Shall Not Be Questioned

More on the UMass Student

Given that he reports he disposed of the firearm with New Hampshire police, it would seem that he might not be in trouble based on what the law actually says. In this case we’re talking about 18 USC 922(a)(3) which states that it shall be unlawful:

(3)Â for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;

So it does seem that he’s in the clear if he legally disposed of the firearm in New Hampshire. The question I would have is whether he disposed of it legally. It gets complicated that he’s a Massachusetts resident transferring a gun in New Hampshire, because for that we have 18 USC 922(a)(5):

(5) for any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the transferor resides; except that this paragraph shall not apply to

(A) the transfer, transportation, or delivery of a firearm made to carry out a bequest of a firearm to, or an acquisition by intestate succession of a firearm by, a person who is permitted to acquire or possess a firearm under the laws of the State of his residence, and

(B) the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes;

He turned it into the police, but I would note the police are not a federally licensed dealer or collector. Ironically, he would probably have been in the clear completely had he just sold the gun to an FFL the next day at a gun show. For the act of purchasing the firearm, it would appear this student committed no crime, but the act of turning it into the police may have itself been a federal crime, since the police do not hold a federal firearms license, and are not residents of Massachusetts.

But I think that’s being hyper-technical. I doubt you’ll see any prosecution because the kid transferred it to police, even if it violated a technical letter of the law.

UPDATE: As a commenter points out, the definition of “person” in 18USC921 doesn’t include state agencies, like local police, only individuals, and a few other corporate entities. So there was no crime here.

We’re In Potentially Great Danger in PA on Gun Rights

Over at our other blog, we take a look at the some potential problems we could be facing with gun rights in Pennsylvania. We have a lot of NRA A and A+ rated retirements from some pretty powerful positions within the Pennsylvania Legislature, in addition to some contentious and important federal races. We have to defend a lot more highly graded seats than the other side does, and there are plenty of people running for those seats that are poorly rated, or associated with Mayors Against Illegal Guns.

I think the frustrating thing is, Pennsylvania Gun Owners don’t seem, by in large, to be taking these looming threats seriously at all. Over the weekend, we tried to get a dinner meeting together with several of the Pennsylvania NRA Election Volunteer Coordinators from Eastern PA, and only the EVC for the 6th and 7th district showed up. And these are the people who are supposedly plugged in? We’re in a lot of trouble if this is the best we can expect of our “leaders” in this issue. I sense this frustration reflected in an e-mail alert from Kim Stolfer a few days ago, in which he said:

On top of all of this is the issue of the average gun owner turning a blind eye to these and so many other issues. I’m sure all of us know some gun owners who have a myriad of reasons as to why they don’t need to be involved. All one has to do is to go to a gun show or the average gun club and take a look around. I encourage you to grab these guys by the scruff of their philosophical neck and do your best to wake them up! We need everyone in this struggle for our freedoms and our heritage.

I’ve often said people make the mistake of believing Pennsylvania is a pro-gun state. It’s not quite as safely pro-gun as many believe. Sure, when gun owners in this state are stirred to anger, they can be quite an electoral force. The problem with Pennsylvania Gun Owners is they often don’t get involved until we have our backs against a wall. By that time, we’ve already elected anti-gun politicians who convince themselves that our bark is worse than our bite. That’s not the time to get involved. That time is now. Otherwise the basis for the next wave of gun control in Pennsylvania, much like we saw in the early and mid 1990s, is going to be laid. Last time we were lucky to get out without an Assault Weapons Ban, though just barely. Next time we might not be so lucky.

Retention

Not usually important for civilians who carry guns, unless you open carry. This article over at LawOfficer.com is an insightful treatment of the topic.

When someone puts their hands on your gun during a contact, [a fight to the death] is exactly what you must be prepared for. I testified to the fact that a suspect who touches your gun during a street contact has already demonstrated his intent. Weapon retention and ground fighting tactics do not include a measure of politeness. You must consider any disarming attempt a life-or-death situation. If you honestly feel your weapon retention and/or ground fighting training adequately prepares you for such an encounter, great. But if you have any doubts about your skills or abilities to maintain control of your duty weapon during an attempted disarming, resolve them before you next hit the street.

Not everything is applicable to civilian carrying, but at the least good holster selection and at least some basic retention training are a must if a civilian chooses to carry openly.

More Justice

One of the Sea Shepherd crew was captured by the Japanese after illegally boarding one of the whaling vessels. Apparently he was the guy who lent the crew the three million dollar boat that sank in the Antarctic seas.

I hope the Japanese whalers take him back to Japan and try him for piracy.

How About Some Prosecution?

This Umass student committed a federal crime, namely buying a long gun out of state in a private sale. While you may buy long guns out of state in from a federally licensed dealer, any transfer between non-licenees has to happen through an FFL if the residents are of a different state.

If I did this, and bragged about it here, I’d get busted. Let’s see some justice. Ironically, the person who sold him the gun did not commit a felony, since he did not know he sold a gun to someone who wasn’t a New Hampshire resident. But the student here most definitely did commit a felony.

So what was that again about weak gun laws?

UPDATE: I should note this is a bit of “trying to make a point.” Â I actually don’t think this kid’s life ought to be ruined because he violated an unjust law. What I’d like him to do is recognize the law is unjust. I do not think the US Attorney for Massachusetts should treat him any differently than he would any other gun owner in Massachusetts, but I think offering a plea deal to avoid jail time would be fair. He’ll have a federal gun felony on his record, but hey, I don’t make the laws, you know.

UPDATE: Also notice in the video he freely admits that no one would sell him a handgun. The best he managed is a break action double barrel bird gun.

UPDATE: Maybe not a crime. Some more confusion over our federal gun laws that ordinary people with no legal training are expected to follow or face multi-year prison sentences from the felony rap. Still want to argue that guns aren’t regulated enough Mr. Daniel Entrinkin?

Update on Microstamping in California

The public comment period is apparently closed on the matter, but implementation of the microstamping law requires certification that the technology is available. Apparently the California DOJ are proceeding with that process:

The lack of available microstamping technology has not deterred the Department of Justice from proceeding with promulgating regulations for the lawâ€™s implementation. In other words, these proposed regulations are completely unnecessary at this time. It is on this basis, among others, that the NRA is objecting to the DOJ commencing with the rulemaking process on this matter. The NRA Letter to the DOJ is available to read in its entiretyÂ here.

Proceeding despite the fact that the technology isn’t available. This is about fighting crime right? Not a backdoor gun ban?

West Virginia is floating a bill to make Bloomberg’s gun show stings illegal, citing that they could interfere with ongoing law enforcement investigations. It will do this by making it a crime for anyone to persuade, encourage or entice a dealer or person into making an unlawful sale.

Irish Equivalent of NRA Suing Over Gun Ban

Looks like the NARGC, which his the Irish equivalent of the NRA, is doing its level best to fight the state’s new restrictive handgun licensing policy, which basically only recognizing Olympic shooting sports as legitimate reason to own a pistol, and then only pistols suitable for that purpose.