Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-21-2019, 2:25 PM
tirogers tirogers is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Is a CA Resident legally aloud to make a Polymer 80 Glock in another state?

New member here, I've been reading and reading this forum. The information and people here are great! Thanks everyone in advance.

My theoretical question:

Can a CA resident legally travel to another state (Nevada) build a Polymer 80 (glock), then legally travel to other states where it is legal to possess with it. Then prior to re-entering CA destroy the lower and dispose of any LCM?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-21-2019, 2:29 PM
frankm's Avatar
frankm frankm is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Occupied Vespuchia
Posts: 10,280
iTrader: 26 / 100%
Default

In!
__________________
RKBA Clock: soap box, ballot box, jury box, cartridge box (moved right 11/10/18, with Kavanaugh and Newsom we sit on the edge of a knife)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-21-2019, 7:39 PM
turnip_lord turnip_lord is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 3
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Pretty sure that California has no say over what you do with your life entirely outside the state.

I am not aware of any federal laws that would restrict non-prohibited people from making otherwise legal firearms wherever they want. Buying / selling is a different story.

Some states may have their own restrictions, though. Washington is cracking down on "ghost guns", for example.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-21-2019, 9:13 PM
jeremiah12 jeremiah12 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,654
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

When I researched this years ago, I believe I found it to be illegal. I had found a place in NV that I could use their CNC machine to mill out an 80% AR receiver. This was a few months before the ATF put a stop to the CNC milling at shops where you just pushed a button.

The issue was obtaining a firearm out of state. I did a quick search and cannot find it now. The ATF requires that a person follows the laws of the state they are a resident in when obtaining a firearm. It does not matter how that firearm is obtained. It can be purchased, received as a gift, exchanged for services rendered, or even made. The moment you do any work on it and it can be considered a firearm, you have obtained a firearm.

CA does not allow CA residents to obtain firearms from out of state unless they are first sent to a CA based FFL.

I can be wrong, so I will wait for someone to chime in who has more knowledge.

As an aside, my son just accepted a job in Illinois. I was reading about the FOID card. I was surprised to learn that after he gets his, he can buy handguns or long guns in five nearby states. He just has to go to a FFL in the state, show his FOID card, pay his money, and pass the NICS check. Many in Illinois who live close to a border state do this. Illinois has a 1 day wait for long guns and a 3 day wait for handguns. The border states do not have the waiting periods. With his FOID card, he can even buy from a private seller in one of those five states.
__________________
Anyone can look around and see the damage to the state and country inflicted by bad politicians.

A vote is clearly much more dangerous than a gun.

Why advocate restrictions on one right (voting) without comparable restrictions on another (self defense) (or, why not say 'Be a U.S. citizen' as the requirement for CCW)?

--Librarian
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-21-2019, 9:21 PM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,134
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tirogers View Post
New member here, I've been reading and reading this forum. The information and people here are great! Thanks everyone in advance.

My theoretical question:

Can a CA resident legally travel to another state (Nevada) build a Polymer 80 (glock), then legally travel to other states where it is legal to possess with it. Then prior to re-entering CA destroy the lower and dispose of any LCM?
IANAL, just a retired LEO who prepared a lot of cases for trial.

I don't see where any California law would be violated by a California resident personally manufacturing a handgun in a different state, so long as the firearm remains out of California.

If the California resident were to import the handgun into California without going through the PC 27585 process, then there would be felony violation.

However such manufacture could easily be construed as a violation of federal law. 18 USC 922(a)(1)(A) makes it illegal for a resident of one state to receive a firearm in another state in "interstate or foreign commerce." The dictionary definition of "receive" includes "to come into possession of" which would be the case if a person manufactured their own firearm. Prior to Gonzales v Raich, the popular understanding of "interstate commerce" was that an object had to cross state lines, but Gonzales has since held that purely intrastate conduct could affect interstate commerce.

I don't know of any case law on the point, but I wouldn't conclude that the OP's hypothetical would be legal from a federal viewpoint.
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Last edited by RickD427; 05-21-2019 at 9:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-21-2019, 9:31 PM
kingransom kingransom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Ventura county
Posts: 451
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Why not just buy a Glock here? Seems stupid to buy and build a gun just to destroy it unless you have something to hide and shouldn't be in possession in the first place

Last edited by kingransom; 05-21-2019 at 10:05 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-21-2019, 9:48 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 38,598
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremiah12 View Post
As an aside, my son just accepted a job in Illinois. I was reading about the FOID card. I was surprised to learn that after he gets his, he can buy handguns or long guns in five nearby states. He just has to go to a FFL in the state, show his FOID card, pay his money, and pass the NICS check. Many in Illinois who live close to a border state do this. Illinois has a 1 day wait for long guns and a 3 day wait for handguns. The border states do not have the waiting periods. With his FOID card, he can even buy from a private seller in one of those five states.
This is quite weird, and I wonder if it has not been mangled.

18 USC 922 (a))3) and (a)(5) and (b)(3)
Quote:
18 U.S. Code § 922. Unlawful acts

(a) It shall be unlawful—
...
(3) for any person,

other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector

to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business)

any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State,

except that this paragraph
(A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State,

(B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and

(C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;
...

(5) for any person
(other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm

to any person (other than a licensed importer,licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector)

who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the transferor resides;

except that this paragraph shall not apply to

(A) the transfer, transportation, or delivery of a firearm made to carry out a bequest of a firearm to, or an acquisition by intestate succession of a firearm by, a person who is permitted to acquire or possess a firearm under the laws of the State of his residence, and

(B) the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes;
...

(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver—
...

(3) any firearm to any person who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the licensee’s place of business is located,

except that this paragraph

(A) shall not apply to the sale or delivery of any rifle or shotgun to a resident of a State other than a State in which the licensee’s place of business is located if the transferee meets in person with the transferor to accomplish the transfer, and the sale, delivery, and receipt fully comply with the legal conditions of sale in both such States (and any licensed manufacturer, importer or dealer shall be presumed, for purposes of this subparagraph, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have had actual knowledge of the State laws and published ordinances of both States), and

(B) shall not apply to the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes;
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922

That is, the IL FOID holder - or any IL resident not otherwise prohibited from owning a gun - can legally go to another state and buy a long gun [(b)(3)], but may not buy and take possession of a handgun out of state.

ETA the "five nearby states' sounds like the old Federal 'adjacent states for long guns' thing, which changed years ago to 'any state for long guns'; state laws mess that up, e.g. California.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Last edited by Librarian; 05-21-2019 at 11:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-22-2019, 4:18 AM
Marauder2003's Avatar
Marauder2003 Marauder2003 is offline
S/360 Changed The Game
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: NV
Posts: 954
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

The FOID card is changing.

https://abc7chicago.com/major-overha...nting/5302191/
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-22-2019, 4:21 AM
jeremiah12 jeremiah12 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,654
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
This is quite weird, and I wonder if it has not been mangled.
I just checked again and I did mangle it. I have too much floating around my head from all the research I have do to help my son with his big move.

IL state law allows the purchase of long guns by IL residents from a FFL in the 5 adjoining states by IL residents with a FOID card without having the purchase go through an IL FFL. That is popular with hunters, no wait to pick up their rifles.

It does not cover handguns. Handguns have to be shipped to an IL FFL first. Most FFLs in those states will sell the gun and send it to a IL FFL and because the distances are close, most offer next day delivery.

I was trying to figure all of this out because my son wanted to leave most of his guns here and bring them to IL later. I learned that he has to have them with him when he applies for his FOID card. He has 60 days after obtaining his DL ti apply for his FOID card. He declares the guns he brought into state then.

After that, any gun he brings into state has to follow IL law, so I would have to send them to an IL FFL.

I told him that is not happening. We are driving his guns together and not leaving his truck unattended the entire trip. That means we camp out, no motels. My CCW covers all of the states in-between. In IL it is back to unloaded in an enclosed container, no lock is needed.

The town he is moving to has a population of 20,000 and 3 gun stores as well as a handful of table top FFLs. I plan to visit the gun stores.

My son has an IOU from when he graduated UC Davis with his Masters in Animal Science. I was going to buy him the gun he has always wanted but is off roster in CA, a Jericho 941. They are hard to come by but I have found a few sources. I am hoping to find a FFL that will hold it for him until he gets his FOID card.
__________________
Anyone can look around and see the damage to the state and country inflicted by bad politicians.

A vote is clearly much more dangerous than a gun.

Why advocate restrictions on one right (voting) without comparable restrictions on another (self defense) (or, why not say 'Be a U.S. citizen' as the requirement for CCW)?

--Librarian
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-22-2019, 9:02 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,737
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

RickD427, Doesn't 18 U.S.C. 922 (a) (1) (A) concern persons in the business?

Quote:
18 U.S. C. 922 (a) It shall be unlawful—(1) for any person—
(A) except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce;
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-22-2019, 9:15 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,134
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
RickD427, Doesn't 18 U.S.C. 922 (a) (1) (A) concern persons in the business?
My bad. I read through 18 USC 922 too quickly. The correct subsection would be (a)(9).
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-22-2019, 12:56 PM
morthrane morthrane is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 805
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
I don't see where any California law would be violated by a California resident personally manufacturing a handgun in a different state, so long as the firearm remains out of California.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
I don't know of any case law on the point, but I wouldn't conclude that the OP's hypothetical would be legal from a federal viewpoint.
IANAL either, but I've noticed that the federal level (BATFE et. al.) seems to have the view that if its illegal in your home state, then you can't have it. But that seems to be more limited to things like NFA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
My bad. I read through 18 USC 922 too quickly. The correct subsection would be (a)(9).
IIRC, that's the subsection that was one of the theorectical felonies that the Mother Jones reporter may have commited, when the colorado-residing "journalist" went to california and built an 80% AK. (that also looked like it was an illegal AW, and then illegally disposed, etc....)

Mance v. Holder tried to remove the out of state pickup of handguns prohibition, but ultimately failed.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-22-2019, 5:44 PM
tirogers tirogers is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default 18 USC 922 (a)(9)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
My bad. I read through 18 USC 922 too quickly. The correct subsection would be (a)(9).

"(9) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, who does not reside in any State to receive any firearms unless such receipt is for lawful sporting purposes."

Is the above 18 USC 922 (a)(9) you are referring it? If so, then what if hypothetically it was to use it for "lawful sporting purposes"?

Also the hypothetical person is a resident of CA ("who does not reside in any State") so not sure 18 USC 922 (a)(9) would apply????

Please forgive me, I'm very new to CA VS Fed. law and properly comprehending them with 100% confidence.

The laws are obvious intended to be confusing!!!!

Last edited by tirogers; 05-22-2019 at 6:29 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-22-2019, 9:46 PM
Quiet's Avatar
Quiet Quiet is offline
retired Goon
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Bernardino County
Posts: 24,083
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tirogers View Post
If so, then what if hypothetically it was to use it for "lawful sporting purposes"?
Currently, the Feds (BATFE, US State Department) have determined "lawful sporting purposes" to be limited to hunting and target shooting.
In regards to "target shooting"...
Practical action shooting (3-gun, 2-gun, IPSC, IDPA, etc) is not considered a form of target shooting by the Feds.
Feds seem to limit it to bullseye target shooting and trap & skeet shotgun shooting.

Which means self-defense, practical target shooting, and plinking do not meet the Feds determination of "lawful sporting purpose".
__________________


"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).

Last edited by Quiet; 05-22-2019 at 9:49 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-26-2019, 12:16 PM
Mountain Max's Avatar
Mountain Max Mountain Max is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 563
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Just throwing my hat in the ring on this one...

You also have the option of setting up a business entity in another state, then assigning a resident of that state as an officer of your corporation which can take delivery of firearms and fill out the 4473 on behalf of your company. Read the fine print on the 4473, perfectly legal to own guns in other states through a corp, just have to add the corp info and attach it to the 4473 (just don't bring them back into CA)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-26-2019, 1:14 PM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,134
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tirogers View Post
"(9) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, who does not reside in any State to receive any firearms unless such receipt is for lawful sporting purposes."

Is the above 18 USC 922 (a)(9) you are referring it? If so, then what if hypothetically it was to use it for "lawful sporting purposes"?

Also the hypothetical person is a resident of CA ("who does not reside in any State") so not sure 18 USC 922 (a)(9) would apply????

Please forgive me, I'm very new to CA VS Fed. law and properly comprehending them with 100% confidence.

The laws are obvious intended to be confusing!!!!
You're not the only one with a difficulty comprehending the federal law. On that note please check out 18 USC 922(a)(3) . It better applies to a resident on a state, who imports a firearm received in another state. Here is the text:

"...for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter"
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-27-2019, 10:45 AM
tirogers tirogers is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default 18 USC 922(a)(3)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
You're not the only one with a difficulty comprehending the federal law. On that note please check out 18 USC 922(a)(3) . It better applies to a resident on a state, who imports a firearm received in another state. Here is the text:

"...for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter"
To me: This sounds like as long as it does NOT enter the state the person is a resident of then this statute does not apply. Does anyone else also see this?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-27-2019, 10:47 AM
tirogers tirogers is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default This a great bit of information, thanks for sharing!!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Max View Post
Just throwing my hat in the ring on this one...

You also have the option of setting up a business entity in another state, then assigning a resident of that state as an officer of your corporation which can take delivery of firearms and fill out the 4473 on behalf of your company. Read the fine print on the 4473, perfectly legal to own guns in other states through a corp, just have to add the corp info and attach it to the 4473 (just don't bring them back into CA)


This a great bit of information, thanks for sharing!!!!!

4473 states "When the transferee/buyer of a firearm is a corporation, company, association,
partnership, or other such business entity, an officer authorized to act on behalf
of the business must complete Section A of the form with his/her personal
information, sign Section A, and attach a written statement, executed under
penalties of perjury, stating: (A) the firearm is being acquired for the use of and
will be the property of that business entity; and (B) the name and address of that
business entity. "

Last edited by tirogers; 05-27-2019 at 11:18 AM.. Reason: add 4473 info
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-27-2019, 6:10 PM
P5Ret P5Ret is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Ebay
Posts: 4,890
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Possibly, but if you talk too much about aloud you may no longer be allowed to.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-27-2019, 6:43 PM
tirogers tirogers is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Do you care to elaborate?

is that a shhhh?

Last edited by tirogers; 05-27-2019 at 9:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-30-2019, 9:04 AM
Strykeback Strykeback is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Isnt this the same idea as someone that buys a second home in Arizona but was first a citizen of California? California being the liberal state it is, thinks it has control even when people are outside its boarders.

But a person that also resides in Arizona could purchase firearms at his ffl in his new state as long as he didnt bring them back to california. Why wouldnt the same go for 80%s?

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-30-2019, 9:17 PM
Quiet's Avatar
Quiet Quiet is offline
retired Goon
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Bernardino County
Posts: 24,083
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strykeback View Post
Isnt this the same idea as someone that buys a second home in Arizona but was first a citizen of California? California being the liberal state it is, thinks it has control even when people are outside its boarders.

But a person that also resides in Arizona could purchase firearms at his ffl in his new state as long as he didnt bring them back to california. Why wouldnt the same go for 80%s?
Because Federal laws allows a resident to acquire a firearm in the State they reside in.

Which means, if the CA resident resides in AZ and meets the Federal & AZ requirements for residency, then they can legally acquire firearms in AZ as an AZ resident.

In the OP's scenario, the CA resident does not obtain residency in another State, so they are attempting to acquire a firearm as a non-resident without the use of a FFL.

Since 1968, Federal laws have restricted or prohibited the acquisition of firearms by non-residents, unless a FFL is involved.
__________________


"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama (Seattle Times, 05-15-2001).

Last edited by Quiet; 05-30-2019 at 11:57 PM.. Reason: spelling/grammer
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-30-2019, 11:17 PM
Strykeback Strykeback is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiet View Post
Because Federal laws allows a resident to acquire a firearm in the State they reside in.

Which means, if the CA resident resides in AZ and meets the Federal & AZ requirements for residency, then they can legally acquire firearms in AZ as an AZ resident.

In the OP's scenario, the CA resident does not obtain residency in another State, so they are obtaining to acquire a firearm as a non-resident without the use of a FFL.

Since 1968, Federal laws have restricted or prohibited the acquisition of firearms by non-residents, unless a FFL is involved.
Thank you Quiet for clearing that up.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-01-2019, 2:08 AM
tirogers tirogers is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiet View Post
Because Federal laws allows a resident to acquire a firearm in the State they reside in.

Which means, if the CA resident resides in AZ and meets the Federal & AZ requirements for residency, then they can legally acquire firearms in AZ as an AZ resident.

In the OP's scenario, the CA resident does not obtain residency in another State, so they are attempting to acquire a firearm as a non-resident without the use of a FFL.

Since 1968, Federal laws have restricted or prohibited the acquisition of firearms by non-residents, unless a FFL is involved.

Any Chance you can you provide the appropriate statute(s)?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-05-2019, 9:26 PM
tirogers tirogers is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiet View Post
Currently, the Feds (BATFE, US State Department) have determined "lawful sporting purposes" to be limited to hunting and target shooting.
In regards to "target shooting"...
Practical action shooting (3-gun, 2-gun, IPSC, IDPA, etc) is not considered a form of target shooting by the Feds.
Feds seem to limit it to bullseye target shooting and trap & skeet shotgun shooting.

Which means self-defense, practical target shooting, and plinking do not meet the Feds determination of "lawful sporting purpose".
I feel silly asking, but I have to... will someone please explain the difference between "bullseye target shooting" and "practical target shooting"?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 3:09 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.