I also don't worry too much about violating the GFSZA as any violation of the Act by an otherwise law-abiding gun owner would be unlikely to be prosecuted as it would have a good chance of being overturned under US v. Lopez (and there may also now be a challenge under Heller v. DC), and no prosecutor likes to have a case overturned. I do like to be on the right side of the law whenever possible though, and getting a non-resident permit from the state I visit most often (Virginia) is a relatively painless step as VA is shall-issue.brianko wrote:Be aware that there is a burden on the prosecutor's behalf to prove that the firearm "has moved in or otherwise affects interstate commerce." A previous poster in another thread posted some legal cites that he believes makes it easy for the government to prove that a firearm "has moved" in interstate commerce (simply by way of being shipped from manufacturer). From my readings on the background of this, I don't believe this applies backwards in time to every individual component of said firearm that might have crossed state lines, but rather applies to how the firearm arrived at the location it was in when it was confiscated. Then again, IANAL, and like you, I'd rather not be the test case. But as I stated previously, I'm not going to lose sleep over this.
However, in my case (and in most I would imagine) it would be extremely simple for the prosecutor to prove that the gun had moved in interstate commerce. I'm a Texas resident and have purchased all of the guns I own in Texas, most from FFLs. If I take one of those firearms to another state and carry it there, I have moved that firearm in interstate commerce. This could be verified by doing a trace on the serial number and showing that it was purchased by me from a dealer in a state other than the one where I carried it.