Minimum age for gifting a long gun to immediate family?

Biggfoot44 said:

What are you driving for when you speak of " own " ? Serious question .

Click to expand...

I got a Cricket .22 for my 7 year old son. I want to gift it to him. Can I legally "gift" it to him and is he legally old enough to "own" it (only have access per MD law)?

If so, that means he can legally own any MD defined "long gun". . .which means he can legally own an HBAR (for now). I was trying to determine if there is a definite legal way to "gift" it to him to "own" in an effort grandfather his ownership.

Gatman said:

I got a Cricket .22 for my 7 year old son. I want to gift it to him. Can I legally "gift" it to him and is he legally old enough to "own" it (only have access per MD law)?

If so, that means he can legally own any MD defined "long gun". . .which means he can legally own an HBAR (for now). I was trying to determine if there is a definite legal way to "gift" it to him to "own" in an effort grandfather his ownership.

Click to expand...

Best suggestions is contact a Maryland lawyer with experience in maryland gun laws.

Based on what is in law, probably not. Your best bet is probably a legal assignment of the firearm to him signed by you and a witness and stamped by a notary.

But if Maryland wouldn’t support ownership by someone of that age, that won’t matter a fig.

Absolutely a matter for a lawyer or discussing with a state DA.

You can’t compare it to something like a car. You can’t legally drive one till you have a license or learners permit, so basically 16. But there is nothing in law saying you can’t buy it.

But Maryland law is clear, you cannot buy a long gun until age 18 and you cannot buy a handgun until age 21. To go beyond that it says a 16 year old may possess a long gun (but they can’t buy one). Someone under 16 may possess a long gun if they have a hunter’s Ed certificate. But you can’t earn that either till a certain age (I forget what it is, but it isn’t 7).

So you’ve got multiple strikes against Maryland recognizing legal ownership. Nothing stops you from trying it, but attempting to assert that it is legal ownership when your child is 7 taking ownership isn’t going to be a “ha ha ha, no” and they take it away. It would put both of you potentially facing up to the maximum penalty under FSA2013 (5 years?) if HBARs become banned and they are possessing it years later and a LEO sees and investigates.

So my suggestion is if you are considering going down that path is consult a lawyer or the DA. If you don’t, you risk a lot without really anything to back you up other than maybe getting dragged through the courts and hoping that you have a good lawyer and can resolve it in the end in a positive way (other than an arrest record and probably tens of thousands in legal costs. Also probably at least a few days in jail).

One last consideration is FSA2013’s grandfathering clause says this

A PERSON WHO LAWFULLY POSSESSED OR PLACED A VERIFIABLE PURCHASE ORDER FOR, HAS A PURCHASE ORDER FOR, OR COMPLETED AN APPLICATION TO PURCHASE AN ASSAULT LONG GUN OR A COPYCAT WEAPON BEFORE OCTOBER 1, 2013.

A 7 year old cannot legally possess a long gun. Nor would have a purchase order or completed an application to own one.

So ask the DA or a lawyer familiar with gun laws, but it is likely a no. Someone 16 years old today you could probably make a case. Someone with a hunter’s Ed certificate also is a maybe (but maybe dubious).

To add, under Maryland law right now, no they may not have access to that cricket (possession), unless supervised at all times that they have access.

Not until they have a hunter’s Ed certificate anyway. There is also a safe storage law up for consideration that raises the age of possession and access to 18. There are some exceptions relating to hunting/range use. You’d want to check that one out if it passes.

Back in 2013 there was some discussion of inheritance of a Banned rifle by a named recipient who was underage at the time of the donor's passing ( that is a recipient who was otherwise not prohibited , other than age ). The consensus opinion was that the Banned Rifle would be held in Trust by the Estate pending the named recipient attaining the necessary age, whereupon formal title would then pass to recipient .

As for the situation outlined by the OP , probably not , at least not without the untimely passing of the OP .

Biggfoot44 said:

Back in 2013 there was some discussion of inheritance of a Banned rifle by a named recipient who was underage at the time of the donor's passing ( that is a recipient who was otherwise not prohibited , other than age ). The consensus opinion was that the Banned Rifle would be held in Trust by the Estate pending the named recipient attaining the necessary age, whereupon formal title would then pass to recipient .

As for the situation outlined by the OP , probably not , at least not without the untimely passing of the OP .

Click to expand...

Yes. The law spells out inheritance as well as grandfathering. Under the grandfathering provisions as written, unlikely the OP's child could be okay under the grandfathering provisions. under the inheritance provisions, the child doesn't need to legally possess the firearm for it to transfer to them and be grandfathered.

Borked up. A lawyer or the DA could likely confirm and spell it out (more) clearly. Or maybe they know of something in Maryland or common law that makes it not the case and the OP would be fine.