Checking for "hot" pistols?

[45_auto]

But I know this much, innocent owners have a superior title than anybody else regarding the property they purchased in good faith and paid value for.

So let's say my $1,200 gun is stolen.

I report it to the police and show them my receipt from the local gun shop.

The thief sells you the gun for $400 and gives you a receipt.

The police catch the thief, he tells them he sold it to you. They recover it from you.

You have a receipt from the thief. I have a receipt where I bought it from the local gun shop. You believe that you are the "innocent owner" and get to keep the gun?

In the real world, I get my gun back. Your only recourse to recover your $400 is if you can recover it from the thief.

I haven't been doing it as long as you (only 12 years vs your 17), but I've handled a lot of stolen property cases and so far in every one the recovered property has been returned to the original victim. Haven't seen one yet where the purchaser of the stolen property got to keep it.

 

[Sam1911]

I've been doing this 17 years and I still have a practice to run, else I'd research some more for you. I definitely don't want to argue in here, I just want to share what I can and learn what I havent. But I know this much, innocent owners have a superior title than anybody else regarding the property they purchased in good faith and paid value for. That's a rule of law.

Ok... but have you ever heard of a case (a cite would be nice) where someone possessed a firearm that was reported stolen and which they were able to fight to keep regardless?

I am not a lawyer and I am asking because I want to learn. But I've never heard of such -- and never heard of anyone claiming such was true before.

 

[baylorattorney]

I haven't found a case which says I cannot.

It's like I said earlier, these matters aren't often litigated, if at all, so you wont find precedence. I ran the search in various forms and couldnt find a case regarding firearms one way or the other. Its ripe for litigation. I'm offering the argument and I believe it is dispositive of the issue.

I buy a colt delta elite from some guy I believe to be legit. I pay $650 for it. Turns out it is stolen and cops seize it. If I don't get it back, it has now been stolen from the original owner and from me an innocent owner. The common law holds that that is not good policy. An innocent owners title trumps an original owners title. After police are done with the weapon I get it back or sue the hell out of them. Then when I win, I offer to sell it back to the original owner and split the loss with me. Tho I can keep it outright, I realize the law can be unfair, but that is the rule. Innocent owner title beats original owners title. There are all sorts of cases holding this, but none specific to guns that I can find.


Mark, esquire

 

[45_auto]

An innocent owners title trumps an original owners title.

I buy a colt delta elite from some guy I believe to be legit. I pay $650 for it. Turns out it is stolen and cops seize it.

In Louisiana the only way an innocent owners title trumps an original owners title is if the innocent owner purchased the article from a public auction or a legitimate merchant. Buying from an individual in a private sale it's buyer beware. You just lost $650 unless you can recover it from the thief that sold you the gun.

Art. 524. Recovery of lost or stolen things.

The owner of a lost or stolen movable may recover it from a possessor who bought it in good faith at a public auction or from a merchant customarily selling similar things on reimbursing the purchase price.

If you had bought it from a local gun shop or police auction, the owner would have to pay you your $650 to get it back. On an individual sale, you have no recourse.

 

[brickeyee]

NICS doesn't contain any stolen gun data. NCIC contains data from every stolen gun that is entered into the NCIC system.

Excuse me.
NOT EVERY STOLEN ITEM< GUN OR OTHER IS IN NCIC.

Is that clear enough for you now?:banghead:

'Good faith' is a defense against a criminal charge of receiving stolen property, it does not entitle you to the property.

You cannot convey a valid ownership of stolen property, you had no valid ownership interest.

Last man standing is SCREWED.

The details vary by state, but what state allows the possessor of stolen property to convey ownership?

Once the legal chain of ownership is broken, every subsequent change in ownership is invalid, there is no valid ownership to convey.

If you are so sure post the statute (and surrounding case law) that allows valid transfer of ownership.
My guess is you will have a tough time finding it.

 

[baylorattorney]

Good faith is much more than a criminal defense. You are thinking a bit too narrow there.


Mark, esquire

 

[andrewstorm]

good faith

Is having your local sheriff run the guns,ask him if its lawful for you to purchase them without permit or safety inspection,then ask him if its necessary to run the serial no.s,.....its called covering your ass,and the sheriff knows you like to deal legitimately............and if there hot you haven't bought them yet......no loss..............remember if its to good to be true its probably not true blue

 

[brickeyee]

Good faith is much more than a criminal defense. You are thinking a bit too narrow there.

Maybe in Louisiana but not in Virgina, Washington, DC, and New Hampshire.

Possession of stolen property is, in and of itself a crime.
Having purchased it in good faith is a defense against that criminal charge.

It does not grant you ownership of the property since the title to stolen property cannot be conveyed. The seller does not own the property if it has been stolen.

If this is not the case in LA, I will mark it as a place I would never want to set foot in again.

Art. 524. Recovery of lost or stolen things.

The owner of a lost or stolen movable may recover it from a possessor who bought it in good faith at a public auction or from a merchant customarily selling similar things on reimbursing the purchase price.

I think you are construing this way to tightly.

It sets up condition that "public auction or from a merchant customarily selling similar things" must give up the item if the original owner asserts a claim.

It does NOT say others sellers cannot cannot be forced to return the property, it just establishes a duty for "public auction or from a merchant customarily selling similar things" to return the item.

 

[BlisteringSilence]

I'm sure records of checks are kept so I doubt many LE are going to stick their necks out so joe public can feel good about his deal. Any LE please chime in.

Call your local department's non-emergency number and ask nicely. We have a deputy that will happily run it for you.