Help with PA travel information

[Pilot321]

I try to avoid places like NY and Canada, but sometimes it is unavoidable, especially for business travel. In situations like these, I just leave my gun at home to avoid any potential legal issues. I know it is not what you want to hear, and it does feel naked to someone used to having a gun, but it may be the best alternative. It is only a week or two, right?

[tl_3237]

[/i]

what about this section? I am NOT promoting any sort of mis-interpretation or inventive interpretation of any laws, but it seems to me that I, being a person with my state's LTCF, should be able to take possession of a firearm from another with in possession of a proper permit from their state.

That offered, how about leaving it at a LGS in PA for an overnight stay? Opinions on the legality of that?

Nonetheless such a transfer is a serious Federal violation.

"Lawful sporting purpose" has been narrowly defined by the ATF in a few earlier interpretations - some dealing with firearm imports. There is no clear definition. Some 'sporting purposes' are: hunting, formal target shooting (bullseye, skeet, trap). Some 'non-sporting purposes': combat shooting, practical shooting, plinking.

None of the known definitions apply in the OP's scenario.

Transfers between the OP and an FFL is not restricted but there are issues as to whether that temporary transfer is recorded in the bound book and thus necessitating a formal transfer (including PICS/NICS) background checks both ways (not possible for out-of-state handguns). It is conceivable that the firearm can be left with a licensed gunsmith for a 'cleaning' or other maintenance work without the necessity for formal transfers.

An example of ATF's convoluted logic(?):

"Department of the Treasury Study on the Sporting Suitability of Modified Semiautomatic Assault Rifles (4/98)"
http://www.atf.gov/files/firearms/in...ult-rifles.pdf

Excerpt from chapter "Scope of 'Sporting Purposes'" http://www.atf.gov/files/firearms/in...tic-rifles.pdf

In addition, the FEP specifically addressed the informal shooting activity of "plinking" (shooting at randomly selected targets such as bottles and cans) and determined that it was not a legitimate sporting purpose under the statute. The panel found that, "while many persons participate in this type of activity and much ammunition was expended in such endeavors, it was primarily a pastime and could not be considered a sport for the purposes of importation. . . ." (See exhibit 6.)

Finally, the 1989 report determined that the term sporting purposes should be given a narrow reading incorporating the traditional rifle sports of hunting and organized competitive target shooting. In addition, the report determined that the statute's reference to sporting purposes was intended to stand in contrast with military and law enforcement applications. This is consistent with ATF’s interpretation in the context of the Striker-12 shotgun and the USAS-12 shotgun. It is also supported by the court’s decision in Gilbert Equipment Co. v. Higgins.

We received some comments urging us to find "practical shooting" is a sport for the purposes of section 925(d)(3).48 Further, we received information showing that practical shooting is gaining in popularity in the United States and is governed by an organization that has sponsored national events since 1989. It also has an international organization.

While some may consider practical shooting a sport, by its very nature it is closer to police/combat-style competition and is not comparable to the more traditional types of sports, such as hunting and organized competitive target shooting. Therefore, we are not convinced that practical shooting does, in fact, constitute a sporting purpose under section 925(d)(3).49 However, even if we were to assume for the sake of argument that practical shooting is a sport for the purposes of the statute, we still would have to decide whether a firearm that could be used in practical shooting meets the sporting purposes test. In other words, it still would need to be determined whether the firearm is of a type that is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to practical shooting and other sporting purposes.50

Moreover, the legislative history makes clear that the use of a military weapon in a practical shooting competition would not make that weapon sporting: “if a military weapon is used in a special sporting event, it does not become a sporting weapon. It is a military weapon used in a special sporting event.”51 While none of the LCMM rifles are military weapons, they still retain the military feature of the ability to accept a large capacity military magazine.

[Texan51]

Thanks for all the information. While I have a strong belief in the 2nd amendment, I also have a strong belief in existing laws even though some choose a narrow interpretation when it comes to guns. I will be leaving my gun at home and hope in the event something happens I can survive the time it takes to notify authorities and their response. I guess I should just stay in Texas!!

[Truckman]

Consider carrying a non lethal defense item.
Situational awareness will do a lot to keep you safe.
Once at the falls you're with a lot of other people and probably fairly safe, just traveling to and from might be an issue.
Just keep your eyes open and if something doesn't feel right get away from there.
Don't let the gas tank get too low, so you have options on where to stop.
I would recommend crossing to the Canadian side, I think their displays and museums are better, but you will need a passport, and possibly a birth certificate. No defense items in Canada, not even pepper spray.
It's hard to see everything in one day. Just look at one of the tourist sites and a map of the area.

[knight0334]

Rent a storage locker or a bank vault box within PA or another peaceable journey state and store your gun there before crossing into hostile territory.

Problem solved...

[knight0334]

Nonetheless such a transfer is a serious Federal violation.

"Lawful sporting purpose" has been narrowly defined by the ATF in a few earlier interpretations - some dealing with firearm imports. There is no clear definition. Some 'sporting purposes' are: hunting, formal target shooting (bullseye, skeet, trap). Some 'non-sporting purposes': combat shooting, practical shooting, plinking.

None of the known definitions apply in the OP's scenario.

Transfers between the OP and an FFL is not restricted but there are issues as to whether that temporary transfer is recorded in the bound book and thus necessitating a formal transfer (including PICS/NICS) background checks both ways (not possible for out-of-state handguns). It is conceivable that the firearm can be left with a licensed gunsmith for a 'cleaning' or other maintenance work without the necessity for formal transfers.

An example of ATF's convoluted logic(?):

Only if the firearm turn-around is within the same day's shop hours. Otherwise the FFL must add the gun to his bound book, which after that both federal and state transfer laws apply for the "owner" to get his gun back. ...which with him not being a PA resident he could not take possession without the handgun being first sent a TX FFL.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/guns...nd-book-record

Q: Does a gunsmith need to enter in a permanent “bound book” record every firearm received for adjustment or repair?
If a firearm is brought in for repairs and the owner waits while it is being repaired or if the gunsmith is able to return the firearm to the owner during the same business day, it is not necessary to list the firearm in the “bound book” as an “acquisition.” If the gunsmith has possession of the firearm from one business day to another or longer, the firearm must be recorded as an “acquisition” and a “disposition” in the permanent "bound book" record.

[tl_3237]

Only if the firearm turn-around is within the same day's shop hours. Otherwise the FFL must add the gun to his bound book, which after that both federal and state transfer laws apply for the "owner" to get his gun back. ...which with him not being a PA resident he could not take possession without the handgun being first sent a TX FFL.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/guns...nd-book-record

Though I agree with the entry into the bound book, I still believe that using a gunsmith is not a formal transfer and potentially viable for the OP because:

1. There is no 4473 involved when the owner retrieves his firearm after 'repairs';

2. There is no NICS check on return;

3. Although 18 USC 922(b)(3) normally would prevent an FFL from delivering a handgun to a non-resident recipient, the exception is given:

18 USC 922(a)(2)(A) this paragraph and subsection (b)(3) shall not be held to preclude a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector from returning a firearm or replacement firearm of the same kind and type to a person from whom it was received;

Also:

(P24) A firearm is delivered to a
licensee by an unlicensed individual
for the purpose of repair. Is the
return of the repaired firearm subject
to the requirements of the
Brady law? Would the transfer of a
replacement firearm from the licensee
to the owner of the damaged
firearm be subject to the
requirements of the Brady law?

Neither the transfer of a repaired
firearm nor the transfer of a replacement
firearm would be subject to the
requirements of the Brady law. Furthermore,
the regulations provide that
a Form 4473 is not required to cover
these transactions. However, the
licensee’s permanent acquisition and
disposition records should reflect the
return of the firearm or the transfer of
a replacement firearm.

FEDERAL FIREARMS REGULATIONS REFERENCE GUIDE 2005