Well, the question I would have is who has violated what law in the case
posed?

Imagine slightly different circumstances -- X is visiting grandfather
who is dying in state S and X's grandfather gives him a Springfield '03
(picked to be legal to own everywhere) which he bought years before
1968.  X has a clean record and could buy any legal firearm in his home
state of California.

X takes the gun and returns home to California by automobile packed in
his trunk, unloaded and separated from any ammunition.

Who has violated the law and what law has been violated?

Now, for the same circumstances, imagine that X's grandfather gives him
a M1911 colt semi-automatic instead.

Again who has violated the law and what law has been violated?

Now, for both those prior circumstances, imagine that it isn't X's
grandfather that gives him the gun, but an old family friend, not a
relative.  The gun in each of these two repeated circumstances remains a
gift.

Does the violation of law change?

Phil 

> 
> On Sep 10, 2007, at 10:46 AM, Volokh, Eugene wrote:
> 
> >     Very sorry to trouble you, but I had a question I wanted to ask
> > people who are up on the technical rules of federal and California law
> > related to non-dealer gun transfers.  Assume the following:
> >
> >     X's grandfather dies in state S.
> >     X's stepgrandmother gives X, when X visits after the
> > grandfather's death, a gun that the grandfather had owned, saying that
> > the grandfather wanted (or perhaps would have wanted) X to have it.
> >     X brings the gun back to California.
> >
> >     How may X lawfully own the gun in California, without violating
> > federal law or California law?  Let's set aside the law of state S for
> > now.  If you have any tips for me on this, I'd be much obliged.  No, X
> > is not me.  Many thanks,
> >
> 
> California law isn't even the first hurdle.  A non-dealer transfer of  
> a firearm in state A to a person who is not a resident of state A is  
> already a violation of federal law.  An exception is made for  
> bequests, but these circumstances sound insufficiently formal.  X  
> bringing the gun back to California without shipping through a dealer  
> is a second violation of federal law.  Involving a dealer in the  
> transaction would in theory result in X obtaining the information  
> that she cannot own the gun in California, and he cannot ship it there.
> 
> --
>         Escape the Rat Race for Peace, Quiet, and Miles of Desert Beauty
>           Take a Sanity Break at The Bunkhouse at Liberty Haven Ranch
>                           http://libertyhavenranch.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to [email protected]
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
> 
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
> 
> 

-- 
The Art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get
at him as soon as you can. Strike at him as hard as you can and as
often as you can, and keep moving on.
 -- Ulysses S. Grant
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to