The place for general discussion about guns, gun (and gun parts) technology discussion, gun reviews, and gun specific range reports; and shooting, training, techniques, reviews and reports.
It's a problem specific to CT due to a requirement that all handgun transfers since ~1989 (I think) have required an authorization number (read: background check and permission slip). Hypothetical example: Person from out of state moves in with friends here in CT and brings firearms with them. Upon moving out of town, said firearms remain with friends in CT. No one involved thinks anything of it until years later when the parties no longer have contact. If any of the guns is a pistol that has any record of ownership outside of CT post-1989, there is no way to legally be in possession of that gun without a CT state police authorized transfer. Admittedly, the likelihood of this ever causing any legal trouble is very small, but it would be nice to not have to dispose of the guns in order to eliminate the risk.
So if I understand correctly, you really need to know if the gun was ever registered in another state (one that (a) registers guns and (b) would share that information with CT), correct? Otherwise you could claim that the gun was inside CT since before 1989 (assuming it's old enough to have been) and no one can prove otherwise.
Is it really only an issue if the possessor of the gun decides to transfer it to someone else? Or is possession of the gun problematic?
MarkD wrote:
So if I understand correctly, you really need to know if the gun was ever registered in another state (one that (a) registers guns and (b) would share that information with CT), correct? Otherwise you could claim that the gun was inside CT since before 1989 (assuming it's old enough to have been) and no one can prove otherwise.
Is it really only an issue if the possessor of the gun decides to transfer it to someone else? Or is possession of the gun problematic?
That's pretty much it. I believe possession alone could be problematic if all the conditions you mentioned could not be met. I think it would only become an issue if something else went wrong first (arrest, defensive shooting, etc). Even then I'm having trouble thinking of what they would be charged with. Can you tell we have too many gun laws in CT?
"Unattended children will be given an espresso and a puppy"
Since this seems to be a special situation for Connecticut, with substantial penalties for getting it wrong, I recommend lawyering up with some mouthpiece in CT that knows the local gun laws. a local Bar Association should be able to help refer you.
The use of the word "but" usually indicates that everything preceding it in a sentence is a lie.
E.g.:
"I believe in Freedom of Speech, but". . .
"I support the Second Amendment, but". . .
--Randy