PDA

View Full Version : CAN I BUY AND SELL GUNS THIS WAY LEGALLY IN CALIFORNIA?


Electros
11-03-2008, 7:10 PM
I have read the current hand gun laws for California and (Arizona-which have no laws) and have some questions to ask-and if I read the laws right for California I could buy and sell small numbers of hand guns legally-I would only be gifted higher dollar guns that real collectors or gun buyers want for a higher profit margin-please read questions as follows and comment on what I have stated and list any types of hand guns that would bring the highest profit value for resale- Thanks-

1) My father lives in Arizona, a good citizen, and can buy hand guns at will-

2) I live in California, have a good clean record and am an adult over 21-

3) According to California hand gun laws a father can gift a hand gun to his
immediate family members ie: sons, daughters, or Grandshildern.

4) The CA Justice Dept. paper work only asks that the new owner from father
to son send in $19.00 and list the new owners information-and the name
only of the gifter and the relationship without asking for an address or
further information-

5) Once I the son own the hand gun I should then be able to sell this to
another individual in CA through an FFL-end of story-

AJAX22
11-03-2008, 7:12 PM
you are limited to selling 6 handguns per year if you are not an 01FFL

Fobjoe
11-03-2008, 7:13 PM
No you may not. That is considered a straw purchase should ATF choose to pursue it. However, you could transfer guns for your own use. If you decide you don't like it, then you could sell it. It has a lot to do with intention. Don't buy to sell.

elSquid
11-03-2008, 7:16 PM
...

Electros
11-03-2008, 7:17 PM
I have not followed up on the reply that only 6 guns can be sold per year-but no place did I read anything stating (straw purchases not allowed) what section does this actually come from?

Electros
11-03-2008, 7:18 PM
what is an LE Agency?

sargenv
11-03-2008, 7:20 PM
LE = Law Enforcement

ersatz
11-03-2008, 7:23 PM
LE Agency= Law Enforcement Agency, could be ATF, DOJ, whomever. Not sure how feasible it is to buy a gun and then sell it for a profit with all the fees associated. And it certainly isn't wise to admit such on a public forum.

Electros
11-03-2008, 7:32 PM
This is why I am asking these questions to you guys the pros to see what kind of answers I will get-

Mssr. Eleganté
11-03-2008, 7:53 PM
Another problem for you is the fact that the transfers from your father in Arizona to you in California would have to be processed through a California FFL. This is required by Federal law. There is no "intrafamily" exemption to FFL transfers in Federal law.

Electros
11-03-2008, 8:10 PM
As for the Intrafamilial gifting has no mention of the need for an FFL only asks how the gun was obtained-plus a $19 fee-up to 3 guns at a time -I listed the form page here- http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/oplaw.pdf

Mssr. Eleganté
11-03-2008, 9:00 PM
As for the Intrafamilial gifting has no mention of the need for an FFL only asks how the gun was obtained-plus a $19 fee-up to 3 guns at a time -I listed the form page here- http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/oplaw.pdf

That form doesn't mention needing an FFL because California law doesn't require an FFL for intra-family transfers. If you get a gun from you dad in Arizona and send in that form to CalDOJ you will be totally in the clear with all California law enforcement.

But BATFE can bust you for violation of the 1968 Gun Control Act and throw you into Federal prison.

Don't you remember when you asked this same question last month?

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=125149

Here is the actual text from the Federal law that regulates firearms transfers between residents of two different States...

§ 922. Unlawful acts

(a) It shall be unlawful --

(3) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State,

...

(5) for any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the transferor resides; except that this paragraph shall not apply to (A) the transfer, transportation, or delivery of a firearm made to carry out a bequest of a firearm to, or an acquisition by intestate succession of a firearm by, a person who is permitted to acquire or possess a firearm under the laws of the State of his residence, and (B) the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

nick
11-03-2008, 9:01 PM
Thank you, President Reagan :)

ke6guj
11-03-2008, 9:05 PM
As Amendment II stated, if you get that firearm from your dad in AZ, without using a CA FFL, you have violated federal law.

As for the "only 6 guns can be sold per year" thing; its actually "less than six transactions per calendar year"
12070. (a) No person shall sell, lease, or transfer firearms unless he or she has been issued a license pursuant to Section 12071. Any person violating this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Subdivision (a) does not include any of the following:
(4) The infrequent sale, lease, or transfer of firearms.
(c)(1) As used in this section, "infrequent" means:
(A) For pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person, less than six transactions per calendar year. For this purpose, "transaction" means a single sale, lease, or transfer of any number of pistols, revolvers, or other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person.
(B) For firearms other than pistols, revolvers, or other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person, occasional and without regularity.

Mssr. Eleganté
11-03-2008, 9:08 PM
Thank you, President Reagan :)

President Johnson signed the Gun Control Act of 1968 into law. Ronald Reagan was only the Governor of California at that time.

383green
11-04-2008, 8:03 AM
Isn't it only a straw purchase if person "A" purchases the gun with the intention of giving it to person "B" without transferring the gun by legal means, such that person "B" (presumably a prohibited person) gets to skip the background check, 4473 and DROS? If the transfer between persons "A" and "B" is done legally, through an FFL where required, then I wouldn't expect person "A"'s original purchase to be a straw purchase.

Now, person "A" is still acting as a dealer in the scheme that Electros proposes, which has its own set of problems, but I don't see this as being a straw purchase situation as long as all transfers are conducted in the legally required manner(s) and no prohibited persons are buying the guns.

Decoligny
11-04-2008, 9:35 AM
No you may not. That is considered a straw purchase should ATF choose to pursue it. However, you could transfer guns for your own use. If you decide you don't like it, then you could sell it. It has a lot to do with intention. Don't buy to sell.

Exactly how is this a straw purchase? A straw purchase is when you buy a firearm for someone who can not legally buy a firearm for themselves.

As far as tha ATF is concerned the transactions that the OP is describing is probably skirting CA law (not 100% sure), but I do know that it is not skirting Federal law if the end purchaser is not prohibited from owning a firearm, so the ATF wouldn't be concerned as their jurisdiction is Federal Law.

It probably does violate the CA law, as the OP will be paying his father for these "gifts" and is therefore purchasing the firearms.

Too risky anyway you look at it.

383green
11-04-2008, 9:44 AM
The proposed transactions do skirt federal law, however, because the father to son gift takes place across state lines, and thus the gun needs to be transferred through an FFL in CA according to federal law.

I don't think the proposed scheme would be a straw purchase, but it still wouldn't be legal as described in the original post.

dfletcher
11-04-2008, 9:45 AM
What is the definition of a transaction?

I have approximately 60 handguns. If I sell them one at a time via PPT I'd presume that is 60 transactions. If I go to an FFL and ask - "Will you buy these - make me an offer" is that one transaction or 60 transactions?

And with a PPT when does that "transaction" take place? When I put it up for consignment or when a person actually buys the thing?

ohsmily
11-04-2008, 9:55 AM
What is the definition of a transaction?

I have approximately 60 handguns. If I sell them one at a time via PPT I'd presume that is 60 transactions. If I go to an FFL and ask - "Will you buy these - make me an offer" is that one transaction or 60 transactions?



Yes, that is one transaction.

ohsmily
11-04-2008, 9:55 AM
No you may not. That is considered a straw purchase should ATF choose to pursue it.

No, it is not a straw purchase. Go away.

FortCourageArmory
11-04-2008, 9:58 AM
What is the definition of a transaction?
Selling of a firearm or multiple firearms to the same person/entity.

I have approximately 60 handguns. If I sell them one at a time via PPT I'd presume that is 60 transactions. If I go to an FFL and ask - "Will you buy these - make me an offer" is that one transaction or 60 transactions?
If they all go to the same person or entity, it is one transaction. If you sell 30 to me and then 30 to Wes at 10%, that would be two transactions, etc.

And with a PPT when does that "transaction" take place? When I put it up for consignment or when a person actually buys the thing?
At the time the firearm is sold to the other party and the DROS paperwork is filled out. You'll know because you'll have to sign the DROS form as well.

FortCourageArmory
11-04-2008, 10:01 AM
No you may not. That is considered a straw purchase should ATF choose to pursue it. However, you could transfer guns for your own use. If you decide you don't like it, then you could sell it. It has a lot to do with intention. Don't buy to sell.
Not a straw purchase by definition but it probably violates federal gun-transfer law. Becasue it involves transferring a firearm across state lines, the feds say that it MUST be done through an FFL holder. Not my rules...just the ones I have to abide by.