Can I legally "loan" a weapon to someone living outside TN?

[Hershmeister]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1354895958' post='856452']Yet you, apparently, own a firearm or two (admittedly an assumption on my part but I think a reasonable one given your presence on the Tennessee Gun Owners Forum)...If you are that worried about potential lawsuits wouldn't it be prudent to stay away from firearms altogether? [/quote]


I mitigate my risks by ensuring that I don't loan them out

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='Hershmeister' timestamp='1354896136' post='856457']
I mitigate my risks by ensuring that I don't loan them out
[/quote]And I carry a ####load of insurance including insurance specifically to cover me if I'm sued related to firearms...to each his own I guess.

There aren't many people I would loan a weapon to (other than allowing people to shoot my weapons at the range)...this man is one of the bravest people I've ever known...four tours in Iraq and a dozen other ####-holes as well; some of our country's highest awards for bravery and service (the weight of his medals when he wears them all almost add as much weight as his battle gear)...I've no doubt he would give his life for me without a second thought and I'd like to think I'd do the same for him. Even if it were illegal and even if I did get sued he still deserves my help and I would give it to him.

What I wanted to find out here is if offering my help in this way would be illegal and it looks like I'm okay with this legally; if someone, someday sues me then they can take their best shot.

[monkeylizard]

[quote name='scoutfsu' timestamp='1354895978' post='856454']
You are also a resident of your state HOR.
[/quote]

For pretty much all other purposes, I'd agree. But that's not how the definition in sec. 921 reads. It's pretty specific that for the purposes of the chapter (Chapter 44 - Firearms) active duty residence is the PDS state. It makes no mention that I saw for being a dual citizen of sorts. It makes sense. In these rare cases like Robert's, it hurts the active duty person. But without that definition, the man in MO wouldn't be able to buy a handgun at the local gun store or PX. He'd have to come home to TN to do that then carry it back. That's not so bad when it's MO and TN, but would suck if you're from Florida and stationed in Alaska or Hawaii.

It reads to me like the lawmakers were trying to help service members out by making their state of residence for firearms purposes equal to their assigned base/post/station/port/camp/craphole so they didn't have to keep changing official residency after every PCS to not run afoul of these laws. Like most well intentioned laws it has unintended side effects.

Any lawyers on here know different about dual-state-residency for active duty in regards to federal firearms laws?

[scoutfsu]

Interesting. I know myself and many other people that have bought at our HOR and duty station. I'm definitely in for the answer to your question.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='monkeylizard' timestamp='1354905806' post='856558']
For pretty much all other purposes, I'd agree. But that's not how the definition in sec. 921 reads. It's pretty specific that for the purposes of the chapter (Chapter 44 - Firearms) active duty residence is the PDS state. It makes no mention that I saw for being a dual citizen of sorts. It makes sense. In these rare cases like Robert's, it hurts the active duty person. But without that definition, the man in MO wouldn't be able to buy a handgun at the local gun store or PX. He'd have to come home to TN to do that then carry it back. That's not so bad when it's MO and TN, but would suck if you're from Florida and stationed in Alaska or Hawaii.

It reads to me like the lawmakers were trying to help service members out by making their state of residence for firearms purposes equal to their assigned base/post/station/port/camp/craphole so they didn't have to keep changing official residency after every PCS to not run afoul of these laws. Like most well intentioned laws it has unintended side effects.

Any lawyers on here know different about dual-state-residency for active duty in regards to federal firearms laws?[/quote]
As I've looked at the applicable laws here it doesn't look to me as if, in the case of [i]loaning[/i] a firearm to someone, the state of residence matters as far as Federal law goes. If I'm misinterpreting that I hope someone lets me know.

[monkeylizard]

No, you're correct about loaning. I didn't mean to confuse the issue.

scoutfsu, I have no doubt that happens a lot, and why wouldn't it? If the federal law says you use your duty station, LGSs around any post/base/etc would know that and accept a military ID. Then you go home and have your HOR drivers license and permanent address, so why wouldn't the local LGS there sell to you too? Nothing would give an LGS in either location a reason not to do the sale. From reading the 921 definitions though it seems like once you're active duty your HOR state no longer matters and it's all based on the state of your duty station. I suppose it could get even more confused if you reside in a different state than your duty station which is also different that your HOR. Scott AFB for example is in Illinois but pretty close to St. Louis. You could be a TN resident stationed in IL and living in MO. Then there's Ft. Campbell which is in both TN and KY, so which one is your duty station? Edited December 7, 2012 by monkeylizard

[TMF]

[quote name='monkeylizard' timestamp='1354905806' post='856558']

For pretty much all other purposes, I'd agree. But that's not how the definition in sec. 921 reads. It's pretty specific that for the purposes of the chapter (Chapter 44 - Firearms) active duty residence is the PDS state. It makes no mention that I saw for being a dual citizen of sorts. It makes sense. In these rare cases like Robert's, it hurts the active duty person. But without that definition, the man in MO wouldn't be able to buy a handgun at the local gun store or PX. He'd have to come home to TN to do that then carry it back. That's not so bad when it's MO and TN, but would suck if you're from Florida and stationed in Alaska or Hawaii.

[/quote]

When I was in the military my home of record was elsewhere, yet I bought at least half a dozen firearms in the state of TN from FFL dealers. All I had to show was my orders and proof of residency (such as a power bill). I could turn right around and purchase a firearm in my home state from an FFL as well. This happens everyday right here in Clarksville.

[TMF]

[quote name='monkeylizard' timestamp='1354913209' post='856615']Then there's Ft. Campbell which is in both TN and KY, so which one is your duty station?[/quote]

Which ever side of the border you can prove you live on. Soldiers living on the TN side have to show proof of residency along with orders. On the KY side orders should be sufficient to purchase there.

[Guest FIST]

I'm an Illinois resident, with an Illinois DL and FOID, TN plates and HCP and orders stationing me at Campbell. I can buy guns in all 3 states (KY, TN, IL). As long as you have the required documents your good to go.

Home of record is your "official" residence unless you change it. The reason your allowed to buy in a state your stationed in is becuase you are there due to military service and therefore not punished for it.

[monkeylizard]

[quote name='FIST' timestamp='1354930118' post='856706']
The reason your allowed to buy in a state your stationed in is becuase you are there due to military service and therefore not punished for it.
[/quote]

That's pretty much why I figured the lawmakers put that in the definitions. Otherwise AD would get hosed. It just seems odd that they didn't say active duty are residents of both their duty station AND their permanent home of residence.

[JohnC]

Too much liability in loaning a gun to someone else, no matter how good your intentions are.

What would you do if he shot someone in self defense, but the perp sues you for his injuries, pain and suffering?

In this case, id just get him something really cheap, make him promise to keep it, and register it in his name

Fwiw, my Dad felt sorry for one of my uncles that fell on hard times and bought him another Remington 700 30-06 and he ended up selling that gun too.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RobertNashville]

I appreciate some of the should or shouldn't do it replies but Honestly, I don't understand how some of you justify owning a firearm Much less carry one in if you are that worried about lawsuits.

[monkeylizard]

Yeah, this.

My take on it is just loan it to him. It all looks legal and legit to me.

[Oh Shoot]

[quote name='JohnC' timestamp='1354972075' post='856844']
....In this case, id just get him something really cheap, make him promise to keep it, and [b]register it[/b] in his name[/quote]

You probably just didn't phrase that precisely, but in case, to get a "registration" in someone else's name, you'd both have to go to an FFL and transfer the gun from you to him. Which in the case of a handgun, you can only do in the state of the buyer/receiver.

- OS Edited December 9, 2012 by Oh Shoot

[JohnC]

[quote name='RobertNashville' timestamp='1354982619' post='856884']
I appreciate some of the should or shouldn't do it replies but Honestly, I don't understand how some of you justify owning a firearm Much less carry one in if you are that worried about lawsuits.
[/quote]

I don't carry. This is mainly a "poke holes in paper" hobby for me.

Now if someone is armed and threatens my life or my families at home, they're screwed. Edited December 9, 2012 by JohnC

[Guest 6.8 AR]

[quote name='Hozzie' timestamp='1354886487' post='856371']
If he has a TN DL then he is a resident of TN. If he is giving it to him while he is in TN, then no issue at all I wouldn't think as long as he is stationed there for the Service.
[/quote]
The reason I said this I thought was obvious. You don't write a bill of sale when you loan something. Bill of sale means
a transfer.

[RobertNashville]

[quote name='JohnC' timestamp='1355025513' post='857101']
I don't carry. This is mainly a "poke holes in paper" hobby for me.

Now if someone is armed and threatens my life or my families at home, they're screwed.
[/quote]Wasn't directed specifically at you but even if it were, not carrying only reduces your risk of a lawsuit slightly. Most of the risk of owning a firearm is when it's discharged (in you home, on the street doesn't really matter)...if a round goes somewhere it isn't supposed to go you are going to be in for a ####storm of lawsuits (and that will likely be the very least of your problems). That's to say nothing about the incredible risks everyone who drives a car on public highway takes every time they are out on the road...one tiny mistake and you could easily take a life, maybe your own, or wind up with vehicular homicide charges. There are probably hundreds of things we all do every day that could result in a civil lawsuit with the potential or ruining our financial lives.

The point that I was making is about choosing to not live life in fear, most especially, not living in fear of a stupid civil lawsuit.

The other point I was making is that my question didn't ask if I "[u][i]should[/i][/u]" do it.

Edited December 9, 2012 by RobertNashville