#41
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#43
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#45
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#46
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 "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."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. |
#47
|
||||
|
||||
Indeed.
__________________
Remember, you can post here because they died over there. www.BlackRiverTraining.com |
#48
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Quote:
|
#49
|
||||
|
||||
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). |
#50
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 |
#51
|
||||
|
||||
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. |
#52
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#53
|
||||
|
||||
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? |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
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 "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."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. |
#56
|
||||
|
||||
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 "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."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. |
#58
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#59
|
||||
|
||||
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:
|
#60
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 |
#61
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#62
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 |
#63
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
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.. |
#64
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
What year did handgun intrafamilial transfers fall under the FFL requirement? I thought it was later than 1991, no?
__________________
- Rich |
#65
|
||||
|
||||
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 "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."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. |
#66
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 |
#67
|
||||
|
||||
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 "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."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. |
#68
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#69
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#70
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
#71
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#72
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#73
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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.. |
#74
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 "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."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. |
#75
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#76
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
ARCHIVED Calguns Foundation Wiki here: http://web.archive.org/web/201908310...itle=Main_Page "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."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. |
#78
|
||||
|
||||
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.. |
#79
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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 |
#80
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|