Minor transporting rifle. Go or no go?

[Ibefuz]

I was wondering if its legal for my 17yr old brother to transport a rifle from his house to my house via car?

Thanks in advance.

[Flintlock Tom]

Yes.
No minimum age for transporting a rifle.
Unloaded.
In a case or out of sight is good, too, but not required by law.

[XVIga_Rob]

As long as he does not stop at school, he should be OK.

[WDE91]

My suggestion would be
unloaded
in a case
in a locked trunk
If asked to search obviously say no

[AK all day]

Tagged

[CSACANNONEER]

He can legally own a long gun at birth so, why wouldn't he be able to transport one?

[AK all day]

Wait, what cannoneer??

[CSACANNONEER]

There is no age restriction on owning long guns. The age restriction on owning (not possessing) handguns is 18 years old. Of course, there are age restrictions on purchasing firearms but, that's different.

[paul0660]

As long as he does not stop at school, he should be OK.

Stopping isn't the issue. He could, if the rifle were in a locked case, take it into the principal's office, legally. Unlocked, he cannot get within 1000 feet of the school without violating the Federal Gun Free Zone law (not the California law. If not for the Federal law he could sling it over his shoulder and go talk to the principal).

All unloaded of course. There could also be a "school policy" which is not law but could affect employees and students.

[AK all day]

When you say "own", what exactly do you mean?

[Hakoomay]

"own" as in to have possession of the firearm

[AK all day]

So, having possession meaning transporting, shooting, cleaning, and storing? All under the age of 18?

[CSACANNONEER]

So, having possession meaning transporting, shooting, cleaning, and storing? All under the age of 18?

OWN like in it is his or her personal property just like shoes, cars, a bag of skittles, etc. Yes, not only can a minor do all of the above but, he or she might be required to keep sole possession of it under federal law.

Here's one example: My stepson manufactured a rifle, for his own personal use, before he turned 18. He choose not to put any identifying marks on it. Since there is no manufacturer's info or SN, he is not legally allowed to transfer it (which includes loaning it) to anyone. So, legally, he is responsible for storing it safely. He can store it in one of my safes but, he can not give it to me to store it for him.

[XVIga_Rob]

Stopping isn't the issue. He could, if the rifle were in a locked case, take it into the principal's office, legally. Unlocked, he cannot get within 1000 feet of the school without violating the Federal Gun Free Zone law (not the California law. If not for the Federal law he could sling it over his shoulder and go talk to the principal).

All unloaded of course. There could also be a "school policy" which is not law but could affect employees and students.

You are correct. However, I would not reccomend doing it.

[mrdd]

Here's one example: My stepson manufactured a rifle, for his own personal use, before he turned 18. He choose not to put any identifying marks on it. Since there is no manufacturer's info or SN, he is not legally allowed to transfer it (which includes loaning it) to anyone. So, legally, he is responsible for storing it safely. He can store it in one of my safes but, he can not give it to me to store it for him.

Do you have a cite for this? I agree that there is no requirement for an individual without a manufacturers license to mark any firearm they build. There is also no prohibition against them transferring it to another individual.

The problem comes in that an FFL is is required to ensure that an item being transferred is correctly identified on the 4473 so transferring it to another through an FFL is problematic without appropriate markings.

However, there is no place in the law that says that you cannot loan such an item to another. Of course, the loan must conform to other laws, for example, not to exceed 30 days in California.