seem to be in a position of having to release these weapons unless he decides to do so

 

[Eghad]

Do your son a favor and keep them. If they want to take civil actions I'm pretty sure once you explained the situation to the judge or official it would be dead in the water. Or cut the guns up and end the argument. I don't think your ex understands the seriousness of being a felon in possession of a firearm. or she is in serious denial.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

absent a court order or a really Loud, Convincing Female voice over the airwaves, this dad doesn't have to release these weapons legally. I believe that is why I mentioned it is more than a legal issue and more personal in my opinion. you may feel you know right is right or wrong is wrong but the bottom line is this man doesn't seem to be in a position of having to release these weapons unless he decides to do so

I think you are wrong. The decision will be made based on how far and how hard the son and the ex-wife/mother want to push the matter. The mother is not a prohibited person. The son could sell the guns to her, give her a signed bill of sale, and she could then take legal action against the father for refusing to release her property to her.

I understand the moral issue, but what's morally correct here is different from what's legal. If the guns do not belong to the father (and he has acknowledged that they do not), then he has NO legal right to refuse to send them to whatever non-prohibited person the owner of the guns tells him to send them to.

 

[fxdrider]

A small side-point to all of this - my son has never verbally expressed to me his desire to release these rifles to his mother - neither by telephone, e-mail, face-to-face, smoke signal or otherwise. All I have is the word of his mother, which, in my experience isn't worth a nickle. (But I'm a bit biased.... )

So, if he really, really, reallllllllly wanted me to do this, you'd think he'd at least be on the phone discussing it. As such, it seems I don't have a trustworthy directive of what to do with them. So, in my safe they'll sit (excepting maybe the occasional trip to the range - you know...to make sure they're still functioning properly. )

Another small point, I happen to know that his mother's new husband has a gun that he keeps in the house, unsecured at that. Not faulting them for that - they do live out in the country and have no small children visiting. The PROBLEM is that my felon son visits the house on a daily basis, and they both (son and mother) know the law concerning his being in the presence of a firearm - that it is illegal. It doesn't seem to bother them in the least. That shouldn't surprise me, since blatant disregard for the law is kind-of what got him into this mess to begin with.

It is this disregard for the law that they both exhibit which gives me pause over placing weapons in their hands. If they(or he - same difference) pursue the matter in court, and the judge is wacky enough to order me to transfer the rifles to her - I'll request that I be allowed to hand them to an officer of the court/deputy/whatever - so long as I am not the one placing them in her hands. Her receipt of those guns, if it happens, will directly result in my son's re-incarceration. I just cannot bring myself to be a part of that.

 

[youngunz4life]

thx for the update fxdrider, that was one of my reads on this. he probably has no clue what to do(1st step being call you about it), and he knows he is in the wrong so doesn't even have that mindset right now...aka: it is the least of his worries and he knows you are taking care of them. the mom mentioning it might get a tfl thread but anything else is few and far between. that is why I told Aguilar I disagree andor don't see any point in you paying for lawyer advice(I think they give fifteen minutes for free)....the ball isn't really in your court unless you decide to be generous.....back to my other point though, this is a serious situation and does desever thought before action.

all the best

 

[Slamfire]

Is there a gun buy back program in your state?

Take the rifles there, get the $25.00 for them and a receipt, send the $25.00 and a copy of the receipt to your son, and you won't have to deal with this anymore.

 

[youngunz4life]

pretty sad that he is living by a different "code" at this time and he can't just write a certified, notarized letter explaining why he feels the guns are his(in a non-threatening way).

 

[thallub]

So, if he really, really, reallllllllly wanted me to do this, you'd think he'd at least be on the phone discussing it. As such, it seems I don't have a trustworthy directive of what to do with them. So, in my safe they'll sit (excepting maybe the occasional trip to the range - you know...to make sure they're still functioning properly.

Good decision. Don't bring up the subject with either your son or ex: Maybe it will go away.

 

[NJgunowner]

Take the rifles there, get the $25.00 for them and a receipt, send the $25.00 and a copy of the receipt to your son, and you won't have to deal with this anymore.

Worst idea ever. Then he gets sued for the value of the rifle and potentially faces criminal charges over destruction of private property or the illegal sale of firearms that may or may not be his.

I still think they are his at this point, but I wouldn't risk it. Besides, giving the gun grabbers guns validates what they are doing. Horrible idea.

 

[TheSkySoldier]

Sounds to me like a lawsuit may be brewing. What she is going to argue is that she paid for one, so she should get that one. What he'll argue is that he was in ownership of them both and they he should decide who gets them (obviously, the topic of your post).

I would say that she may have legitimate claim over the one she purchased, however, it's not like there are any receipts for either. You feel that if she gets the guns, she'll hand them right to him, which you could argue in court, but you'd have to show that this would be the case. What she needs to be aware of is that if she knowingly gives the firearms to a person that cannot legally possess a firearm (as I see it, it's no different than handing it to a random child on the street), then she may be committing a crime herself.

If it were me, I would say keep the guns and tell her that your son is not to have anything to do with firearms any more, and she isn't going to get them because all she's going to do is harbor his problems. If they really want them back, let them get a lawyer and spend their money first before getting your own. Chances are, they won't do anything about it.

 

[fxdrider]

What she is going to argue is that she paid for one, so she should get that one. What he'll argue is that he was in ownership of them both and they he should decide who gets them (obviously, the topic of your post).

I would say that she may have legitimate claim over the one she purchased, however, it's not like there are any receipts for either.

Actually, she did not purchase the one she gave to him. It was a gift to her from me, back when we were married. And, I still have the receipts for both of them. Unfortunately, they were given as gifts, so the receipts won't indicate ownership. He did have legal ownership of them at one time. Now, he cannot possess them.

 

[mightyoakwildlife]

Okay, my head is starting to hurt. I've done all the reading of your Code of Virginia, Title 18.2-308 that I can stand for now.

Basically, if you have any intention of returning or otherwise availing the firearms to your son within ten years of his conviction (in ANY State), you are guilty of 18.2-308.2:1, a Class 6 Felony.

As the unwilling participant in a felony, it would behoove you to immediately surrender the arms to your local P.D., contact the County D.A., or consult an Attorney. I found nothing as to the legality of your son "owning" while not "possessing" firearms, so I won't speculate as to the outcome of such a claim, if made by him.

Unless they are something special to you, it would probably be best to rid yourself of them in some way. Which way you choose would be where the educated/experienced opinion of the aforementioned parties will serve you best.

Sorry for your predicament, and I wish you the best of luck!

 

[thallub]

Its very simple, the son of fxdrider lives out of state and is a convicted felon. If the guns are transerred to the mother a convicted felon will probably have access to them. Fxdrider has the sales receipts for both guns.

An order to release the guns to the mother must come from a judge in the state where fxdrider lives: That means the mother would have to come to fxdrider's state and hire a lawyer and for a hearing or trial. All that stuff costs big bucks: Unless the guns are extraordinarily valuable or the mother has money to burn the chance of a lawsuit is nil.

fxdrider, don't give up those guns. Good luck to you.

 

[youngunz4life]

I agree with thallub; do Not relinquish these weapons to anyone besides family

Sounds to me like a lawsuit may be brewing

not a chance skysoldier (above quote was your first line)

Chances are, they won't do anything about it.

I agree 100% skysoldier (above quote is the last line of your post)

 

[Stressfire]

If the order comes from a judge to surrender them, your conscience should be clear. Let him worry about giving a felon access to guns come reelection time. Short of that, I'd just go ahead and hang on to them.

 

[Tom Servo]

Its very simple, the son of fxdrider lives out of state and is a convicted felon. If the guns are transerred to the mother a convicted felon will probably have access to them. Fxdrider has the sales receipts for both guns.

That pretty much sums it up. Any more commentary is just running in circles.