Posted: 4/18/2013 4:07:56 AM EDT
|
So, here are some hypotheticals:
-You have an "issue" along the lines of wife/GF thinks you're depressed or something along those lines You get an involuntary committal (17a-503) to the ER...let's say it's without merit. Now your weapons have been transferred out on a dps-3 to a local ffl. I'm wondering if the transfer/authorization # will be denied. Assault weapons ban prohibits transfer. Possible 5 year denials for psych issues...thought I saw that in there. -divorce or mere accusation of a domestic issue. Ex-parte protective order gets served (minimal cause needed initially), your weapons get transferred in the same manner. Can you get them back? (assault weapons) A few were posting that they couldn't get their AR's back from the dealer (consignment) after the ban. Would it be better to turn them in to PD? No DPS-3 in that case....ownership preserved? What are your thoughts? Wondering if a "trust" would be more secure. Other named owners could take possession. |
|
Quoted:
Wondering if a "trust" would be more secure. Other named owners could take possession. WIth regard to non-AWs, a trust would be a viable option. Unfortunately though, you cannot now transfer any AWs to a trust so it would provide no protection for those firearms. |
|
Quoted:
ALWAYS have a friend with a safe on speed dial if you have kids or a SO. Also, possible to have a AW "in repair" at a lic gunsmith for a very long time? No DPS-3 needed for that. They got rid of the "give to friend option in the statute". If you're served, you only have two choices: ffl or PD. So, when you register, there's strict accountability of what you own. WIth regard to non-AWs, a trust would be a viable option. Unfortunately though, you cannot now transfer any AWs to a trust so it would provide no protection for those firearms.]
Why is that? |
|
WIth regard to non-AWs, a trust would be a viable option. Unfortunately though, you cannot now transfer any AWs to a trust so it would provide no protection for those firearms.]
Why is that? You are legally transferring from one entity to another. Same as me transferring to you. No no |
|
Quoted:
to transfer a firearm into the trust other than adding it to the schedule A of the trust what more do you need to do? I transfered my SBR's to my trust simply by adding them to the schedule A A trust is a legal entity. It is the same as transferring from one person to another. Schedule A is just a legal document showing what items reside in said trust. |
|
Quoted:
What if one simply moves the guns out of state, then sets up a trust there, and put said guns into it? Would that mean you couldn't bring the guns back with you, and would have to leave them in that state? Don't the laws of CT stop at the CT border? The laws of CT do stop at the border and do not prevent a transfer to another entity while outside the state (caveat: interstate firearms transfers must go through an FFL) but the new law states that you must own the AW prior to the effective date of the law (4/4/2013). So even doing a transfer of an AW outside the state is ineffective to protect it since the transferee cannot now possess it in or import it into CT. |
| It's so dumb that our US constitutional rights end at the CT state border. I wish Congress would do something to block states from restricting gun rights the way CT has, but we would need a supermajority in both houses just to keep Obimbo from vetoing such a measure. |
|
They're going to screw over a lot of people this way and I'm sure its how liberals wanted it. Its basically at the discretion of a police officer or a hospitol to decide if you should get evaluated or commited when responding to a complaint. Many times when police respond to a complaint they opt to take the subject/person to get evaluated rather than arresting them, or many times its the only option police have other than doing nothing. I believe that being forced to get evaluated and being commited are the same thing, because many mental hospitols or psychiatric sections of regular hospitols in the state have it so you cannot sign out for at least 3 days after being commited inpatient voluntarily or involuntarily. This would cause you to lose your guns and most people would not get them back. There may be a process afterwards where you could go before a judge and ask for a decision on the matter. Keep in mind that the majority of judges in the state have the liberal mindset and are extremely hesitant or reluctant to return guns. The old law was much different as it required a court to order you to a hospitol before you had your gun rights suspended. With the new law (no court order requirements) it will be abused much more after it goes in effect Oct 1st. |