Guns inherited across state lines

Z

zxcvbob

New member
Moderator Note: This post was moved from another thread.

BTW, does it matter if an inherited gun is legal in the recipient's state? I wouldn't think so, but to be legal she might have to sell it rather than take it home (and that's none of the executor's business)

Sorry for the thread veer, but the original question has been asked and answered so I don't see the harm. (so just a little bit sorry ;))
 
Actually, I think it matters very much whether the gun is legal in the heir's state of residence.
(a) It shall be unlawful-- . . . .
(3) for any person, other than a . . . . licensed dealer [and a few others not relevant here] . . . .to transport into or receive in the State where he resides . . . . any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, . . . . ;


18 U.S.C.A. § 922 (West)
Click to expand...
IOW, I could inherit an AR15 from someone in MT. I live in Arkansas and an AR15 is completely legal here. Folks in States that have banned AR15s cannot inherit that same AR15.
 
Specifics on the states involved and the type of gun(s) would help.

As for federal law, § 922(a)(3) states:

(A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State,
Click to expand...
 
FWIW, a few years ago I was discussing estate trusts (not NFA firearms trusts, but the kind of trust people create for the purpose of avoiding probate when they die) with an attorney who also is a gun guy. He commented that in Connecticut, due to its AWB and the requirement that all "assault weapons" had to be registered with the state police by some magic date in 2014, a AR-15 (or any firearm falling under the Connecticut definition of an "assault weapon") could not be included in a trust, because the act of transferring the firearm from personal property to the trust would be, be definition, a transfer. And the Connecticut law does not allow transfers of "assault weapons" within Connecticut.

I subsequently mentioned this to a Connecticut attorney I met at a conference and he disagreed, so I consider it an open question at this point. But I think it's fairly clear that if a firearm is not lawful to acquire or to possess in state ____, the federal law pertaining to transfers by inheritance or by intestate succession can't make the acquisition or possession legal. The federal law is only an exception to the requirement that interstate transfers must go through an FFL.
 
So the executor would sell the gun and give the proceeds to the heir?
Click to expand...

Possibly. If that is distasteful because the gun carries some sentimental value, and if there are other potential beneficiaries in states to which the gun could be transferred, the beneficiary could disclaim the item and consent to transfer to another beneficiary. This may require an unopposed motion to the local probate court. If that sounds like a lot of work, it may be.

If there is a beneficiary in a safe state who would buy the item at market price as an in-kind distribution of his share in order to keep it in the family, that may be the simplest solution.
 
I would imagine it may also be legal to take possession of the "illegal in state X" firearm, if one kept it in a state where it was legal, although utilizing a trust may be necessary to avoid the residency issue of the cited law. Am I off base here? (I'm definitely NOT a lawyer.)
 
raimius said:
I would imagine it may also be legal to take possession of the "illegal in state X" firearm, if one kept it in a state where it was legal, although utilizing a trust may be necessary to avoid the residency issue of the cited law. Am I off base here? (I'm definitely NOT a lawyer.)
Click to expand...
One can exercise ownership without having physical possession.
 
If someone owns property in multiple states can they still own something as long as it is kept in the state where legal. For example someone lives in California where a gun is prohibited, but own vacation property in Texas where it is legal. Can they own the gun as long as it stays at the property in Texas even though it isn't their primary residence.

Just curious, I don't have that kind of money anyway.
 
jmr40 said:
If someone owns property in multiple states can they still own something as long as it is kept in the state where legal. For example someone lives in California where a gun is prohibited, but own vacation property in Texas where it is legal. Can they own the gun as long as it stays at the property in Texas even though it isn't their primary residence.
Click to expand...
Yes. The BATFE has issued advisories that people who own (not rent for a week or two) multiple homes are considered to be residents of whichever home they are in at the moment for purposes of purchasing firearms. California law only applies within California's boundaries. California can't dictaye what anyone may or may not own in Texas.

https://www.atf.gov/questions-and-a...tate-and-owns-property-another-state-purchase

May a person who resides in one State and owns property in another State purchase a firearm in either State?

If a person maintains a home in 2 States and resides in both States for certain periods of the year, he or she may, during the period of time the person actually resides in a particular State, purchase a firearm in that State. However, simply owning property in another State does not alone qualify the person to purchase a firearm in that State.

[27 CFR 478.11]
Click to expand...

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney.
 
The problem with purchasing based on that temporary residency is actually proving the residency. Since most FFLs only want to deal with driver's licences as the proof of residency, how would you ever prove (to the satisfaction of the FFL) that for this 3 month period you are a residency of this state and not the state that issued the DL?
 
Not every state will allow the transfer of a bequeathed gun to a resident without paperwork.

In California, a bequeathed gun will need to be transferred to the recipient through an FFL unless the decedent was immediate family whether the transfer is interstate or intrastate.
 
Doyle said:
The problem with purchasing based on that temporary residency is actually proving the residency. Since most FFLs only want to deal with driver's licences as the proof of residency, how would you ever prove (to the satisfaction of the FFL) that for this 3 month period you are a residency of this state and not the state that issued the DL?
Click to expand...
I'm not an FFL, but I believe the BATFE guidance holds that other documents such as tax bills and utility bills can be used as evidence of residency. Maybe one of the resident FFLs can help me out on this one.
 
The problem with purchasing based on that temporary residency is actually proving the residency. Since most FFLs only want to deal with driver's licences as the proof of residency, how would you ever prove (to the satisfaction of the FFL) that for this 3 month period you are a residency of this state and not the state that issued the DL?
Click to expand...

There is no FFL. The residency issue is still there, but you don't have to prove it to anybody except the executor of the estate and *maybe* the ATF if they somehow get involved. (but it should be a private matter that they don't even get notified)
 
One can exercise ownership without having physical possession.
Click to expand...

This is a key concept.

Not a lawyer, but here are the key points as I see them'
First, there is Federal law, then there are state laws, in your state of residence, which may, or may not include specific exceptions for inheritance weapons.

If you cannot legally possess the firearm in your state of residence, you still own it, but the estate executor retains possession, until you direct them to a legal disposition of the arm.

You could order it sold, (and choose the buyer, if it mattered). You could order it transferred to anyone else who could legally possess it, following all required regulations. You could even order it destroyed, I suppose.

As the owner you can decide what to do with your property, even if the law forbids you to take physical possession of that property.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top