TRX
Member
What happens if you're not a resident of a "state", such as people living in the District of Columbia, the various posessions or territories, or Puerto Rico?
Do US citizens living abroad lose their 2nd amendment rights?
- Thread starter BPaddict
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 2nd amendment atf ffl living abroad rkba
- Status
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
They have US addresses of residence. No problem.
But to the original poster's question, no, if you are not a resident of the US I don't know of any way to lawfully purchase a firearm. That does stink, but when we start writing laws about gun ownership and possession (thinking about 1934, 1968, 1986, etc.) that's the sort of (maybe?) unintended consequence that comes into being.
When you consider all of the day-to-day sorts of stupidity and hassles gun owners deal with, or for that matter, of all the "loopholes" and work-arounds we sometimes take advantage of, because of how thoughtlessly most gun laws are constructed, the question of denying RKBA to a US citizen who has no US residence is a pretty small "floater" in the proverbial punchbowl which is just chock full of them.
But to the original poster's question, no, if you are not a resident of the US I don't know of any way to lawfully purchase a firearm. That does stink, but when we start writing laws about gun ownership and possession (thinking about 1934, 1968, 1986, etc.) that's the sort of (maybe?) unintended consequence that comes into being.
When you consider all of the day-to-day sorts of stupidity and hassles gun owners deal with, or for that matter, of all the "loopholes" and work-arounds we sometimes take advantage of, because of how thoughtlessly most gun laws are constructed, the question of denying RKBA to a US citizen who has no US residence is a pretty small "floater" in the proverbial punchbowl which is just chock full of them.
SwaneeSR
Member
An interesting problem.
The short answer is you still have your 2nd Ammendment rights as a US citizen. However, you can not exercise this right without establishing residency in the US.
Interesting that this affects many thousands of citizens and yet has not routed through the legal system and been resolved. I would think that an OUS (outside the US) category would need to be created or better yet a mechanism created to allow someone like the OP to elect a state of residence for this specific purpose. I do not mean that the OP becomes a resident, but that this is allowed as an alternative to normal residency for purposes of purchasing a firearm.
The other issues such as storage could be resolved and are really out of scope for this discussion. For example, a secure storage locker could be rented by the OP and firearms legally stored in a safe manner until his next visit.
Swanee
The short answer is you still have your 2nd Ammendment rights as a US citizen. However, you can not exercise this right without establishing residency in the US.
Interesting that this affects many thousands of citizens and yet has not routed through the legal system and been resolved. I would think that an OUS (outside the US) category would need to be created or better yet a mechanism created to allow someone like the OP to elect a state of residence for this specific purpose. I do not mean that the OP becomes a resident, but that this is allowed as an alternative to normal residency for purposes of purchasing a firearm.
The other issues such as storage could be resolved and are really out of scope for this discussion. For example, a secure storage locker could be rented by the OP and firearms legally stored in a safe manner until his next visit.
Swanee
TimSr
Member
I guess the right to bear arms and the right to buy arms are not the same, which is kind of silly when you think about it logically. When you end up in a situation where it's legal for you to possess your gun collection, but unlawful for you to purchase another, you just shake your head. This is an area of the law that needs to be reformed.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
There are SO MANY areas of US gun law that really should be reformed just to make them logical and consistent -- I wouldn't hold my breath on this one.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
And the unfortunate truth is that without a legal state of residence mundane questions like storage become pretty important. Yes, you "should" be able to buy firearms and have them with you as you visit the country, but without a state you really do put anyone whom you leave/store them with in jeopardy.
There are ways around that, like buying a gun when you arrive in country and then selling it to a dealer just before you leave, but the practicalities of having and keeping a "collection" as someone who doesn't live in the US are pretty daunting.
There are ways around that, like buying a gun when you arrive in country and then selling it to a dealer just before you leave, but the practicalities of having and keeping a "collection" as someone who doesn't live in the US are pretty daunting.
Disclaimer: I might be wrong, I'm not giving legal advice, and I'm not telling anyone to commit a felony. Just brain storming for further discussion. I never had to deal with this type of issue or the like, so I have not educated myself about it.
Shouldn't the OP look into what ever particular state residency laws are? Is there a way to have double residency?
Shouldn't the OP look into what ever particular state residency laws are? Is there a way to have double residency?
rodregier
Member
The earlier quoted SAF case link quoted makes it quite clear than the judicial branch doesn't see a problem to be solved under the current legislative structure.
I can't see this being resolved without federal legislative remedy. Since the constituency affected by this issue is diffuse and likely low percentage of voting turnout, I can't see federal politicians being interested in solving it.
The overall trend in firearm legislation is towards more federal restrictions, not less.
All of this is an unforeseen consequence of GCA68 with it's focus on clamping down on interstate commerce in firearms.
Just as an interesting data point of the broader picture, I'm led to believe there are 500,000 plus US Citizens residing in Canada, for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_diaspora#Number_of_U.S._citizens_living_abroad
I can't see this being resolved without federal legislative remedy. Since the constituency affected by this issue is diffuse and likely low percentage of voting turnout, I can't see federal politicians being interested in solving it.
The overall trend in firearm legislation is towards more federal restrictions, not less.
All of this is an unforeseen consequence of GCA68 with it's focus on clamping down on interstate commerce in firearms.
Just as an interesting data point of the broader picture, I'm led to believe there are 500,000 plus US Citizens residing in Canada, for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_diaspora#Number_of_U.S._citizens_living_abroad
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
It isn't actually a matter of what any state's residency definition is or requirements are. It's a matter of the federal law description of what constitutes residency for the purposes of purchasing a firearm.
Read Frank's excellent post 24 for that information. If he is not in a state for the purpose of making a home there, he is not a resident of that state.
That can be a good thing, as you can be, by that definition, a resident of multiple states if you live in/have a home in each of them for a portion of the year. Or it can be a hindrance, as in this case, if you want to buy firearms but DON'T live in that state or have any intention of making a home there.
The OP answered his own question with this statement. By admitting that these will only be "visits", he does not have the rights of a resident to purchase firearms.
The OP can claim permanent residency back in the US by living here a minimum amount of days, which varies by state. But trying to establish residency in both US and EU will open him up to dual taxation.
Theohazard
Member
No, this is incorrect. Just like Sam1911 pointed out in his response to Praxidike's question, state residency rules are completely irrelevant here. This whole thread is about federal law and what it says about the residency requirements to buy a firearm.CWL said:
Go back and read both my and Frank Ettin's posts that cite the applicable law. Basically, to be a resident you need to be currently living or intending to live in that state. This means that the moment the OP sets foot in a US state with the intention of living in that state, he's a resident there for the purpose of buying a firearm per federal law.
Obviously, state laws might add in extra requirements when buying firearms, but when it comes to the federal requirements to buy a firearm, the only definition of residency used is the federal one that we previously cited.
TimSr
Member
I agree on that, but this particular issue adversely affects active military in particular, which on it's face is an absurdity considering what they do and who employees them.
Even when you are legitimately a resident of multiple states, getting acceptable documentation that the dealer will accept can be a challenge. This is because most often the proof of residence as well as identification is a state-issued drivers license, but most states take your old license when you apply for one in your new state.
Napalm Candy
Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2014
- Messages
- 9
While I think you are correct the OP is SOL he does have good grounds for a lawsuit against the us government and the GCA as his constitutional rights are being violated the amount of time they are violated is not relevant.
rodregier
Member
Post #3 is a link to the lawsuit on the topic assisted by the SAF. Court ruled for the gov't. SAF tried a number of different grounds, all shot down.
Unless a clever legal mind comes up a novel approach or a different venue, I can't see another court challenge being successful.
Unless a clever legal mind comes up a novel approach or a different venue, I can't see another court challenge being successful.
Handloader109
Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2014
- Messages
- 107
Your rights are clearly suspended, not lost. Establish a state of residence and buy your guns when you come back to the US permanently. If you don't come back permanently, then you can't legally buy firearms. If I were going to come back, I would sure put them on a layaway plan, or pay for them upfront like we all do for suppressors. Take possession once you come back to the US. And you should be able to shoot them during visits if the gun store has a range, just like suppressor, they haven't left the control of the Lgs and are not transferred to you yet.
Librarian
Member
Dearth v Lynch (was Holder)
See also http://michellawyers.com/dearth-v-holder/, the documents page for the case maintained by the lawyers, and http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/0...l-challenging-atf-gun-ownership-restrictions/
I don't yet see the case scheduled for trial, but navigating court web sites is not something I often do. I won't pay for PACER.
As of June 23, 2015. http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/12-5305/12-5305-2015-06-23.html#
See also http://michellawyers.com/dearth-v-holder/, the documents page for the case maintained by the lawyers, and http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/0...l-challenging-atf-gun-ownership-restrictions/
I don't yet see the case scheduled for trial, but navigating court web sites is not something I often do. I won't pay for PACER.
Last edited:
Acera
Member
First 'residence' is not a clearly defined legal term, you need to be referencing 'domicile'.
The expat and RV community deal with this all the time, their forums will be a wealth of knowledge.
I have an acquaintance who he and his wife live on a large sailboat and have not stayed in one place more than a month or two in years (getting to be almost decades now). No telling what side of what ocean they are currently on. I have dropped them an email about the service they use to deal with legal issues. I know for all legal purposes they live in Texas. He has a secure, climate controlled storage unit outside Houston where all the stuff they own that is not on the boat is stored, this includes his firearms, family pictures, a big clock, and other things IIRC.
They employ a service that provides them with a non-P.O.Box address here in Texas. With that, they get their voter registration, drivers licenses, car insurance, health insurance, his/hers retirement checks, investment services, bank accounts, library cards, etc. through that address, just as if they live there 24/7/365. Any legal issues dealing with a probate, hiring a lawyer, etc. are all in Texas. (Texas was a good choice since we don't have income taxes here). Their mail gets forwarded wherever they wish. I know some of these places give you a lot of options, forward the mail, hold the mail, scan and email the mail, etc.
If I get a response back I will forward the name of the company to you. I would think that if you do a search in non-income tax states, you might find a number of businesses that do exactly the same thing.
The expat and RV community deal with this all the time, their forums will be a wealth of knowledge.
I have an acquaintance who he and his wife live on a large sailboat and have not stayed in one place more than a month or two in years (getting to be almost decades now). No telling what side of what ocean they are currently on. I have dropped them an email about the service they use to deal with legal issues. I know for all legal purposes they live in Texas. He has a secure, climate controlled storage unit outside Houston where all the stuff they own that is not on the boat is stored, this includes his firearms, family pictures, a big clock, and other things IIRC.
They employ a service that provides them with a non-P.O.Box address here in Texas. With that, they get their voter registration, drivers licenses, car insurance, health insurance, his/hers retirement checks, investment services, bank accounts, library cards, etc. through that address, just as if they live there 24/7/365. Any legal issues dealing with a probate, hiring a lawyer, etc. are all in Texas. (Texas was a good choice since we don't have income taxes here). Their mail gets forwarded wherever they wish. I know some of these places give you a lot of options, forward the mail, hold the mail, scan and email the mail, etc.
If I get a response back I will forward the name of the company to you. I would think that if you do a search in non-income tax states, you might find a number of businesses that do exactly the same thing.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
That's tricky though Acera, because federal GUN law doesn't make any reference to "domicile" at all, and specifically -- in very clear terms -- defines what constitutes the RESIDENCY requirement to buy a firearm.
The actual text of the law has been quoted here in post 24. Note that the law which governs the purchase of firearms says, "An individual resides in a State if he or she is present in a State with the intention of making a home in that State."
It doesn't say, "...the place where he gets his mail," or "...the place where he stores things in a rental locker," or "...the place where he's hired a forwarding service." Actually, it doesn't even say that simply owning property in a state is sufficient.
I've no doubt that this is indeed how some folks who live a nomadic lifestyle do handle such things, and that with a (service-provided) address and a state-issued form of ID an FFL will not think twice about selling that person a firearm. But it does sound like it would be not strictly following the law.
The actual text of the law has been quoted here in post 24. Note that the law which governs the purchase of firearms says, "An individual resides in a State if he or she is present in a State with the intention of making a home in that State."
It doesn't say, "...the place where he gets his mail," or "...the place where he stores things in a rental locker," or "...the place where he's hired a forwarding service." Actually, it doesn't even say that simply owning property in a state is sufficient.
I've no doubt that this is indeed how some folks who live a nomadic lifestyle do handle such things, and that with a (service-provided) address and a state-issued form of ID an FFL will not think twice about selling that person a firearm. But it does sound like it would be not strictly following the law.
Sam basically nailed it, but sometimes saying things in a different way can help.
That is not necessarily true. For the purposes of GCA68, it is a clearly defined legal term. It is defined at 27 CFR 478.11 (see post 24).Acera said:
That is not necessarily true. It is not true for the purposes of GCA68. For the purposes of GCA68 Texas does not appear to be their State of Residence as defined at 27 CFR 478.11.Acera said:
That's all very nice, but it doesn't do a thing to help the OP buy a gun in compliance with federal law (GCA68).Acera said:
Acera
Member
To the mods who posted above. You point out that not everything the in the law regarding firearms is clearly defined. I think those types of things have been discussed before in the past, that is why you must look beyond the world of firearms sometimes for legal answers.
http://domicile.uslegal.com/distinctions-between-domicile-and-residence/
My friend would not have any issue purchasing a firearm legally when he is in Texas. He has all the documents he needs to do that. Non-P.O.Box Address, drivers license with that address on it, etc. If it becomes a question of intent to stay in Texas, I think over the years he as demonstrated that through his personal records, banking, insurance, etc.
Question best suited for a lawyer specializing in this type of situation. And I say, that (expat, RVers, etc.) community would be a better resource to find that attorney than many others. They deal with this type of stuff all the time.
He has not replied to my email yet, but a quick search found a number of places that do the same thing.
If the OP is serious, he might spend some time checking them out.
.
http://domicile.uslegal.com/distinctions-between-domicile-and-residence/
My friend would not have any issue purchasing a firearm legally when he is in Texas. He has all the documents he needs to do that. Non-P.O.Box Address, drivers license with that address on it, etc. If it becomes a question of intent to stay in Texas, I think over the years he as demonstrated that through his personal records, banking, insurance, etc.
Question best suited for a lawyer specializing in this type of situation. And I say, that (expat, RVers, etc.) community would be a better resource to find that attorney than many others. They deal with this type of stuff all the time.
He has not replied to my email yet, but a quick search found a number of places that do the same thing.
If the OP is serious, he might spend some time checking them out.
.
Don't tell a lawyer (me) to look for legal answers. That's what I did to earn my living for more than 30 years, and that's what I've done here.Acera said:
You have not done that. You've linked to a general, informational article on a legal topic. The article was written for laypersons to give them a basic understanding of some general, legal principles.
But we're not dealing with matters generally. We're dealing with a specific issue under a specific law -- the federal Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA68). What a real lawyer does when dealing with a specific issue under a specific law is look first at legal authority directly applicable to that law.
So in post 24 I cited and quoted the definition of "State of Residency" set out in the regulations of ATF and applicable directly to the question of what is a person's State of residency for the purpose of buying a gun in conformity with GCA68. In that post I also cited, linked to, and quoted an ATF Ruling directly addressing the question.
For the reasons I've outlined, and based on your friend's situation as you've described it, you're quite possibly wrong. Based on your friend's situation as you described it, Texas does not appear to be your friend's State of residency as defined at 27 CFR 478.11 for the purposes of GCA68.Acera said:
Yes, contacting a lawyer is always a good idea. While I am a lawyer, I am not your lawyer, your friend's lawyer or the OP's lawyer. But this situation involves federal guns laws, specifically GCA68, so a lawyer consulted needs to be, or needs to make himself, familiar with that body of law -- including the case of Dearth v. Lynch referenced in post 43.Acera said:
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Frank said:
This hits on something I was pointing out up in post 45. There's a pretty darned good chance that, if you get off your boat or out of your RV or off the plane from your home abroad, and walk into a gun shop with the driver's license, mailing address, and other documentation the forwarding service (for lack of knowing the exact name for these) provided to you, the FFL dealer isn't going to stop and dig to find out if these represent your HOME, where you actually live or intend to live, or if they all point to the (again, for lack of knowing the correct name for this entity) "shell address" your service provides for you to have mail sent to. As long as it isn't a P.O. Box, and looks pretty much like a normal address, I imagine very few dealers would ever give it a second look.
Of course, if it says, "Jim Smith, c/o, Bill's Mail Forwarding Service for Wandering Nomads, 123 Street Rd, Sometown, TX, USA" that probably would put up a red flag. But as long as it looks legit and everything seems consistent, they probably won't know that this is not your lawful residence, under GCA'68.
That doesn't mean that you are giving a legally accurate and acceptable answer to box 2 of the 4473 form.
In fact, it isn't much different from handing the dealer a fake ID and getting away with it.
And there is a difference between getting away with committing a crime and doing things legally. When you commit a crime, you bet your freedom, your future, and your fortune on not getting caught.Sam1911 said:
In the ATF publication, Federal Firearms Licensee Quick Reference and Best Practices Guide (ATF P 5300.15), describes satisfactory identification as follows (pg 6, emphasis in bold in original, emphasis in italics added):
If the identification proffered by the transferee lists an address which is not his residence, i. e., where he actually lives, he has made a material misrepresentation for the purpose of buying a gun in violation of 18 USC 922(a)(6), which crime is punishable by up to five years in federal prison. Eighteen USC 922(a)(6) reads as follows:
Last edited:
- Status