Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
12/6/2019 7:27:02 PM
Posted: 9/30/2014 1:34:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/30/2014 1:36:32 PM EST by mutiger]
Every year I attend a shooting holiday for the St. Patricks day holiday weekend. It is a big event with family and friends. There is shooting all day then drinking later that night. Can I bring my class III weapons and have drinks afterwards?

My storage options while drinking are to lock them in my car or put them in the landowners home. Are either of these options legal.? If I am drinking someone in my group who hasn't been, will drive me (nfa items would be in the trunk and I would be hypothetically intoxicated in the passenger seat) Is that legal? What can or can't I do in this situation as I'm wondering if it is worth the trouble to take them at all.
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 1:55:36 PM EST
Originally Posted By mutiger:
Every year I attend a shooting holiday for the St. Patricks day holiday weekend. It is a big event with family and friends. There is shooting all day then drinking later that night. Can I bring my class III weapons and have drinks afterwards?

My storage options while drinking are to lock them in my car or put them in the landowners home. Are either of these options legal.? If I am drinking someone in my group who hasn't been, will drive me (nfa items would be in the trunk and I would be hypothetically intoxicated in the passenger seat) Is that legal? What can or can't I do in this situation as I'm wondering if it is worth the trouble to take them at all.
View Quote


Depends on your state law.



Link Posted: 9/30/2014 2:08:13 PM EST
Individually owned, or on a trust? Makes a difference in the answer...
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 2:31:18 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
Individually owned, or on a trust? Makes a difference in the answer...
View Quote


SBR and suppressor are individually owned and MG is on a trust. I am the only trustee on the the trust though if that matters.
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 2:41:11 PM EST
The state is Missouri
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 2:55:09 PM EST
I can't speak to the strict legalities of it, but I sure wouldn't do it given that. Yes, you technically still would be in possession of your NFA items in your drunken state - but should you have an encounter with law enforcement I don't think it would go well for you.
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 4:46:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/30/2014 5:24:31 PM EST by dbrowne1]
...
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 5:36:09 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
I can't speak to the strict legalities of it, but I sure wouldn't do it given that. Yes, you technically still would be in possession of your NFA items in your drunken state - but should you have an encounter with law enforcement I don't think it would go well for you.
View Quote


Please explain why?
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 7:32:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CKxx:


Please explain why?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CKxx:
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
I can't speak to the strict legalities of it, but I sure wouldn't do it given that. Yes, you technically still would be in possession of your NFA items in your drunken state - but should you have an encounter with law enforcement I don't think it would go well for you.


Please explain why?


Unless you have a perfect encounter with the perfect LEO, it would not be a stretch to say that an impaired owner can't possibly be in control of his NFA goodies. Add to that the fact that some LEOs still think SBRs and suppressors are illegal - much less anything full auto - and I wouldn't want to be relying on someone else to articulately state my case as to why they are in fact legal items that are owned legally. Whether it was a BS call or not, it could make life very expensive and painful while OP fights to secure the return of his items and ensure he doesn't wind up with a record, restricted ability to own firearms, or worse. I guess I am just risk-averse enough to not put myself in a situation that could easily go sidewise in a hurry.
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 8:53:43 PM EST
Translation
"If you play stupid games, be prepared to win stupid prizes"
Let your conscience be your guide.
Link Posted: 9/30/2014 9:50:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
I can't speak to the strict legalities of it, but I sure wouldn't do it given that. Yes, you technically still would be in possession of your NFA items in your drunken state - but should you have an encounter with law enforcement I don't think it would go well for you.
View Quote

That's because there are no legalities of it.

Link Posted: 9/30/2014 10:43:17 PM EST
Being in possession of an firearm while intoxicated is NOT a crime in Missouri. Once upon a time it was but the law was changed and now reads that you must be 1 - intoxicated, 2 - in possession of, and 3 - negligently use the firearm for it to be a crime.

This question always comes up when I teach ccw classes. While guns and alcohol obviously don't mix, it is not a criminal act to be in possession while drinking / intoxicated.

As for your other questions on storage etc, I can not speak to those situations but am curious to the answer. I would think that would more be the jurisdiction of the ATF and their opinion.
Link Posted: 10/1/2014 1:18:07 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/1/2014 9:11:05 PM EST by mutiger]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cbr954:
Being in possession of an firearm while intoxicated is NOT a crime in Missouri. Once upon a time it was but the law was changed and now reads that you must be 1 - intoxicated, 2 - in possession of, and 3 - negligently use the firearm for it to be a crime.

This question always comes up when I teach ccw classes. While guns and alcohol obviously don't mix, it is not a criminal act to be in possession while drinking / intoxicated.

As for your other questions on storage etc, I can not speak to those situations but am curious to the answer. I would think that would more be the jurisdiction of the ATF and their opinion.
View Quote



Very good to hear. I assume that doesn't change if the firearms are NFA or not? In Missouri, your car is an extension of your home so it is legal for those without CCW to have loaded weapons in the car. If it is not illegal to be in possession of weapons while being intoxicated (locked in the trunk), I would assume I should be GTG here? It seems no one has a concrete answer, so unless I hear one I will refrain from bringing them. However, if what you say is true, I think I would be in the clear to have them locked in the trunk even if i am in anyway intoxicated and also in said car.

Link Posted: 10/1/2014 6:55:56 PM EST
If they are locked in your trunk I can't see what the problem would be. Otherwise you could argue that my gun safe is also "unsafe storage when I am intoxicated."
Link Posted: 10/1/2014 8:35:38 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:


Unless you have a perfect encounter with the perfect LEO, it would not be a stretch to say that an impaired owner can't possibly be in control of his NFA goodies. Add to that the fact that some LEOs still think SBRs and suppressors are illegal - much less anything full auto - and I wouldn't want to be relying on someone else to articulately state my case as to why they are in fact legal items that are owned legally. Whether it was a BS call or not, it could make life very expensive and painful while OP fights to secure the return of his items and ensure he doesn't wind up with a record, restricted ability to own firearms, or worse. I guess I am just risk-averse enough to not put myself in a situation that could easily go sidewise in a hurry.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
Originally Posted By CKxx:
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
I can't speak to the strict legalities of it, but I sure wouldn't do it given that. Yes, you technically still would be in possession of your NFA items in your drunken state - but should you have an encounter with law enforcement I don't think it would go well for you.


Please explain why?


Unless you have a perfect encounter with the perfect LEO, it would not be a stretch to say that an impaired owner can't possibly be in control of his NFA goodies. Add to that the fact that some LEOs still think SBRs and suppressors are illegal - much less anything full auto - and I wouldn't want to be relying on someone else to articulately state my case as to why they are in fact legal items that are owned legally. Whether it was a BS call or not, it could make life very expensive and painful while OP fights to secure the return of his items and ensure he doesn't wind up with a record, restricted ability to own firearms, or worse. I guess I am just risk-averse enough to not put myself in a situation that could easily go sidewise in a hurry.


Extending that logic, no NFA owner could ever be drunk again, even at home. You can be in control of the NFA item, intoxicated, and still have it secured, IMO.
Link Posted: 10/1/2014 9:10:23 PM EST
There's no problem with what you proposed in the OP.
There will be no illegal transfer of the NFA items, and there are no storage requirements for NFA items.
Link Posted: 10/1/2014 9:36:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/1/2014 9:37:04 PM EST by cbr954]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FredMan:


Extending that logic, no NFA owner could ever be drunk again, even at home. You can be in control of the NFA item, intoxicated, and still have it secured, IMO.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FredMan:
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
Originally Posted By CKxx:
Originally Posted By JDMnAR:
I can't speak to the strict legalities of it, but I sure wouldn't do it given that. Yes, you technically still would be in possession of your NFA items in your drunken state - but should you have an encounter with law enforcement I don't think it would go well for you.


Please explain why?


Unless you have a perfect encounter with the perfect LEO, it would not be a stretch to say that an impaired owner can't possibly be in control of his NFA goodies. Add to that the fact that some LEOs still think SBRs and suppressors are illegal - much less anything full auto - and I wouldn't want to be relying on someone else to articulately state my case as to why they are in fact legal items that are owned legally. Whether it was a BS call or not, it could make life very expensive and painful while OP fights to secure the return of his items and ensure he doesn't wind up with a record, restricted ability to own firearms, or worse. I guess I am just risk-averse enough to not put myself in a situation that could easily go sidewise in a hurry.


Extending that logic, no NFA owner could ever be drunk again, even at home. You can be in control of the NFA item, intoxicated, and still have it secured, IMO.


That logic is exactly why Missouri law was changed. There was a case where a gentleman had a very bad reaction to prescription medication and while the police and paramedics were assisting him, the police officer noticed a gun sitting on an end table in the same room. He arrested the man for possession while intoxicated. So as you say by that logic, ANY firearm owner could be considered of violating the law while intoxicated in their own home. The legislature took action and included the "use in a negligent manner" language.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 2:16:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cbr954:
Being in possession of an firearm while intoxicated is NOT a crime in Missouri. Once upon a time it was but the law was changed and now reads that you must be 1 - intoxicated, 2 - in possession of, and 3 - negligently use the firearm for it to be a crime.

This question always comes up when I teach ccw classes. While guns and alcohol obviously don't mix, it is not a criminal act to be in possession while drinking / intoxicated.

As for your other questions on storage etc, I can not speak to those situations but am curious to the answer. I would think that would more be the jurisdiction of the ATF and their opinion.
View Quote

IMHO, this oversimplifies MO law dangerously.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 5:53:04 PM EST
Depends on state law. There are some states where you can carry them loaded while loaded and others where a sip disqualifies you. Federal law is silent on the matter. Of course, I advise you to be completely sober while interacting with any firearms but that isn't the law everywhere.
Link Posted: 10/2/2014 10:26:20 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/2/2014 10:27:10 PM EST by cbr954]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kcgunesq:

IMHO, this oversimplifies MO law dangerously.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By kcgunesq:
Originally Posted By cbr954:
Being in possession of an firearm while intoxicated is NOT a crime in Missouri. Once upon a time it was but the law was changed and now reads that you must be 1 - intoxicated, 2 - in possession of, and 3 - negligently use the firearm for it to be a crime.

This question always comes up when I teach ccw classes. While guns and alcohol obviously don't mix, it is not a criminal act to be in possession while drinking / intoxicated.

As for your other questions on storage etc, I can not speak to those situations but am curious to the answer. I would think that would more be the jurisdiction of the ATF and their opinion.

IMHO, this oversimplifies MO law dangerously.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


How so? Not enough lawyer speak for you?. Here is the actual text for all to see. It seems pretty simplified to me without the insertion of opinion.

571.030. 1. A person commits the crime of unlawful use of weapons if he or she knowingly:

(5) Has a firearm or projectile weapon readily capable of lethal use on his or her person, while he or she is intoxicated, and handles or otherwise uses such firearm or projectile weapon in either a negligent or unlawful manner or discharges such firearm or projectile weapon unless acting in self-defense;
Top Top