|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 30, 2009, 05:26 PM | #1 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Private party transfer through CA FFL
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Private party transfers, curio/relic handguns, certain single-action revolvers, and pawn/consignment returns are exempt from this requirement. Quote:
Last edited by maestro pistolero; March 30, 2009 at 05:33 PM. |
||||
March 30, 2009, 06:35 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 7, 2007
Location: Free of California!
Posts: 274
|
"Private party transfer" has a special meaning in California. There's a special bit of $35 paperwork you have to fill out for it, and it requires that both people be present and have CA government-issued ID.
Since the gun is coming from out of California, it's still subject to the List. :barf:
__________________
NRA Life Member since January 2009 Matt.25:40 |
March 30, 2009, 06:55 PM | #3 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Quote:
|
|
March 30, 2009, 07:20 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 7, 2007
Location: Free of California!
Posts: 274
|
Yeah, tell us about it. It's backdoor ban. You can buy anything on the list... and then the conditions for the list get tighter and tighter. For example, you can't add a new gun unless it has a loaded chamber indicator and a magazine disconnect, and the DOJ is very persnickety about what counts as a "loaded chamber indicator". Next year they're hoping to add microstamping to the list of requirements.
As older models get discontinued or dropped from the list (manufacturers have to pay a fee every year to stay on the list) and newer models don't make the cut (or don't even get submitted), Californians have fewer and fewer options. Eventually, well, they didn't outright ban handguns, did they? It's not their fault nobody makes guns that meet their "safety" requirements.
__________________
NRA Life Member since January 2009 Matt.25:40 |
March 31, 2009, 09:53 AM | #5 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
Quote:
That information is incorrect. |
|
March 31, 2009, 10:04 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 18, 1999
Location: Hemet (middle of nowhere) California
Posts: 4,261
|
The private party transfer exemption to the list is for in-state private party transfers only. State to state private party sales are still subject to the list. Note that the list is more specific than it appears because it's SKU number specific even though the DOJ doesn't publish those SKU numbers.
__________________
Proud Life Member: National Rifle Association, California Rifle & Pistol Association, and the Second Amendment Foundation. Annual Member: Revolutionary War Veterans Association (Project Appleseed) and the Madison Society. |
March 31, 2009, 10:56 AM | #7 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
Quote:
|
|
March 31, 2009, 11:59 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 7, 2007
Location: Free of California!
Posts: 274
|
NavyLT, see the answer from one of the DOJ analysts in an older thread.
Whether this is a strict legal interpretation or not, it's the DOJ's stance on the matter right now, and behaving otherwise is a good way to end up on the wrong end of a prosecution. The Calguns Foundation believes they've found a workaround (involving transferring the bare frame, which is not a "handgun", then sending the other parts separately direct to the new owner), but that is still waiting on the Office of Adminstrative Law's stamp of approval.
__________________
NRA Life Member since January 2009 Matt.25:40 |
March 31, 2009, 03:39 PM | #9 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
Thanks! I appreciate the extra info, appears as if you are correct. They should define private party transaction in the statutes.
|
|
|