SCOTUS: Felons can legally sell or transfer firearms

[PistolBob]

Earlier this week the US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that convicted felons can sell or transfer their firearms through a third party instead of relinquishing the guns to government custody. The ruling was in favor of former US Border Patrol agent Tony Henderson, who wished to turn over his collection of 19 firearms to his wife after he was convicted of selling marijuana in 2006.

SCOTUS RULES on Gun Transfer by Felon

Justices agreed that third parties, such as gun dealers, would have to make proper assurances to maintain custody of the firearms and keep them away from the felon.

 

[pudly]

Seems like a reasonable decision. The felons aren't being told that they can buy or keep firearms. However, they aren't paying yet another penalty of losing their property without compensation and/or surrendering them to the government for possible destruction. They also made clear that whoever the party was that was selling the firearms could not do it as a sham so that the felon could still effectively have access/control of the firearms.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Unanimously? Really? Sotomayer too?! Wow.

 

[T.Lex]

Dupe.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...63690-supreme-court-grants-cert-gun-case.html

 

[MandyGal]

Hm, I don't know about this. I mean Tony for example - while I don't think marijuana possession should be a felony by any means, this means that maybe more dangerous felons can simply leave their firearms to family (like his wife) which means he still has access to them. I don't think Tony is a problem by any means, but this still seems like a slippery slope.

 

[pudly]

Hm, I don't know about this. I mean Tony for example - while I don't think marijuana possession should be a felony by any means, this means that maybe more dangerous felons can simply leave their firearms to family (like his wife) which means he still has access to them. I don't think Tony is a problem by any means, but this still seems like a slippery slope.

Welcome to INGO, MandyGal. The justices addressed this point, indicating that "effectively" leaving the guns available to the felons was not an option.

Kagan further added that the pertinent issue was not whether the felon has a say in where the firearms go, but if they had the ability to use or direct the use of the guns after the transfer. Justices agreed that third parties, such as gun dealers, would have to make proper assurances to maintain custody of the firearms and keep them away from the felon.

“A felon cannot evade the strictures of [the law] by arranging a sham transfer that leaves him in effective control of his guns,” Kagan wrote.

 

[KLB]

Dupe.
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...63690-supreme-court-grants-cert-gun-case.html

In all fairness, that one was about them taking the case. This one is about the decision.

Looks like a good decision any way.

 

[T.Lex]

It is a rare event that they take a case, then do not decide it.

But, it is not unprecedented - certiorari improvidently granted, or cert granted but held over until another term.