PDA

View Full Version : Something that occured to me about selling guns to prepare for a divorce...


BigFatGuy
02-05-2012, 9:34 PM
Just a question, nothing pending or imminent:

I see some people give advice to sell your guns off quick before a divorce, with the unspoken intent to buy it back after the divorce is over.

Whether that advice is smart or not, a lot of people think it's a good idea, and something occured to me:

What about the person who bought the guns with the full intention of selling them back on request? Is that a straw purchase? Is he in trouble if he is called into divorce court and admits that he is really just a repository to hide assets?

I've seen plenty about why it's bad for the person getting divorced, but nothing about the other person involved.

dantodd
02-05-2012, 9:38 PM
I might be missing something. Are you insinuating that the buyer paid less than actual value for the guns? I am of the belief that it would be a straw purchase as long as all the transactions go through an FFL others disagree.

njineermike
02-05-2012, 9:39 PM
I believe selling things off before a divorce to avoid community property issues is already illegal all by itself.

QQQ
02-05-2012, 9:47 PM
If you keep yer trap shut, nobody can prove why you sold off the guns.

Helpful_Cub
02-05-2012, 9:51 PM
It can't be a straw purchase because the holding person still has to go through the DROS to do the transfer.

axel4488
02-05-2012, 10:18 PM
I believe selling things off before a divorce to avoid community property issues is already illegal all by itself.

The amount the woman gets out of a divorce just shows how prejudice the courts are towards males in domestic situations.


As for your predicament, I would probably keep what you are doing on the low since some people might say you are cheating your soon to be ex out of her "fair share"

nick
02-05-2012, 10:29 PM
One might be better off selling the guns outright. He'll need the money during the divorce...

Librarian
02-05-2012, 10:36 PM
I believe selling things off before a divorce to avoid community property issues is already illegal all by itself.

Theoretically, that could be an issue.

But since a very common legal procedure is to get a restraining order, and, once issued, that order requires the restrained person to sell his guns to an FFL or surrender them to the police, NOT selling them in advance of such an order is a serious hit to the value, thus diminishing that possible community property.

If a division of 'community property' were to become necessary, certainly some of the proceeds from the sale of those guns which were presumptively community property might be included in what might be divided.

wildhawker
02-05-2012, 11:41 PM
There are serious Family Law implications in the scenario discussed in the OP. Consult a lawyer who specializes in California family law for specific legal advice before doing anything related to selling/transferring/otherwise disposing of property (even if you're just thinking about a divorce).

-Brandon

6172crew
02-06-2012, 12:33 AM
If you/he/her owned the firearms before they were married they wouldnt get them as far as I was told by my lawyer. The ones you bought while married might be something he/she is entitled to half of the value.

I am not a lawyer so go get one but this is what I got out of my lawyer. I made it easier for them buy trading in the cars I owned before marriage in on machine guns, only people who know what I owned back then was the tax man. Im divorced now and she isn't getting anything from me except child support when she needs it. I admit my ex wasn't too bad about trying to take things that were mine and I gave her everything except the firearms, an xbox and a imac and a truck load of ammo.:chris:

wikioutdoor
02-06-2012, 7:07 AM
A large part of it is that women can get greedy. My dad told my sister that she gets all my moms jewelry and that I get all the guns when they go.

My moms jewelry could probably buy my dads guns 10x over but my sister still wants half of them even though she won't even let my brother in law keep 1 in the house. For what just to pawn them off at fire sale prices for a little extra money ?

When a women is willing to sell off her cherished items jewelry ect for a divorce then she can expect the same from her husband with his guns.

Lost.monkey
02-06-2012, 7:39 AM
I finished up my divorce in 2010 in california, and it sucked.

One of the things I noticed: upon initial filing, a temporary restraining order goes into effect (as stated on the paperwork) preventing either party from concealing assets or liquidating property. If you were to sell off all of your guns and not split the proceeds 50/50 (providing the other party has agreed to selling the guns vice holding interest in the guns themselves), you could be held in contempt of court. Discovery can turn this up pretty easily, and may only rely on the opposing party's word as evidence.

Play fair, pay your share. In the grand scheme of things, you can always get the guns back. Your time, not so much.

Steve1968LS2
02-06-2012, 7:43 AM
A large part of it is that women can get greedy. My dad told my sister that she gets all my moms jewelry and that I get all the guns when they go.

My moms jewelry could probably buy my dads guns 10x over but my sister still wants half of them even though she won't even let my brother in law keep 1 in the house. For what just to pawn them off at fire sale prices for a little extra money ?

When a women is willing to sell off her cherished items jewelry ect for a divorce then she can expect the same from her husband with his guns.

Nothing is sadder than watching people fight over inheritance.. they become like rabid animals.

My mom made me sole beneficiary of her estate.. and she told me to dole it out based other's attitudes. Act like a vulture and get nothing, act like a civilized human and you'll get what she wanted you to have.

When my Grandfather passed away they swooped in like Locust and stipped the place. All of his reloading equipment that I was supposed to get, gone. All of his firearms that we used to shoot, gone. Luckily I knew where he hit his 308 hunting rifle and the .22 he taught me to shoot with so they are in my safe. Relatives that didn't give a crap about him when he was alive came out to get "thier share".. sad

compulsivegunbuyer
02-06-2012, 7:49 AM
A restraining order seems par for the course these days. I would dump them off and shut my mouth.

My moms jewelry could probably buy my dads guns 10x over but my sister still wants half of them even though she won't even let my brother in law keep 1 in the house. For what just to pawn them off at fire sale prices for a little extra money

Then you get half the jewlery.

Zartan
02-06-2012, 7:54 AM
My mom made me sole beneficiary of her estate.. and she told me to dole it out based other's attitudes. Act like a vulture and get nothing, act like a civilized human and you'll get what she wanted you to have.
How did that end up going?

When my Grandfather passed away they swooped in like Locust and stipped the place. All of his reloading equipment that I was supposed to get, gone. All of his firearms that we used to shoot, gone. Luckily I knew where he hit his 308 hunting rifle and the .22 he taught me to shoot with so they are in my safe. Relatives that didn't give a crap about him when he was alive came out to get "thier share".. sad
Geeez. Do you ever talk to the locust now? What a shame.

Steve1968LS2
02-06-2012, 8:00 AM
How did that end up going?

Geeez. Do you ever talk to the locust now? What a shame.

I'm happy to report she is still alive.. and I would would rather have it that way than to have all of her "stuff"

No, I don't talk to any of that side of the family, my time is worth more to me than that. lol

Money does strange things to people.

PCPerks
02-06-2012, 8:15 AM
I guess it depends on the divorce. Every time I hear about nasty divorces I cringe, but mine was so smooth and straightforward we didn't even use lawyers. I guess since we were both unhappy and wanted out, it made things easier to divide everything up. If you can keep the angry emotions out of it as much as possible, it makes things much easier to divide up. Plus if you're generous on some things, it makes it easier for them to be generous to you on what you want. An example, if your wife picked out all her favorite furniture in the house, let her have it and you take all your guns, etc. It can all be worked out. I just wouldn't do anything that could remotely be considered illegal. Because your wife knows you have guns, and if all of a sudden they are gone before the divorce, that WILL come up.

As for the vultures that come out for a death in the family, there is nothing I hate more. I'm unfortunately going to be having to deal with that in the near future as the executor of a fairly large estate. Apparently I'm the only person who would rather have him around then any of his money. So I'm getting some good instruction on what he wants me to do after he's gone, and there are going to be some pissed off people that I'll have to deal with.

compulsivegunbuyer
02-06-2012, 9:04 AM
My grandfather died in 1987. My uncle wanted to take all his guns to the police station, and it was alot of guns. No one wanted them. I convinced my mom to put her foot down, and I got them all. But the other stuff, grandmas jewlery, silver, antiques, what a nightmare. You realy see peoples true colors when a little money is involved.

Steve1968LS2
02-06-2012, 10:41 AM
As for the vultures that come out for a death in the family, there is nothing I hate more. I'm unfortunately going to be having to deal with that in the near future as the executor of a fairly large estate. Apparently I'm the only person who would rather have him around then any of his money. So I'm getting some good instruction on what he wants me to do after he's gone, and there are going to be some pissed off people that I'll have to deal with.

After my mom saw how people acted when her husband died she wrote everyone out of the will and made me executor since I didn't seem interested in the "stuff" and would rather have the person around like you stated.

Moto
02-06-2012, 10:44 AM
Threads like this remind me why marrage sucks.

E Pluribus Unum
02-06-2012, 10:48 AM
the thing that is funny as the idea that 1 could prepare for a divorce... all that's needed for you you to prepare is a costco sized bottle of ky jelly!

Munk
02-06-2012, 10:58 AM
Theoretically, that could be an issue.

But since a very common legal procedure is to get a restraining order, and, once issued, that order requires the restrained person to sell his guns to an FFL or surrender them to the police, NOT selling them in advance of such an order is a serious hit to the value, thus diminishing that possible community property.

If a division of 'community property' were to become necessary, certainly some of the proceeds from the sale of those guns which were presumptively community property might be included in what might be divided.

I've seen so very many family law horror stories. Selling the guns with the intention of recovering them later is secondary to just not having guns in your ownership anymore during a potentially contentious time. ROs and TROs issued based on lies, or based on the mere fact of ownership of firearms.

POLICESTATE
02-06-2012, 11:07 AM
I would sell mine off to avoid losing them in case a TRO was filed.

OTOH, what if you file a TRO first? Can they file one on you back?

Preemptive TRO?

IntoForever
02-06-2012, 11:08 AM
Vultures and vampyres come out of the woodwork when money is involved.

Could one set up an LLC or trust for all the assets to avoid loosing everything in a divorce?

duggan
02-06-2012, 11:39 AM
When my uncle died my parents drove to Texas to pack up all his belongings, clean his house (rental), tie up all the loose ends so to speak. They did this on their own dime and no one offered to help (dad's side is kinda shady). The wolves came over when my parents were at work and started going through all the stuff deciding who got what, funny thing is they "forgot" to include my dad in the process. My dad had put his guns in the safe so they didn't get their grubbies on those though. I was like 13 maybe 14 at the time, and was raised to respect adults especially family so when they came over I let them in the garage where everything was stored. After I saw how they were acting I locked the door from the garage to the house, turned the TV up loud and ignored the knocks.

As for the divorce issue I sold a few of my guns (kept the ones my dad gave me), the money from those went to pay for my ex-wifes lawyer, she (the lawyer) didn't complain.

tyrist
02-06-2012, 11:41 AM
I believe selling things off before a divorce to avoid community property issues is already illegal all by itself.

You would be committing fraud when you signed the affidavit.

DublTap
02-06-2012, 11:47 AM
Although it was many years ago, here is how I handled my firearms during a divorce. I filed for divorce after only two years of marriage. The court ordered me to pay alimony during the proceeddings that exceeded my disposable income. I pawned ALL of my guns with a local pawn shop with the agreement that I would pay the interest monthly until I could buy them back. This provided a "fair market value" for the firearms. I paid ALL of the proceeds to my wife to catch up on alimony payments. After the divorce was final, I redeemed my firearms. There was no restraining order, but if there had been, I had no firearms in my possession. There was no issue of a straw purchase since the transaction was only between me and the pawn shop. I had to go through the regular FFL wait period to get my firearms back.

dreamerof1
02-06-2012, 12:01 PM
Threads like this remind me why marrage sucks.

Funny, threads like this remind me how happy I am that I chose my wife well! :)

PCPerks
02-06-2012, 12:54 PM
Funny, threads like this remind me how happy I am that I chose my wife well! :)

I agree, but had to learn the hard way. First wife was a practice round. Wife number two is definitely a keeper. She wants to get into trap shooting so is probably getting a new O/U for our anniversary. :D

Munk
02-06-2012, 2:25 PM
I would sell mine off to avoid losing them in case a TRO was filed.

OTOH, what if you file a TRO first? Can they file one on you back?

Preemptive TRO?

Everyone can file RO's against everyone. Justifying them is the point of contention.

Decoligny
02-06-2012, 2:34 PM
I believe selling things off before a divorce to avoid community property issues is already illegal all by itself.

Even in California, if the property is strictly for the use of one person, it is not considered community property.

Your clothing is not community property, unless you share your wardrobe.

Her Jewelry is not community property unless it was bought with the intent purpose of being an investment.

His Firearms are not community property, unless they were intended for use by both the husband and the wife.

The main point of contention when dealing with selling firearms when dealing with a divorce, is the restraining order issue. If she gets pissed off, and wants to force him to get rid of all his guns, she takes out a restraining order. He must get rid of the guns very quickly, by either selling them through an FFL or by turning them over to the police.

If the husband has already arranged for a friend to take legal possession of his firearms, with a stipulation in the sales contract stating that the husband retains the right to purchase them back when he becomes eligible to own firearms again, and all transactions go through an FFL, then there is no legal problem that I can see.

loose_electron
02-06-2012, 2:58 PM
Consult with a family law attorney.

To much speculation and muddled information here.

Get a lawyer, and expect a 50% split of everything unless there was
a pre-nuptial agreement.

Did I say:
Get a lawyer!

POLICESTATE
02-06-2012, 3:46 PM
Everyone can file RO's against everyone. Justifying them is the point of contention.

So if Person A files a TRO on Person B, then B has to surrender their guns.

If Person B then files a TRO on Person A then A also has to surrender their guns?

Is that right?

Or if Person A files on B first then B can't file on A so long as the TRO against B is still in effect?