<p>Yup. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, <strong>its controller</strong> moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a permanent he or she doesn’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>(Emphasis mine.)</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-02-15T21:01:14.727Z
If you couldn't, spells like Act of Treason wouldn't be nearly as powerful. There's few greater feelings than stealing your opponent's big creature he hasn't even used yet to hit him with it, then sacrifice it on him. Hint: don't do that to your wife the first time you play with her, she won't play for weeks. [citation: personal experience].
corsiKa
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-01-25T02:10:26.353Z
[Grab the Reins](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=49435) would be the poster child for this answer. As it does both parts and does it intentionally.
LovesTha
CC BY-SA 4.0
2013-02-15T07:07:59.093Z
2018-08-23T20:09:36.777Z
2018-08-23T20:09:36.777Z
ikegami
<p>A creature is placed "under my control until the end of turn" through a sorcery spell.</p>

<p>Do I have the option of sacrificing said creature if I cast a "sacrifice a creature" instant, or have a creature or enchantment that has a sacrifice ability?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-02-15T14:17:32.277Z
A scenario that confused me once in actual play was stealing a creature equipped with Blazing Torch from my opponent.  Although the creature now controlled by me had the "Tap, Sac Blazing Torch" ability, it couldn't actually use it, because that would be sacrificing a permanent controlled by another player.  Much to my disappointment...
thesunneversets
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-02-15T18:02:41.083Z
Gets even worse with older equipment cards where there are frequently abilities of the equipment itself, as opposed to newer ones that are generally worded to grant an ability to the creature!
Affe
<magic-the-gathering>
Can I sacrifice a creature that is only temporarily under my control?
user4907
# Can I sacrifice a creature that is only temporarily under my control?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-02-15)

A creature is placed "under my control until the end of turn" through a sorcery spell.

Do I have the option of sacrificing said creature if I cast a "sacrifice a creature" instant, or have a creature or enchantment that has a sacrifice ability?

**Tags:** magic-the-gathering

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: A scenario that confused me once in actual play was stealing a creature equipped with Blazing Torch from my opponent.  Although the creature now controlled by me had the "Tap, Sac Blazing Torch" ability, it couldn't actually use it, because that would be sacrificing a permanent controlled by another player.  Much to my disappointment...  
> **username_2**: Gets even worse with older equipment cards where there are frequently abilities of the equipment itself, as opposed to newer ones that are generally worded to grant an ability to the creature!  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2013-02-15. Score: 21

Yup.

> 701.16a To sacrifice a permanent, **its controller** moves it from the battlefield directly to its owner’s graveyard. A player can’t sacrifice something that isn’t a permanent, or something that’s a permanent he or she doesn’t control. Sacrificing a permanent doesn’t destroy it, so regeneration or other effects that replace destruction can’t affect this action.

(Emphasis mine.)

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: If you couldn't, spells like Act of Treason wouldn't be nearly as powerful. There's few greater feelings than stealing your opponent's big creature he hasn't even used yet to hit him with it, then sacrifice it on him. Hint: don't do that to your wife the first time you play with her, she won't play for weeks. [citation: personal experience].  
> **username_5**: [Grab the Reins](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=49435) would be the poster child for this answer. As it does both parts and does it intentionally.  

---

