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 > SPECIALTY FORUMS > FFL's Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

FFL's Forum For open discussion between FFLs and polite questions for FFLs.

View Poll Results: Should FFLs refuse to honor exemptions for LEO firearm purchases?
Yes, either all should be able to buy it or none. 216 72.73%
Yes, but only for personal use, not for duty use. 9 3.03%
Yes, but only for duty use, not for personal use. 4 1.35%
No, if the exemption exists, the FFL should honor it 65 21.89%
I have no opinion 3 1.01%
Voters: 297. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-26-2013, 7:16 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default Refusing LEO exemptions for firearms

On another forum, there is has been a discussion about refusing to transfer firearms in which the average citizen can not purchase, but LEO are exempt. I am wondering what people here feel about it. I have been considering also doing that.

It sends a message that no one should be considered special. It is one thing for duty use, but a LEO can buy a firearm for personal use that is not on the CA certified list, which is not right, nor fair.

The certified list is claimed to be a safety issue, but those who have the biggest need for a safe firearm are exempt from having a firearm that has been tested, so it is really just a way to limit firearms and to harass people who want to buy a firearm, as well as extorting money from manufacturers.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-26-2013, 7:23 PM
curvejunkie's Avatar
curvejunkie curvejunkie is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central Valley, CA
Posts: 783
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

This very discussion is taking place in our shop as well... its a interesting topic to say the least.
__________________
Robert
Elite Arms and Supply
1148 S. Main Street, Manteca, CA 95337
209-823-4400


Webstore http://store.elitearmsandsupply.com/
www.facebook.com/elitearmsandsupply

Our new web store is up and running!

Sig Sauer, Glock, Vortex, Kimber, Beretta, Benelli and Wilson Combat Dealers.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-26-2013, 7:28 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Just think what would happen if ALL FFLs refused to honor the exemption. It seems to me that the exemption is what allowed the law to be passed since if the exemption did not exist, most likely LE would have objected and fought it, perhaps causing it to not get passed.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-26-2013, 7:40 PM
762ch's Avatar
762ch 762ch is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 1,146
iTrader: 47 / 100%
Default

These guys shouldn't be allowed to have ANY firearms. NO this doesn't mean ALL leo, but there needs to be some better protocols put in place to prevent this from happening as much as it does...

LEO should have strict enforcement when off duty, maybe as far as ONLY keeping the weapons in vehicle or in the armory.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-26-2013, 9:13 PM
Josh3239's Avatar
Josh3239 Josh3239 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 8,790
iTrader: 53 / 100%
Default

I can understand for personal/non-duty use, it still sends a message and keeps the dealers on fairly good terms with the government and brings money into the store. But honestly, FFLs should really hold them to the same requirements as the rest of us IMO.
__________________
Proud NRA Life Member As Of 2016


"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." Norman Thomas, American socialist
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-26-2013, 10:15 PM
Gryff's Avatar
Gryff Gryff is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 10,787
iTrader: 56 / 98%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
It sends a message that no one should be considered special.
I don't think that should be the point. The point should be:

1) Politicians shouldn't be able to buy the endorsement (or at least silence) of LEA heads and police unions with exemptions in their proposed anti-gun bills.

2) Governments needs to realize that anti-gun efforts are going to be opposed by an important segment of their employees.
__________________
My friends and family disavow all knowledge of my existence, let alone my opinions.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-27-2013, 5:35 AM
efillc efillc is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Inwood, WV
Posts: 150
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

http://www.thepoliceloophole.com/

Check out #2 on the list.
__________________
EFI, LLC - 07/C2 in Inwood, WV

Tank Vest - Molle Vest for Your Dual-Sport Gas Tank
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-27-2013, 11:49 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

I am curious, for those who say in the poll that FFLs should honor the exemption, are any of you not a LEO?
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-27-2013, 2:32 PM
tenpercentfirearms's Avatar
tenpercentfirearms tenpercentfirearms is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Taft, CA
Posts: 12,837
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

The only thing this restriction would apply to would be large capacity magazines, non-roster handguns, and in my case silencers. I already sell parts kits to the general public, so they have them. I sell single shot exempt to the public so they have those too. Also selling non-rostered handguns to cops enables them then be PPTed at some future point. Really only silencers are the true forbidden fruit and I haven't sold a single one to a department yet.

Let's call this whole movement what it is: marketing. That is it. I have called it marketing ever since Ronnie B started it back with the .50 BMG ban. He wasn't out any money refusing to sell to California departments, but suddenly he was popular with everyone (having heard him speak, I actually do think he is a good guy more than I did back then).

Most of the companies who are on that list and are not selling to agencies are still probably selling to individual officers where it is still legal. Or they are selling the products to wholesalers who are then selling them to agencies.

Basically, learn from Armalite, if anyone asks, just tell them you are not selling to police anymore either. Whether you really do or not, just tell people that. You don't want to be branded a collaborator.

So I too refuse to sell to law enforcement. I also will refuse to sell to intrafamilial transfer people too because they shouldn't be able to buy non-roster guns either.

Screw you cops! You get no breaks from me! Long live the Second Amendment.
__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation

Last edited by tenpercentfirearms; 02-27-2013 at 2:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-28-2013, 7:59 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Yes, this relates to the roster and standard capacity magazines (not the reduced capacity magazines). While a non-roster firearm might be later sold as a PPT, that also might never happen.

While it might be marketing, it also is making a statement and sometimes that is needed in order to get things changed. If LEO are exempt from the certified list, then why would they ever be against it and do something to get it removed? Also, please explain why a LEO should be exempt from the certified list for a personal firearm.

Doing this also gets attention in the media and raises the issue of why LEOs should be exempt from the "safety" requirements of the certified list, even for personal firearms. Yes, this is marketing, but it is still a good thing.

Your statement about out of state intrafamilial transfers is a bit of a joke since why should they not be able to buy a non-roster firearm, but then again, why should someone who happens to have family outside of CA be able to get a firearm which is not on the roster.

The roster does not make sense, the exemptions don't make sense and it should be removed.

So you think that nothing should be done and nothing should be said, right? If so, then nothing will change.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-28-2013, 8:09 AM
CSACANNONEER's Avatar
CSACANNONEER CSACANNONEER is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Thousand Oaks
Posts: 40,019
iTrader: 125 / 100%
Blog Entries: 4
Default

I'm torn. The obvious answer is that all civilians, including LEOs, should be held to the same standards. However, the more firearms and +10 round mags in civilian hands, the safer we all are. Limiting anyone's ability to buy firearms or related products is just helping the antis with their agenda.
__________________
NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun and Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor
California DOJ Certified Fingerprint Roller
Ventura County approved CCW Instructor


Offering low cost private basic shooting and reloading classes for calgunners.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-28-2013, 8:46 AM
P5Ret P5Ret is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Ebay
Posts: 2,721
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I guess it depends on what you consider duty use. Is a for example a LCP purchased personally for off duty use going to be considered a duty gun? It seems like a tough line to draw in the sand, and I am quite sure doj may have something to say on it.

Now before anyone starts no I am not exempt nor have I ever purchased something not on the roster before I retired.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-28-2013, 9:59 AM
ASD1's Avatar
ASD1 ASD1 is offline
1/2 BANNED
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Burlingame
Posts: 1,355
iTrader: 110 / 100%
Default

Well if it's for "duty use" have them bring in a letter from their CO stating that it is.

As fare as the DOJ haveing any say. They have no say as what a shop stocks or orders. So to the LE "sorry we don't stock or order non roster guns."
__________________
Coyote Point Armory
341 Beach RD
Burlingame CA 94010
650-315-2210

M-F 9:30-6:30
Sat-Sun 9:30-4:00

http://coyotepointarmory.com

Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-28-2013, 10:49 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CSACANNONEER View Post
I'm torn. The obvious answer is that all civilians, including LEOs, should be held to the same standards. However, the more firearms and +10 round mags in civilian hands, the safer we all are.
I agree.

Quote:
Limiting anyone's ability to buy firearms or related products is just helping the antis with their agenda.
This is where I don't agree. The antis got the certified list passed by exempting LEOs. If there had not been a exemption, I doubt that it would have passed. To raise the issue that the certified list is claimed to be a safety issue, but that LEO are EXEMPT FROM THIS SAFETY ISSUE, by means of refusing to do the transfer, causes the issue to be noticed and gets the information out to the public. If a citizens can not have a firearm because it has not been certified to be safe, why should a LEO be allowed to have the firearm, especially since the LEO is more likely to have an issue where that "safety" comes into play. There has been news stories about what those FFLs are doing and that is good.

By not raising and not forcing this issue, you allow the antis to get away with things like the certified list.

Yes, there is things to consider, which is why I have not made a decision either way. The main reason I see to do this is to push the issue and to try to get it changed, or at least people informed. The antis want to push the "gun show loophole", which actually does not exist, but the "LEO loophole" does exist.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-28-2013, 11:01 AM
tenpercentfirearms's Avatar
tenpercentfirearms tenpercentfirearms is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Taft, CA
Posts: 12,837
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
So you think that nothing should be done and nothing should be said, right? If so, then nothing will change.
When I do something I want it to be meaningful. Will not selling non-rostered pistols and large capacity magazines to my local law enforcement change anything? If we all start doing that, that just ups the incentive for others to jump ship and sell to LEOs. And that is assuming the big time LEO places that already sell to LEOs for less jump on board, which they won't.

I tell the local cops to get lost, they call me a jerk, and go somewhere else and buy it. And anti-gun bills still pass. What principle am I serving in doing this?

This entire anti-LEO sales movement is very real, but it isn't really smart. We as FFLs really need to pay attention as saying the wrong things very well could end up putting you in the same position as Magpul is in right now.

Even if I told the Taft PD to piss up a tree, what good does that get me or them? Our chief is pro-gun and issues CCWs for one reason only, "personal protection". The anti-civil rights crowd already ignores him. What am I getting out of not selling their department anything?

Again, the good news is there isn't much I can sell them since I don't have an AW license and I might just lie and say I am not going to sell them anything. Most of this whole movement is marketing, so lets play the marketing game. I won't sell to LEO. I am with you lynch mob!

What we ought to do is just donate money to worthy causes. That is going to go a whole lot further than this LEO boycott. Cheaper than Dirt just donated $100,000 to SAF! That gets us a whole lot of litigation. That will probably do more for this movement than cutting off any number of LEO sales just to have certain businessmen continue to funnel them goods and for the politicians to ignore these officers who complain they had to drive further to find someone to sell them something.
__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-28-2013, 11:15 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Charging an additional fee for the exemption is also something that I was thinking about and then donating the money. I am not sure of how that would go over either.

The big picture is something to consider, not the individual transfers.

It is not a lynch mob, it is saying that everyone should be the same. Either the law should be that way or others will treat it that way. As you say, some won't be on board, which makes it not effective, except as a media tactic.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-28-2013, 11:47 AM
tenpercentfirearms's Avatar
tenpercentfirearms tenpercentfirearms is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Taft, CA
Posts: 12,837
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
It is not a lynch mob, it is saying that everyone should be the same. Either the law should be that way or others will treat it that way.
So then they cut out LEO exemptions and we all have our rights infringed.

You know what would be more meaningful, is if all of these companies shipped these items and sold these items in the restricted states. If they said they didn't recognize these unconstitutional laws and they were going to send assault weapons, large capacity magazines, and non-approved guns in and sell them in these states, laws be damned, that would make more of a statement.

That would make more logical sense than saying, "Since we can't have it, then no one will!" The anti-rights people will simply say, "Ok, deal."
__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-28-2013, 12:42 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Sorry, but if FFLs cut out LEO exemptions, we don't all have our rights infringed. The infringement happened with the law with the exemption.

Your second paragraph is funny. Would you want them to send you so-called a-salt weapons? Are you going to transfer them? Are you willing to be arrested? It might might a statement, but it is stupid. Refusing to sell to the government makes more of a statement and is safer.

While the antis might say ok, the LEOs will not.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-01-2013, 11:57 AM
tenpercentfirearms's Avatar
tenpercentfirearms tenpercentfirearms is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Taft, CA
Posts: 12,837
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
Sorry, but if FFLs cut out LEO exemptions, we don't all have our rights infringed. The infringement happened with the law with the exemption.
Can regular citizens buy large capacity magazines? No. Their rights are infringed. Stop selling to LEOs and they are in the same boat. It really is that simple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
Your second paragraph is funny. Would you want them to send you so-called a-salt weapons? Are you going to transfer them? Are you willing to be arrested? It might might a statement, but it is stupid. Refusing to sell to the government makes more of a statement and is safer.
You are probably correct, it is probably extremely stupid to keep selling items in violation of the law. Just like tryin to boycott LEO sales. However, boycotting LEO sales just continues the retrictions and the loss of rights. Selling what you want to who you want because the government doesn't tell you what to do is an example of liberty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
While the antis might say ok, the LEOs will not.
Who makes the laws? LEOs can say no all they want, they still follow the law, the laws the legislators make. Do you think any anti-gunner is going to be less anti-gun because a LEO asked them not to? Would a political appointee like a police chief stand up to their at-will employer?

This thing won't work, let's focus on something that will. Unless by thing, I mean publicity for your gun shop/manufacturer for a handful of people that will buy from you because you made a symbolic gesture that has no bearing on your actual sales. In that case, this thing works great!
__________________
For superior customer service and good prices visit www.tenpercentfirearms.com. We are Kern County's leader in black rifle sales.

The Calguns Foundation - Board Member. DONATE NOW! Your dollars go DIRECTLY to front-line legal activism in CA.
Opinions posted in this account are my own and not the approved position of The Calguns Foundation
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-01-2013, 12:02 PM
frankm's Avatar
frankm frankm is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Occupied Vespuchia
Posts: 9,430
iTrader: 25 / 100%
Default

I support not selling to police departments because their leaders are politicians. But I would sell to individual cops.
__________________
RKBA Clock: soap box, ballot box, jury box, cartridge box (expanded right 4/16/14)
"Socialism can be a useful servant, but is a cruel master"
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-05-2013, 8:27 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

So, are all the 10 who voted "no" LEOs?
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-08-2013, 6:59 AM
steelrain556 steelrain556 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 261
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Bunch of cry babies in here. LEOs are exempt. Get over it
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-08-2013, 7:10 AM
IronWorksTactical's Avatar
IronWorksTactical IronWorksTactical is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Southern CA, IE
Posts: 430
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I believe all the treating LEO movements by large companies going on are geared towards department purchases and none are towards the individual LEOs as they have little to no control (any more or less than we do) over the situation. Just my thoughts on the subject.
__________________
Brett

http://Ironworkstactical.com
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-08-2013, 7:14 AM
freonr22's Avatar
freonr22 freonr22 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: San Jose
Posts: 11,810
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelrain556 View Post
Bunch of cry babies in here. LEOs are exempt. Get over it
Why should we have to get over it. Why support the special class system?
__________________
<img src=http://calgunsfoundation.org/images/stories/San-Benito.jpg border=0 alt= />[IMG]file:///C:/Users/PCMECH%7E1/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot-3.png[/IMG][IMG]file:///C:/Users/PCMECH%7E1/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot-4.png[/IMG]
Quote:
Originally Posted by dantodd View Post
We will win. We are right. We will never stop fighting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwiese View Post
They don't believe it's possible, but then Alison didn't believe there'd be 350K - 400K OLLs in CA either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by louisianagirl View Post
Our fate is ours alone to decide as long as we remain armed heavily enough to dictate it.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-08-2013, 8:31 AM
hnoppenberger's Avatar
hnoppenberger hnoppenberger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Orange County
Posts: 1,406
iTrader: 62 / 100%
Default

pathetic groupings. fired for just that I say.


Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-08-2013, 10:15 AM
IronWorksTactical's Avatar
IronWorksTactical IronWorksTactical is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Southern CA, IE
Posts: 430
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hnoppenberger View Post
pathetic groupings. fired for just that I say.


What does this have to do with the conversation topic of the thread?
__________________
Brett

http://Ironworkstactical.com
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-08-2013, 2:57 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelrain556 View Post
Bunch of cry babies in here. LEOs are exempt. Get over it
I would suspect that you are a LEO. I don't think your response is appropriate as it is basically name calling since I don't see any "cry babies" in here. Perhaps you need to understand that a FFL is a business and they can choose to do what they want. This means that a FFL can decide to not honor LEO exemptions, either for their own personal firearms and/or their department firearms.

So, we should allow elected politicians to have special privileges because they exempted themselves, right?

The issue is whether it is acceptable to have different classes of people, even for their own person firearms, but especially for department firearms. The government has put restrictions on law abiding citizens, but have said that some citizens are more special than the rest.

The response quoted, along with the attitude, tends to say quite a lot.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-08-2013, 3:02 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IronWorksTactical View Post
I believe all the treating LEO movements by large companies going on are geared towards department purchases and none are towards the individual LEOs as they have little to no control (any more or less than we do) over the situation. Just my thoughts on the subject.
Actually, I think it also involves individual LEOs as well. As a group, they do have some control and some politicians tend to listen them as a group. If ALL CA FFLs refused to transfer any firearms not on the certified list to LEOs, then the LEOs might be a bit more against the certified list. Right now, some LEOs could care less about it as it does not affect them. Some LEOs are against it because the list just plain wrong.

What I have seen is that some FFL refuse to honor any exemptions, basically saying that if the average citizen can't have it, no one should not be able to have it, which is basically saying that it is not acceptable to have a special class of citizens.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-08-2013, 3:07 PM
MontClaire's Avatar
MontClaire MontClaire is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: *CLASSIFIED*
Posts: 4,057
iTrader: 63 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelrain556 View Post
Bunch of cry babies in here. LEOs are exempt. Get over it
The people will change that. Cry me a river.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-08-2013, 3:17 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 7,222
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

If you treat any customer "unfairly" I.E. refuse an otherwise legal transaction, be ready to receive bad feedback, and poor recommendations in the future. With the coming load of anti firearms laws FFL dealers will need every customer and all the support they can get. So if your refuse a legal transaction be ready to get all that comes with that decision, which will include a loss of regular gun buying customers and a reputation of not being friendly to law enforcement....
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.


Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 03-08-2013, 3:36 PM
Tripeaks69's Avatar
Tripeaks69 Tripeaks69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 940
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

NO ONE MUST BE ABOVE THE LAW..

But since they are need the LE Agencies support they make an exemption from LEO in that case they making LEO Above the law in principle, they are special group of people, the select few blessed by the Legislators for them to control the Gun Ownership of the Law Abiding Citizen..



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-08-2013, 3:41 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
If you treat any customer "unfairly" I.E. refuse an otherwise legal transaction, be ready to receive bad feedback, and poor recommendations in the future.
And if a FFL treats everyone the same, or in other words "fairly", then word might get out that is a FFL to support by the average citizen. In other words, it can go both ways. There are more non-LEOs than LEOs.

Quote:
With the coming load of anti firearms laws FFL dealers will need every customer and all the support they can get. So if your refuse a legal transaction be ready to get all that comes with that decision, which will include a loss of regular gun buying customers and a reputation of not being friendly to law enforcement....
Hmmm, that sounds like a threat, which is an issue, especially if it is from a LEO.

It could result in an increase of regular gun buying customers. It could also give the FFL a reputation for treating ALL customers the SAME with NO ONE being special and that could be a positive thing, unless LEOs try to get revenge on the FFL, which would be an interesting issue. That could also result in more media coverage.

Personally, I think that the LEO loophole should be better advertised so that the average citizen understands what the real situation is. LEOs should be against the exemption since the law should not exist at all, but it seems that at times people are only against something if it actually affects them and refuse to stand up for what is right if it does not affect them.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-08-2013, 4:03 PM
psssniper's Avatar
psssniper psssniper is offline
nulla lex prohibet
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Clemente
Posts: 2,677
iTrader: 182 / 100%
Blog Entries: 3
Default

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that they are issued a duty weapon and whatever else their job may require, if they need/want anything for personal use then they should jump through the hoops just like the rest of us.
__________________
"I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness; I love only that which they defend.
victus exaro somniculosus, somnus exaro ieiunium
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-08-2013, 4:20 PM
CavTrooper's Avatar
CavTrooper CavTrooper is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ft Stewart, GA via SoCal!
Posts: 5,945
iTrader: 31 / 97%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
If you treat any customer "unfairly" I.E. refuse an otherwise legal transaction, be ready to receive bad feedback, and poor recommendations in the future. With the coming load of anti firearms laws FFL dealers will need every customer and all the support they can get. So if your refuse a legal transaction be ready to get all that comes with that decision, which will include a loss of regular gun buying customers and a reputation of not being friendly to law enforcement....
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
And if a FFL treats everyone the same, or in other words "fairly", then word might get out that is a FFL to support by the average citizen. In other words, it can go both ways. There are more non-LEOs than LEOs.



Hmmm, that sounds like a threat, which is an issue, especially if it is from a LEO.

It could result in an increase of regular gun buying customers. It could also give the FFL a reputation for treating ALL customers the SAME with NO ONE being special and that could be a positive thing, unless LEOs try to get revenge on the FFL, which would be an interesting issue. That could also result in more media coverage.

Personally, I think that the LEO loophole should be better advertised so that the average citizen understands what the real situation is. LEOs should be against the exemption since the law should not exist at all, but it seems that at times people are only against something if it actually affects them and refuse to stand up for what is right if it does not affect them.
Absolutely sounded like a threat. You know LEOs can refuse service too right?

House getting robbed? "We'll get around to it"

Wife getting raped? "We'll get around to it"

Kids been kidnapped? "We'll get around to it"

Yup... don't wanna get on LEOs bad side... serve them.. OR ELSE!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-08-2013, 4:24 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by psssniper View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that they are issued a duty weapon and whatever else their job may require, if they need/want anything for personal use then they should jump through the hoops just like the rest of us.
As I understand it, some departments allow officers to buy their own firearm and some seem to require that the officer buys their own firearm. In the case of a duty weapon, the department can issue a letter to that effect, but I have received such a letter, which had the old CA PC, for a firearm that clearly was not going to be a duty weapon. The officer got the letter to avoid the waiting period.

The last part of your sentence is the real question. Some LEOs don't want to be treated like the rest of us and if the exemption is there, why not? Some FFLs don't want to annoy LEOs, in part due to fear of what might happen (you have seen some of the "threats" here, if you don't honor the exemption, then you are LE unfriendly, which is not true).
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-08-2013, 4:44 PM
psssniper's Avatar
psssniper psssniper is offline
nulla lex prohibet
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Clemente
Posts: 2,677
iTrader: 182 / 100%
Blog Entries: 3
Default

Threats from our public employees, always one of my favorites. I have heard things along the same line from fireman who, when I expressed my opinion of their taking work from us regular guys by doing cheap cut rate contracting on the side, told me "well let's see what happens to your house when it catches on fire" sweet
__________________
"I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness; I love only that which they defend.
victus exaro somniculosus, somnus exaro ieiunium
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-08-2013, 4:59 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CavTrooper View Post
Absolutely sounded like a threat. You know LEOs can refuse service too right?

House getting robbed? "We'll get around to it"

Wife getting raped? "We'll get around to it"

Kids been kidnapped? "We'll get around to it"

Yup... don't wanna get on LEOs bad side... serve them.. OR ELSE!
Yep, and if they refuse, you can't sue them as there is case law on that. Officers who use their own personal issues as a reason to refuse to do their jobs should be fired. If enough officers do that, then the citizens can take over and replace them.

Any threat on the part of officers to not do their job with respect to a specific person/business should be taken seriously and action should be take to deal with it, as well as advertise it so that others know of the abuse of power.

There is a BIG difference between a FFL (business) refusing to do something and a police officer refusing to do their jobs. The threat of a police officer to do their jobs is more of a reason to treat them the same as everyone else. People don't have a choice of which police to call, but they do have a choice of which FFL to use.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein

Last edited by kemasa; 03-08-2013 at 5:02 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-16-2013, 2:56 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 7,222
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Oh please. No "threat". Any customer who believes he was not treated fairly has the right to make his issues known. Even LEO's.

My comments were only related to the relationship between a retailer and a customer. Unfortunately some here see all issues related to law enforcement in some sinister light. You guys are paranoid.

Nowhere did I infer that LEO's would not preform their duties or act in a unprofessional manner if a retailer were to refuse a otherwise legal transaction.
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.


Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04-16-2013, 3:35 PM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 7,015
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
Nowhere did I infer that LEO's would not preform their duties or act in a unprofessional manner if a retailer were to refuse a otherwise legal transaction.
Others did.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-16-2013, 4:04 PM
todd2968's Avatar
todd2968 todd2968 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,690
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

No one is above the law! Equal protection under the law! Special laws for special people. They enforce the law, so therefore they should be held to the law. Any of that make sense?
And the response is, they are making a lawful purchase. Reread above

Keep in mind we are only thinking of the LEO's safety!!!! Those off roster pistols were never drop tested!!!!
__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER
VFW LIFEMEMBER

Last edited by todd2968; 04-16-2013 at 4:21 PM..
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 1:46 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, 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 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.