Gratuitous loan question

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • erwos

    The Hebrew Hammer
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 25, 2009
    13,891
    Rockville, MD
    I am going to completely disagree. FSA2013 makes it clear you cannot even possess a banned assault weapon unless you possessed it when it was grandfathered in. Loaning it to someone puts it in their possession, albeit temporarily, and that would seem to be illegal. I would not want to be the test case in this situation.
     

    Traveler

    Lighten up Francis
    Jan 18, 2013
    8,227
    AA County
    Loan::noun

    Lend::verb

    The grammar Nazis have struck again!:D

    skin.jpg
     

    teratos

    My hair is amazing
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Jan 22, 2009
    59,840
    Bel Air
    I am going to completely disagree. FSA2013 makes it clear you cannot even possess a banned assault weapon unless you possessed it when it was grandfathered in. Loaning it to someone puts it in their possession, albeit temporarily, and that would seem to be illegal. I would not want to be the test case in this situation.

    I thought that, but was hoping I was wrong. Oh, well. He gets my Mossberg.
     

    zoostation

    , ,
    Moderator
    Jan 28, 2007
    22,857
    Abingdon
    That's how I look at it. A loan is not a transfer of ownership, it is a transfer of possession. IANAL.

    Remember, FSA 2013 was passed after that gratuitous loan decision. Meaning seems clear to me, but I wouldn't bet too much on the generosity or consistency of the MD appellate courts.
     

    KPSpeller

    Member
    Aug 28, 2013
    34
    Waldorf, MD
    At the Fed level, "lend" is not an applicable term. The Fed only recognizes the word "transfer". Remember, if you lend someone an old AR15 with a worn seer.... your have "transfered an automatic weapon".
     

    ohen cepel

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 2, 2011
    4,518
    Where they send me.
    WOW, retired military and unarmed?!?!?!?!?
    (I am one so am authorized to harass said person).

    I would NOT loan them ANYTHING aside from advice.

    I would SELL them said shotgun for $2,000. Stupidity should be painful.

    Again from one military retiree to another.
     

    Objee

    Active Member
    Oct 3, 2013
    617
    The rifle in question was regulated and is now banned. Like I said, it's about CYA. Never forget that most of MD state govt hates you with a passion.

    The legalstatus of a rifle is irrelevant when it comes to an HQL.

    HQLs are for handguns, not for rifles.

    It has nothing to do with CYA.
     

    daggo66

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 31, 2013
    2,001
    Glen Burnie
    I am going to completely disagree. FSA2013 makes it clear you cannot even possess a banned assault weapon unless you possessed it when it was grandfathered in. Loaning it to someone puts it in their possession, albeit temporarily, and that would seem to be illegal. I would not want to be the test case in this situation.

    I disagree with your disagreement. We have been round and round with this. Legal definitions are very different from everyday definitions. Transfer in this case is considered transferring ownership. You are not transferring the firearm when you loan it to someone. It is still yours.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,596
    Messages
    7,287,835
    Members
    33,482
    Latest member
    Claude

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom