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
  #41  
Old 04-02-2017, 12:41 PM
Kate Kate is offline
Why Change the Default?
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 267
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
... the buyer must be using their own money.
Seems like a grey area, "their own money." What if last Christmas we gave my son $100 as a Christmas present. If my son kept that money and put it in as part of the gift gun cost, that would be illegal? Ouch...

K
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-02-2017, 12:44 PM
shaocaholica shaocaholica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 889
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

don't be obtuse. No one is going to say Christmas money is for a straw purchase unless you raise your hand and say it is. It's literally all up to you, not us.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-02-2017, 12:51 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kate View Post
Seems like a grey area, "their own money." What if last Christmas we gave my son $100 as a Christmas present. If my son kept that money and put it in as part of the gift gun cost, that would be illegal? Ouch...

K
There's no grey area about it.
The money for the purchase must come from the buyer and nobody else.

You can play "wink wink" all you want with Christmas and Birthday money and all you are doing is implicating yourself and your family members in a Federal felony.
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-02-2017, 1:10 PM
Kate Kate is offline
Why Change the Default?
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 267
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I am not wink winking anything. Merely trying to point out that when you say things like, "...must come from the buyer and nobody else" that such a thing may or may not be possible, and is at least on a slippery slope.

As for being obtuse, I always strive for acute...

K
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-02-2017, 2:02 PM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 750
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

You give your son a Christmas present of $500 cash in December 2016.

In your birth month of 2017 he then buys you a birthday present of an M&P Shield 45.

Both of those are legal transactions. How would a nefarious agency then prove that the $500 was given specifically to buy the gun?

No, there's no "wink wink" here.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there.

www.BlackRiverTraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-02-2017, 2:34 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rastoff View Post
You give your son a Christmas present of $500 cash in December 2016.

In your birth month of 2017 he then buys you a birthday present of an M&P Shield 45.

Both of those are legal transactions. How would a nefarious agency then prove that the $500 was given specifically to buy the gun?

No, there's no "wink wink" here.

People are convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time.

That said, a gift is the personal property of the receiver. It's where gun transactions come in that things can get hinky.

But 'straw purchase' is off topic for this thread. (hint)
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page

Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-02-2017, 2:36 PM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 750
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
People are convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time.
Indeed.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there.

www.BlackRiverTraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-03-2017, 11:51 AM
Darryl Licht's Avatar
Darryl Licht Darryl Licht is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Somewhere in the Inland Empire between the mountains, the desert, and the beach
Posts: 2,259
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
Off Roster is legal - but you have to find an FFL who understands an interstate intrafamilial transfer, who will know what to put into the DROS comment field.

Just as any other interstate transfer,
send from parent,
send to CA FFL through FFL local to parent, or
bring it to CA and go together to the CA FFL
are all legal; call your local CA FFL to see how they prefer to business.
Thanks Librarian... precisely what I was wanting to know!~
__________________
Quote:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.
--Thomas Jefferson
Quote:
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies. --Groucho Marx
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 05-18-2017, 10:48 AM
rumplestilskinfish's Avatar
rumplestilskinfish rumplestilskinfish is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: central valley C.A.
Posts: 422
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

my mother is re-married and has a different last name, am i still eligible for a transfer from my mom? also how about my step father?
__________________
reloading is like building tiny rocket ships. and testing how well they fly (or dont).
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 05-18-2017, 11:12 AM
fiddletown's Avatar
fiddletown fiddletown is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 4,927
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumplestilskinfish View Post
my mother is re-married and has a different last name, am i still eligible for a transfer from my mom? also how about my step father?
Mother - yes: Your mother is always your mother.

Stepfather - no: Your stepfather is not your father unless he has legally adopted you.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 06-09-2017, 4:42 AM
Elcidaviator's Avatar
Elcidaviator Elcidaviator is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 119
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I have few questions that require a little context. I'm military PCS'd to CA. My father is out of state.

First, my grandfather passed away and my father wants to give me a couple of his pistols.
My understanding is these pistols will have to go through an FFL since I was not on the Will. However, my father does not need to utilize an FFL because he is the beneficiary on the Will. Correct?

Second, my father wants to gift me (brand new) a pistol. Can he purchase the pistol online and send it directly to a CA FFL, or should he take possession and then ship it to me?

Third, can my father ship all the pistols at one time and I go and pick them up from the FFL every 30 days, or does my dad have to ship each one individually?

Thanks in advance.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 06-09-2017, 11:46 AM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 750
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Your father does not need to use an FFL to ship the guns. You must use an FFL to receive them. However, FFLs can use a different shipping method so, it might be less expensive to have him use an FFL to ship them. You'll have to check prices to decide.

Your father would have to take possession of any gun that isn't on the roster and then ship to your FFL.

He can ship all the pistols at one time, but you can only take one home each month. The others would have to sit at the FFL.

I'm sorry you got stationed in this very gun-unfriendly state. On which base/post are you stationed?
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there.

www.BlackRiverTraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 06-10-2017, 12:49 AM
Elcidaviator's Avatar
Elcidaviator Elcidaviator is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 119
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Thank you for the reply. My dad is going to have his hands full since my grandfather had a fairly large collection. I guess that's a good problem to have.

I'm flying the U-2 at Beale. It's a great assignment, NorCal is beautiful, but I obviously hate the states political stance.

Follow up question. Before my grandfather passed (and before I really read up on the laws) he gave both my dad and I a pistol each. I didn't think much of it at the time since it was one of those "here have this pistol you'll enjoy it more than me" sort of talks, but we didn't go through an FFL. Is there a way to correct this since he's passed or should I not worry about it?
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 06-10-2017, 11:24 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

In what state were you and grandfather residents at the time of the gift?
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page

Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 06-11-2017, 12:44 AM
Elcidaviator's Avatar
Elcidaviator Elcidaviator is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 119
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

My grandfather was an Ohio resident, I was (still am but PCS'd) a Florida resident and my dad is a New Mexico resident.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 06-11-2017, 1:18 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Well, at least no CA involvement.

Feds think a resident of OH transferring a gun to a resident of a different state need to use an FFL to handle that transfer. That's been law since 1968. You can imagine how well-known that law is. That's probably the least obeyed gun law I can think of; it still carries a 5 year sentence or $10K fine, and there is no 'approved' recovery path.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page

Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 06-17-2017, 2:27 AM
Elcidaviator's Avatar
Elcidaviator Elcidaviator is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 119
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Librarian,
Thank you for all the info. I have been reading your posts for a long time and you're a wealth of knowledge. I appreciate that you take the time out of your day to answer questions in such a humble manner.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 06-25-2017, 7:40 AM
popawoody's Avatar
popawoody popawoody is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Los Angeles Beach Cities
Posts: 127
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Gents -- I wonder if I might solicit opinions on a situation before I talk to someone in Michele's or Colodny's office. I have a handgun which was given to me by my father in 1997. My parents maintained two residences -- one in California and another in Arkansas. I'd originally thought their primary residence was California, but I recently looked at some tax documents of theirs and it now looks like they filed as residents of Arkansas. Make sense... lower state taxes there. Both of my parents passed away years ago.

This "transfer" was a gift from father to son of a firearm legally possessed by the father to a son who was not a prohibited person. It was not done through an FFL. It was a "here son, I want you to have this" deal on a Sunday morning at breakfast. The pistol has been in my safe ever since, except for the occasional trip to the range. I'd originally thought it was an in-state familial transfer. It now looks like it was an interstate familial transfer.

As a possibly useful data point, I have completed more than a dozen DROS transactions in California, including one this month so I am, and remain, quite happily, a non-prohibited person.

Am I required to complete a BOF4544A OpLaw form?

CAN I legally complete a BOF4544A OpLaw form?

Til now, I've been quite happy to possess a handgun that wasn't registered with our friends in Sacramento. On the other hand, I have a deep and abiding desire to avoid being charged with a felony. Thoughts?
__________________
If you come for mine, you'd better bring yours.
Life Benefactor Member, National Rifle Association
Life Member, Second Amendment Foundation
Life Member, California Rifle and Pistol Association
Member, CAL-FFL - Supporter, Firearms Policy Coalition
Sustaining Sponsor, CATO Institute
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 06-25-2017, 7:56 AM
Mitch's Avatar
Mitch Mitch is offline
Mostly Harmless
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Reno
Posts: 6,574
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

The illegal transfer occurred 20 years ago and because the transferer is deceased, cannot be undone.

You could certainly complete the OpLaw form, and California will happily accept your $19. But it won't undo the original illegal transfer (which violated Federal as well as California law).

It was so long ago, and can't be undone. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it. Michel or Colodny, of course, might say something different.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by cockedandglocked View Post
Getting called a DOJ shill has become a rite of passage around here. I've certainly been called that more than once - I've even seen Kes get called that. I haven't seen Red-O get called that yet, which is very suspicious to me, and means he's probably a DOJ shill.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 06-25-2017, 10:46 AM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch View Post
The illegal transfer occurred 20 years ago and because the transferer is deceased, cannot be undone.

You could certainly complete the OpLaw form, and California will happily accept your $19. But it won't undo the original illegal transfer (which violated Federal as well as California law).
Quite possibly has also passed the statute of limitations.
Generally 36 months in California, don't know about Federal.

There is and has been no ongoing crime... it was an illegal transfer in 1997.
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 06-26-2017, 4:58 PM
popawoody's Avatar
popawoody popawoody is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Los Angeles Beach Cities
Posts: 127
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thanks guys! According to 18 USC 3282, it looks like the federal statute of limitations for non-violent and non-capital offenses is 60 months. I'll probably still talk to Michel or Colodny for guidance but it does seem like I'm "off the hook" as far as violation of Federal or California law goes. That is, if the assumption is correct that there has been no ongoing crime in keeping the thing. In 2014, California law added a "reporting within 30 days" requirement, but, as I read it, it applies to transactions beginning in 2014. It appears as if the transferrer (my father) is the party that violated US and California law. (He'd be shocked). I don't see any reference to the transferee side of the transaction in either US or California code. Does that sound right?
__________________
If you come for mine, you'd better bring yours.
Life Benefactor Member, National Rifle Association
Life Member, Second Amendment Foundation
Life Member, California Rifle and Pistol Association
Member, CAL-FFL - Supporter, Firearms Policy Coalition
Sustaining Sponsor, CATO Institute
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 06-26-2017, 7:41 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popawoody View Post
In 2014, California law added a "reporting within 30 days" requirement, but, as I read it, it applies to transactions beginning in 2014.
Correct.
Otherwise it actually would be ex post facto.
You can't prosecute for an act that was not a crime at the time it took place (your failure to report)

And the only evidence of the illegal transfer is your statement in this thread.
Lacking that, the state would be unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the transfer took place after 1991 (which would have created a DROS record vs just a 4473 hidden in some gun shop files)
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 06-27-2017, 9:34 PM
popawoody's Avatar
popawoody popawoody is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Los Angeles Beach Cities
Posts: 127
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
... And the only evidence of the illegal transfer is your statement in this thread.
Lacking that, the state would be unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the transfer took place after 1991 (which would have created a DROS record vs just a 4473 hidden in some gun shop files)
With the possible exception of the fact that the serial number indicates a 1993 manufacture date.
__________________
If you come for mine, you'd better bring yours.
Life Benefactor Member, National Rifle Association
Life Member, Second Amendment Foundation
Life Member, California Rifle and Pistol Association
Member, CAL-FFL - Supporter, Firearms Policy Coalition
Sustaining Sponsor, CATO Institute

Last edited by popawoody; 06-27-2017 at 9:45 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 06-28-2017, 7:05 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by popawoody View Post
With the possible exception of the fact that the serial number indicates a 1993 manufacture date.
There's that....

What year did handgun intrafamilial transfers fall under the FFL requirement?
I thought it was later than 1991, no?
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 06-28-2017, 7:43 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
There's that....

What year did handgun intrafamilial transfers fall under the FFL requirement?

I thought it was later than 1991, no?
That would be 1968, since that's when interstate transfers needed an FFL. Feds don't have the concept of 'intrafamilial'.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page

Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 06-28-2017, 8:06 PM
Cokebottle's Avatar
Cokebottle Cokebottle is offline
Señor Member
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: IE, CA
Posts: 32,373
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
That would be 1968, since that's when interstate transfers needed an FFL. Feds don't have the concept of 'intrafamilial'.
Yes, this particular transaction has more than one issue...

But aside from statements in this thread admitting guilt....

If the OP were to be arrested (assuming SoL has not expired), would the 1993 manufacture date be a ringer for the state that it was transferred illegally?

The gun could have been legally acquired out of state, brought here by father who established residence, THEN gave the gun to his son.....

So the pivotal issues on whether the state would have a case beyond a reasonable doubt would be
A) if the FFL-less IFT was not legal after 1992 (evidenced by lack of DROS record in their incomplete files
or B) state has the ability to prove that father was not at any time a resident after 1992 and before the IFT required an FFL (if not 1991).
or C) state has the ability to prove that OP was never a resident of a state other than California between 1992 and 2016 and thus could not have been a legal personal importer.

Oh ya... coupled with D) Calguns has another server meltdown and this thread is lost
__________________
- Rich

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
A just government will not be overthrown by force or violence because the people have no incentive to overthrow a just government. If a small minority of people attempt such an insurrection to grab power and enslave the people, the RKBA of the whole is our insurance against their success.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 06-28-2017, 8:55 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

So far as I can determine, the CA-Intrafamilial-handguns-must-use-OPLAW started in 1991, but violation of that is a misdemeanor, so ordinarily a SOL of 3 years.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page

Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 06-28-2017, 8:56 PM
fiddletown's Avatar
fiddletown fiddletown is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 4,927
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cokebottle View Post
....So the pivotal issues on whether the state would have a case beyond a reasonable doubt would be....
There's no way to know. We can't possibly know all the evidence a diligent investigation would uncover. It would be a hard case to prosecute, but we can't know that it's a loser.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 07-01-2017, 12:53 PM
popawoody's Avatar
popawoody popawoody is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Los Angeles Beach Cities
Posts: 127
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Assuming the statute of limitations has not expired (which I believe it has), which party violated the law here? My reading of the statutes says it's the transferrer (my father) and not the transferee (me). Is that correct? One of the few advantages I can think of for being on that side of the dirt is that it makes prosecution a challenge.
__________________
If you come for mine, you'd better bring yours.
Life Benefactor Member, National Rifle Association
Life Member, Second Amendment Foundation
Life Member, California Rifle and Pistol Association
Member, CAL-FFL - Supporter, Firearms Policy Coalition
Sustaining Sponsor, CATO Institute
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 07-01-2017, 1:40 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 4,672
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
There's no way to know. We can't possibly know all the evidence a diligent investigation would uncover. It would be a hard case to prosecute, but we can't know that it's a loser.
Yes, and because the feds define residency differently than CA does, there is a possibility that at the time of the transfer father would be deemed a CA resident under federal firearm law due to his having a home in CA where he was living at the time. If so, this would preclude the federal offense.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 07-01-2017, 8:37 PM
Rastoff's Avatar
Rastoff Rastoff is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: So Cal (Near Edwards AFB)
Posts: 750
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

None of this matters. The SoL has expired and no case can be brought. The discussion is academic at this point.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there.

www.BlackRiverTraining.com
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 07-07-2017, 3:29 PM
otteray's Avatar
otteray otteray is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Santa Cruz & Lake Tahoe
Posts: 3,210
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

I can't find anything in this sticky about loaning my daughter a handgun. She is staying in a bad area in Santa Cruz, and I want to loan her a registered handgun while she is there.
__________________

Single fin mentality
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 07-07-2017, 3:43 PM
SkyHawk's Avatar
SkyHawk SkyHawk is offline
Front Toward Enemy
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Outside my Southern Comfort Zone
Posts: 23,178
iTrader: 223 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by otteray View Post
I can't find anything in this sticky about loaning my daughter a handgun. She is staying in a bad area in Santa Cruz, and I want to loan her a registered handgun while she is there.
She must have a firearms safety card and not be a prohibited person. The loan cannot be more than 30 days and must be infrequent.

PC27880 http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/fa...0.&lawCode=PEN

If she needs it longer than 30 days, she needs to pay $19 and send in the OPLAW form, and then when she is done with it and gives it back to you, you must pay $19 and send in the OPLAW form.

And all of that assumes you are both CA residents.


If you are not CA resident, you need to ship or deliver it to a CA FFL and they will transfer it to her for $25 + a transfer fee. It works the same as if you gave her the gun.

There is no exemption for a loan between residents of different states, unless it is for a lawful sporting purpose, and generally assumed to be very temporary. Which means she could visit you in your state and legally borrow a gun to go hunting. But you cannot ship a gun to her state for self protection, without using a FFL in her state.

Then when she is done with the loan, she ships it back to a FFL in your state and you do whatever transfer process your state requires.

And to reiterate, in any of these scenarios she must have a firearms safety card.
__________________
.


Last edited by SkyHawk; 07-07-2017 at 3:52 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 07-07-2017, 4:26 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by otteray View Post
I can't find anything in this sticky about loaning my daughter a handgun. She is staying in a bad area in Santa Cruz, and I want to loan her a registered handgun while she is there.
A loan is a transfer. If you would be acting as a resident of NV, that would be interstate, since your daughter in SC is a CA resident.

If you are acting as a resident of CA, wrong thread, but Skyhawk covered both.
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page

Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 07-07-2017, 6:24 PM
otteray's Avatar
otteray otteray is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Santa Cruz & Lake Tahoe
Posts: 3,210
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Well, a little of both threads. She recently moved back to Cal from Oregon, and the ex-hubby kept her pistol. Looks like we will be getting her the safety card.
Thanks Skyhawk and Librarian. I'll continue looking for the intrastate thread, Librarian. Must be buried.
__________________

Single fin mentality
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 07-07-2017, 7:44 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 44,420
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by otteray View Post
. I'll continue looking for the intrastate thread, Librarian. Must be buried.
Sticky FAQ thread, post 10 - http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...8&postcount=10
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page

Frozen in 2015, it is falling out of date and I can no longer edit the content. But much of it is still good!
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.



Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 07-07-2017, 8:29 PM
rodblder rodblder is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: san diego
Posts: 423
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

thanks, plan to give a Smith 38 to my son, and was wondering what the procedure was................
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 07-24-2017, 10:14 PM
batman3n1's Avatar
batman3n1 batman3n1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Santa Maria, Ca.
Posts: 359
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default I have a question

27875. (a) Section 27545 does not apply to the transfer of a firearm by gift, bequest, intestate succession, or other means from one individual to another, if all of the following requirements are met:

(1) The transfer is infrequent, as defined in Section 16730.

(2) The transfer is between members of the same immediate family.

(3) Within 30 days of taking possession of the firearm, the person to whom it is transferred shall submit a report to the Department of Justice, in a manner prescribed by the department, that includes information concerning the individual taking possession of the firearm, how title was obtained and from whom, and a description of the firearm in question. The reports that individuals complete pursuant to this subdivision shall be made available to them in a format prescribed by the department.

Regarding number (3) above. As the recipient of a hand gun from my son in AZ, Am I required to do number three in order to be in compliance. If yes, is there a form I need to fill out and where do I send it?

Last edited by batman3n1; 07-24-2017 at 10:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 07-24-2017, 10:29 PM
fiddletown's Avatar
fiddletown fiddletown is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 4,927
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by batman3n1 View Post
...Regarding number (3) above. As the recipient of a hand gun from my son in AZ, Am I required to do number three in order to be in compliance. If yes, is there a form I need to fill out and where do I send it?
If you are a California resident and your son is an Arizona resident federal law requires that the gun be transferred to you through an FFL in California. If the transfer does not go through a California FFL, both you and your son commit serious federal crimes entitling each of you to up to five years in federal prison and a lifetime loss of gun rights.

But the good news is that by transferring the handgun through a California FFL a DROS will be completed so you won't have to bother with 27875(a)(3). The DROS takes care of it.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 07-25-2017, 6:44 AM
batman3n1's Avatar
batman3n1 batman3n1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Santa Maria, Ca.
Posts: 359
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

I thought I was completely familiar with the way the interstate, intra-familiar transfer worked, but when I read 27875(a)(3), it threw me for loop. I never noticed it before. Thanks for the reply.
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 4:36 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy