Lending to family?

fabsroman · Oct 22, 2016

Bob A said:
Under the present circumstances, it would seem to hinge on the definition of "Transfer", and whether lending to someone would be so considered.

I confess I cannot answer that question.

Further, if the pistol in question was long in the possession of the OP, it would be difficult, IMO, to consider it a straw purchase.

Is there any validity to my points above?

It will not be a transfer. See Chow v. State of Maryland attached hereto.

You really need to look at the statute and see how it reads. Off the top of my head, I cannot remember if "receive" is part of it, and how "receive" would be interpreted. As already mentioned, the safest thing might be to help him get his HQL and then let him borrow the handgun. In the alternative, just loan him a long gun that is not an "assault weapon".

Stevie Boy · Oct 23, 2016

Maybe I've missed it somewhere but does the source of who pays for the firearm make a difference? I was under the impression that firearms can be gifted. Not the case here I realize but what distinguishes a straw purchase from a gift?

Mark75H · Oct 23, 2016

Stevie Boy said:
Maybe I've missed it somewhere but does the source of who pays for the firearm make a difference? I was under the impression that firearms can be gifted. Not the case here I realize but what distinguishes a straw purchase from a gift?

Gift paperwork. There's a form for that.

THier · Oct 24, 2016

I'm not a lawyer, I try to use common sense in a state that has no common sense.

BUT

Let's say , GOD forbid, he has to use it.

Question to him, "is it yours"

"No it was given to me, my brother bought it for me to protect myself and family"

Isn't that where troubles begins?

Real lawyer types wanna give a non binding opinion?

fabsroman · Oct 24, 2016

Stevie Boy said:
Maybe I've missed it somewhere but does the source of who pays for the firearm make a difference? I was under the impression that firearms can be gifted. Not the case here I realize but what distinguishes a straw purchase from a gift?

Intent is what distinguishes a gift from a straw purchase. Then, in Maryland if the gift is of a handgun, the transaction needs to be done through a FFL or at the MSP barracks because a Form 77r (I believe that is the form that needs to be completed) needs to be completed.

If the gift is of a new firearm, the easiest thing is for the giftor to gift cash to the giftee and allow the giftee to buy the firearm and complete the paperwork in their own name. Of course, that isn't always the case, like when somebody is gifting grandpa's shotgun to their child.

traveller · Oct 24, 2016

THier said:
I'm not a lawyer, I try to use common sense in a state that has no common sense.

BUT

Let's say , GOD forbid, he has to use it.

Question to him, "is it yours"

"No it was given to me, my brother bought it for me to protect myself and family"

Isn't that where troubles begins?

Real lawyer types wanna give a non binding opinion?

The trouble begins once the answer to any question beyond 'what's your name' and 'do you live here' is anything different from 'I am not making any statement at this time'.

fabsroman · Oct 24, 2016

THier said:
I'm not a lawyer, I try to use common sense in a state that has no common sense.

BUT

Let's say , GOD forbid, he has to use it.

Question to him, "is it yours"

"No it was given to me, my brother bought it for me to protect myself and family"

Isn't that where troubles begins?

Real lawyer types wanna give a non binding opinion?

By the way, this isn't a state issue, this is a country issue. Read through Abramski. The gist of the facts are that an uncle gave money to his nephew, to buy a handgun for the uncle at a reduced price that only the nephew could get. The nephew answered the "gift" question on Form 4473 inappropriately because to answer that the gun was for another person would have prevented him from buying the gun and to answer that it was a gift for his uncle would not have been truthful either. Neither the uncle nor the nephew were prohibited from owning firearms. The Supreme Court of the United State of America determined that the nephew had done a straw purchase. It amazes me how courts struggle to get to the tortured results that they do, yet in this case where we have two good people just trying to get a gun at a reduced price for a relative, the Supreme Court of the United States of America cannot find a way to not make the nephew a felon.

The entire country is losing its common sense.

Edit to add: Maryland, New York, New Jersey, and California are just leading the pack on this loss of common sense.

Pinecone · Oct 25, 2016

Stevie Boy said:
Maybe I've missed it somewhere but does the source of who pays for the firearm make a difference? I was under the impression that firearms can be gifted. Not the case here I realize but what distinguishes a straw purchase from a gift?

A gift is a gift.

A straw purchase is where the person who ends up obtaining the firearm is either prohibited or is attempted to conceal their purchase (no NICS on them).

Yes, who funds the purchase plays a big part. Someone gives you money to purchase a firearm for them, that is definitely a straw purchase.

Pinecone · Oct 25, 2016

THier said:
I'm not a lawyer, I try to use common sense in a state that has no common sense.

BUT

Let's say , GOD forbid, he has to use it.

Question to him, "is it yours"

"No it was given to me, my brother bought it for me to protect myself and family"

Isn't that where troubles begins?

Real lawyer types wanna give a non binding opinion?

Which is why the answer should be, no, my brother lent it to me to protect myself and my family.

traveller · Oct 25, 2016

Pinecone said:
A straw purchase is where the person who ends up obtaining the firearm is either prohibited or is attempted to conceal their purchase (no NICS on them).

According to the Abramski decision, there is no requirement for the eventual recipient to be prohibited. It is the purchasing the firearm for someone else yet marking 'are you the recipient' that makes it a straw purchase.

Yes, it's stupid. And Obamacare is a tax.

THier · Oct 25, 2016

Bender,

PLEASE don't think I am judging you, or your family, I just don't trust the legal system as it applies to firearms in MD. I don't want to see you or your family in trouble for doing the "right" thing when thugs somehow get off Everytime.

I would love every thug to think they will get lead poisoning in 230grain doses when they attempt to harm innocent folks who just want to live out their lives, but in MD they know they have the upper hand.

esqappellate · Oct 25, 2016

fabsroman said:
By the way, this isn't a state issue, this is a country issue. Read through Abramski. The gist of the facts are that an uncle gave money to his nephew, to buy a handgun for the uncle at a reduced price that only the nephew could get. The nephew answered the "gift" question on Form 4473 inappropriately because to answer that the gun was for another person would have prevented him from buying the gun and to answer that it was a gift for his uncle would not have been truthful either. Neither the uncle nor the nephew were prohibited from owning firearms. The Supreme Court of the United State of America determined that the nephew had done a straw purchase. It amazes me how courts struggle to get to the tortured results that they do, yet in this case where we have two good people just trying to get a gun at a reduced price for a relative, the Supreme Court of the United States of America cannot find a way to not make the nephew a felon.

The entire country is losing its common sense.

Edit to add: Maryland, New York, New Jersey, and California are just leading the pack on this loss of common sense.

I think the same result would obtain under state law, which (unlike federal law) expressly criminalizes straw purchases. A purchaser identity lie on form 4473 sufficient to support a conviction under Section 922(a)(6) will be fully sufficient as a basis for conviction under state law too. And yes, both the State and the federal government could separately try and convict the straw purchaser and impose jail time.

ras_oscar · Oct 25, 2016

Because I find this conversation interesting in a scholarly way...

Could the OP "RENT" the handgun to his brother for a dollar? Prepare a written rental agreement that defines ownership has not transferred, the receiving brother certifies he is not a prohibited person, the rental will continue until the receiving brother has sufficient financial means to purchase his own firearm, and the receiving brother will maintain the firearm for home defense in a MD legal way, not removing it from the residence for any reason.

swinokur · Oct 25, 2016

that may be problematic based on the term receive in the HQL statute.

MD 5-117.1
.

THier · Oct 25, 2016

swinokur said:
that may be problematic based on the term receive in the HQL statute.

MD 5-117.1
.

Wouldn't "lending" it be the same? That is why my first response mentioned it.

traveller · Oct 25, 2016

'Rent' in the sense of taking home fro a store to use requires an HQL. Rentals at a range are not included (iirc there is an AG opinion on it).

swinokur · Oct 25, 2016

THier said:
Wouldn't "lending" it be the same? That is why my first response mentioned it.

seems that way to me but IANAL

THier · Oct 25, 2016

traveller said:
'Rent' in the sense of taking home fro a store to use requires an HQL. Rentals at a range are not included (iirc there is an AG opinion on it).

OK, since I have never rented a firearm, I guess I read too much into it.

BUT,

What is "receiving"?

swinokur · Oct 25, 2016

the definition rent is in the Statute 5-101
.

THier · Oct 25, 2016

swinokur said:
the definition rent is in the Statute 5-101
.

So, renting or lending to someone who doesn't live with you IS prohibited? Right back to my first post. Damn this state is nuts.

Lending to family?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Ultimate Member

MD Wear&Carry Instructor

R.I.P.

Ultimate Member

The one with two L

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

The one with two L

R.I.P.

President, MSI

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

Attachments

R.I.P.

The one with two L

In a State of Bliss

R.I.P.

In a State of Bliss

Attachments

R.I.P.

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics