Selling firearm back to a friend - not sure what to do

[goColt]

...I have reason to believe that her current husband cannot own firearms. I remembered that he sees a parole officer and some other issues.

My opinion:

So you have no actual proof that he cannot own a firearm? Might wanna check this out if you can before you make a decision. What "other issues" would make you not want to fulfill your word?

I am no lawyer but if they sold them to you "paperlessly" and you sold them back to her "paperlessly" then would there be any proof that you actually ever owned the guns? At least any that would prompt a prosecutor to bring charges? I can't see how selling a gun to someone who can legally own a gun is a problem, especially when you don't know for sure whether her new husband is a felon or not. Is seeing a parole officer a definite indication of him being a felon?

I agree that going through an FFL is the "safest" way to go and it's your posterior at risk, not mine. But it rubs me the wrong way. And I disagree with previous comments, if you do to through an FFL YOU should pay any and all fees since it is your requirement to fulfill your word.

Sounds like there is a little more to this than it appears?

 

[theweakerbrother]

You got to be kidding me. He states the exact same thing you do, with no supporting case law or citations.

No, I'm not kidding you. If you'd like to believe that so that you can sleep better at night, by all means do so.

Would you like to quote case law or citations stating that bills of sale have helped in firearms investigations/prosecutions? You think that those who do so play fair or by their own rules? The BATFE are known for being real boy (and girl) scouts.

Common Sense
NRA-ILA :: Shining a Light On BATFE'S Richmond Roundup
JBT's raid KT Ordnance
Cavalry Arms Raid +548 days

It is a worthless piece of paper unless it has been legally notarized and at that point, you might as well stick to an FFL if you're that concerned about a paper trail. Which one do you think would hold up better in court? A bill of sale or an FFL transfer?

Bill of sale, probably go to court to fight for your innocence. FFL, court is not even an option or worry... and you let the FFL worry about keeping paperwork.

 

[aikidoka]

Call me a suspicious sort, but I gotta wonder. If hubby number two IS a crook, and she told him about herself and hubby number one selling you their gp 100 and their AR for 500.00 a few years ago, and how you offered to sell them back at the same price, wouldn't that send his little mind spinning thoughts of easy profit? Tell you they want to buy them back, give you the 500.00, Sell the AR for 650.00, sell the GP for 400.00, and pocket the difference!!! Hmmmm.... I just gotta wonder about the motivation behind this sudden desire to have them back. And I do agree with three earlier posters.
1 While you DID make the offer, it is essentially a long term no interest loan. If you're ok with that, then ok.
2 This is NOT the same family unit you bought them from. If your friendship is primarily with the woman, then so be it. Otherwise, hmmm.... tough call.
3 OOOOOOOOOH yeah. FFL or not at all. CYA baby.

.Good luck to ya.

The guns are not anything as nice as an AR. It's a Keltec sub2000 and a Makarov. She has always wanted at lest the Keltec back and has mentioned buying them back from me several times before even meeting the new guy, but it just never worked out, so it isnt an all of a sudden desire.

I really don't care for that particular Keltec so no skin off my nose. Having now handled a Makarov I wouldn't mind having one in my collection but if I ever really wanted one again, I can just buy the one my mom has as well as the ar15 she has just sitting around

 

[aikidoka]

I've decided to go with an FFL transfer if she will agree.

I'm a bit ticked that she gave him my phone number though. He wasn't a jerk or anything when he called but I wasn't in the mood to defend myself after being woke up at 1 am and after I told him I had already sent her an IM explaining how we could still do it, so I hung up.

I want to thank everyone for the advice. I never would have thought to try and go through an FFL transer. I learned something

 

[ThrottleJockey]

...I have reason to believe that her current husband cannot own firearms.

Well there you have it. You cannot legally sell them firearms unless this has been cleared up and you no longer have reason to believe......The way I read it you cannot even legally do this through an FFL. The "or in any manner transfer" part is what's gonna get you.

IC 35-47-2-7
Prohibited sales or transfers of ownership
Sec. 7. (a) Except an individual acting within a parent-minor child or guardian-minor protected person relationship or any other individual who is also acting in compliance with IC 35-47-10, a person may not sell, give, or in any other manner transfer the ownership or possession of a handgun or assault weapon (as defined in IC 35-50-2-11) to any person under eighteen (18) years of age.
(b) It is unlawful for a person to sell, give, or in any manner transfer the ownership or possession of a handgun to another person who the person has reasonable cause to believe:
(1) has been:
(A) convicted of a felony; or
(B) adjudicated a delinquent child for an act that would be a felony if committed by an adult, if the person seeking to obtain ownership or possession of the handgun is less than twenty-three (23) years of age;
(2) is a drug abuser;
(3) is an alcohol abuser; or
(4) is mentally incompetent.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

I find it amazing that this thread has gone on for 5 pages with 5 pages of good intentions, yet bad advice. With just 2 minutes of searching and 2 more minutes of reading, the above post was formed, proving that there is absolutely no LEGAL way to return these firearms.

 

[Cygnus]

I find it amazing that this thread has gone on for 5 pages with 5 pages of good intentions, yet bad advice. With just 2 minutes of searching and 2 more minutes of reading, the above post was formed, proving that there is absolutely no LEGAL way to return these firearms.

Wrong. (I think! )

The woman has no hstory of any of that. The transfer to her via an FFL, (which will require a background check for her) , puts the onus on her if she provides them to an improper person one she becomes the owner. And if I read correctly we are not certain her new man is imporper, just suspected of being so. I think if she's the owner it's OK as was the case with her previous husband.

Paging Gunalwyer

Now if the OP thinks it;s straw purchase he should run.....

 

[ThrottleJockey]

And if I read correctly we are not certain her new man is imporper, just suspected of being so.

It is unlawful for a person to sell, give, or in any manner transfer the ownership or possession of a handgun to another person who the person has reasonable cause to believe:

...I have reason to believe

I hope this clears it up for you. As for the difference between the two people, they are married, this pretty much makes them one in the same, legally. The "in any manner" clause rules out even an FFL, because that is a manner of transferring.

puts the onus on her if she provides them to an improper person one she becomes the owner.

This describes a straw purchase, also a crime and also something the OP is concerned about. Not to mention the act of putting an FFL in the position of participating in an illegal act, even if it is unknown to them. As gun owners, we must look out for each other, not throw one another under the bus to cover our own tail.

 

[Benny]

I hope this clears it up for you. As for the difference between the two people, they are married, this pretty much makes them one in the same, legally. The "in any manner" clause rules out even an FFL, because that is a manner of transferring.
This describes a straw purchase, also a crime and also something the OP is concerned about. Not to mention the act of putting an FFL in the position of participating in an illegal act, even if it is unknown to them. As gun owners, we must look out for each other, not throw one another under the bus to cover our own tail.

I completely agree...

However, if they are "one in the same," then when that FFL calls in for a background check, it should show up that the person he is selling to is married to a felon and while they are married, firearms can't be transfered to her. I don't know all of the ins and outs, but you'd have to think that he couldn't be punished for doing his job(ie, calling in a BG check, she checks out, and he sells her the firearms).

BTW,

I'm a bit ticked that she gave him my phone number though. He wasn't a jerk or anything when he called but I wasn't in the mood to defend myself after being woke up at 1 am and after I told him I had already sent her an IM explaining how we could still do it, so I hung up.

Who called you at 1 in the morning? The felon husband or the FFL?

If it is the felon husband, your prior agreement should be null and void IMMEDIATELY.

At this point, it doesn't matter what prior arrangements you had with her. If the dude that isn't allowed to own a firearm is the one trying to get involved, you can almost guarantee the worst...Why the heck else would HE be concerned with her getting them back?



This situation just gets more muffed up by the moment. I'd probably be alerting the police in the near future.

 

[stiffy]

friend or not... when it comes to unnecessary legal issues CYA. You are in control of yourself, no one else.

 

[Benny]

One last thing I'd like to add to my last post...

If you are that concerned with the moral side of this, give her some extra cash.

Hell, if you don't like the guns that much, SELL THEM! Give the difference to her and be done with it.

It's not worth the potential legals issues bro.

 

[snojet]

If I was in that situation that your in I would probably not sell them back. But if I changed my mind. I would use the FFL transfer like others have said. Always cover oneself.

 

[jpo117]

Who called you at 1 in the morning? The felon husband or the FFL?

If it is the felon husband, your prior agreement should be null and void IMMEDIATELY.

At this point, it doesn't matter what prior arrangements you had with her. If the dude that isn't allowed to own a firearm is the one trying to get involved, you can almost guarantee the worst...Why the heck else would HE be concerned with her getting them back?



This situation just gets more muffed up by the moment. I'd probably be alerting the police in the near future.

I've been following this thread with interest but I don't have any expert legal advice to give, so I'm not even sure my advice would be valued at the customary two cents. But I would be very uncomfortable if I were trying to find a way to honor a commitment to sell the guns back to a friend in a way that absolved me of any legal liability, and then the potential legal liability itself called me up in the middle of the night asking what was up with the guns. Under these circumstances I would consider maybe giving the friend fair market value for the guns (minus the original purchase price) or selling them and giving her the money you got (again, minus your cut). It sure sounds like a sticky situation no matter what, though.

 

[BE Mike]

This has all the red flags of a straw purchase. It seems to me that the convicted felon will somehow get a hold of these firearms. When you first asked the question in your initial post, your feelings were the same or you wouldn't be wrestling with this decision. If it were me, I would not under any circumstances sell the guns to this woman.

There have been a lot of changes in circumstances since you first made your promise to sell back the guns to the folks you bought them from. Because of those circumstances you aren't beholding to keep it. I don't say this lightly, because I am a stickler on keeping promises.

If you need the money, just sell the guns to someone else or a FFL. It sounds to me that you could easily get your initial money out of them.

 

[jedi]

wow.. it went from OP thinks the guy may have felnoy issues due to parole officer to others posting the guy is a felon.

The OP what FFL are you going with? I know Deb's charged $50 per transfer. Great Lakes Shooters (glshooters (at) gmail (dot) com) who is based out of Portage charges $20. I found him via a post here (INGO) where some other INGO NWI members used his services. OK of a guy.

This could all be settled by just asking the lady and her boyfriend (possible felon) to show you proof of what his parole is for.

 

[paddling_man]

If you transfer through an FFL (like sooooooo many others have stated) then the onus is on the federal government to determine suitability of the purchaser. All of the rest (bill of sale, your opinion of suitability, etc.) is irrelevant.

You've been trying to do the right thing - keeping your word while not breaking the law yourself. I respect that.

However, once you've got some jerk calling at 0100am to harangue you about this matter, I would feel my duty is absolved and abandon all ties and friendship with these friend who makes some VERY bad decisions about people in her life - OR - do the FFL transfer and be done with them.

Just my two cents. Worth nothing in the long run. Best of luck.

 

[aikidoka]

I completely agree...

Who called you at 1 in the morning? The felon husband or the FFL?

If it is the felon husband, your prior agreement should be null and void IMMEDIATELY.

At this point, it doesn't matter what prior arrangements you had with her. If the dude that isn't allowed to own a firearm is the one trying to get involved, you can almost guarantee the worst...Why the heck else would HE be concerned with her getting them back?

This situation just gets more muffed up by the moment. I'd probably be alerting the police in the near future.

Let's keep in mind I am not sure if he is a felon.

If I saved my IMs with her from way back I might be able to determine that. However, he also lied A LOT at that time so it would be a mess to go through.

He is the one that called and woke me up. He just said she was very upset. He said they are separated and he doesn't even live with her. I said I had already sent her an IM explaining how we could still do this. He then started to say he thought I was wrong to change the agreement, at which point I hung up because I wasn't in the mood to explain the situation all over again.

He was NOT threatening, loud or rude in his language.

They really don't help themselves by him saying he doesn't live there. How about saying I'm not a felon and you can contact my parole officer to verify that? They are clearly not divorced and there is no guarantee that will happen and they still see each other even though he is not living there, which to me means he may be around the guns if he is visiting at her place. If he is a felon, they need to be checking with his parole officer about her having a gun in the home as well.

 

[aikidoka]

About strawman purchase.

What I am concerned with most is that it gets portrayed later as a strawman purchase even if no one intended that.

She has wanted the firearms back before ever meeting him, so it is not a sudden change due to his presence.

On top of my concerns about his actual status and access is her ignoring that she will have to get a LTCH just to get to the range. That irks me.

 

[aikidoka]

wow.. it went from OP thinks the guy may have felnoy issues due to parole officer to others posting the guy is a felon.

The OP what FFL are you going with? I know Deb's charged $50 per transfer. Great Lakes Shooters (glshooters (at) gmail (dot) com) who is based out of Portage charges $20. I found him via a post here (INGO) where some other INGO NWI members used his services. OK of a guy.

This could all be settled by just asking the lady and her boyfriend (possible felon) to show you proof of what his parole is for.

You would think they would have offered an explanation of what the parole is/was for rather than just say we are separated so he doesn't matter.

The message I sent her said it could add $25 - $50 to the price. Not sure if she got that as her reply was - hey.

 

[jedi]

About strawman purchase.

What I am concerned with most is that it gets portrayed later as a strawman purchase even if no one intended that.

She has wanted the firearms back before ever meeting him, so it is not a sudden change due to his presence.

On top of my concerns about his actual status and access is her ignoring that she will have to get a LTCH just to get to the range. That irks me.

You are in a tough spot and I like most here do feel for your position. She is however & adult and can make her own decision if she wants to stay within the law and not get her LTCH and transport a gun to/from range and risk getting in trouble.

At the end of the day that will be her problem. You are doing the right thing and covering your ownless legally while fulfilling your moral agreement to return the weapons.

Off course we can toss a monkey wrench as say... What about the first husband. Does he want the gun back? Was it not part his as well? does he not get a vote/voice in the matter?