PDA

View Full Version : non approved CA gun possible?


hicap
07-19-2005, 8:39 PM
I went to one of my local gun shops today and struck up a conversation with the owner about FFL transfers. I said I was looking for a specific gun, but it wasn't approved on the DOJ list. He said if I could find the gun used I could have it shipped to California despite it not being approved on the DOJ handgun list. This guy seems like he was pretty knoledgable, but I wanted to hear it from you guys too. Is this loop hole true? Can I get a non California approved gun as long as it's used?

classical_buff
07-19-2005, 8:54 PM
I think the owner is wrong about this. Only way you can purchase non-approved gun is through private party transfer - which means the gun has to be in CA already.

And, according to CA DOJ, "Private party transfers, curio/relic handguns, certain single-action revolvers, and pawn/consignment returns are exempt from this requirement."

Hope this helps.

hicap
07-19-2005, 9:30 PM
Shucks! That puts a damper on things. I'll just have to continue to call around for that specific gun.

bu-bye
07-19-2005, 9:42 PM
what gun?

hicap
07-19-2005, 10:02 PM
The new type of Colt MK IV series 70 1911. I know the series 80 Colts are approved, but I just can't get over those firing pin safeties.

rawny@mac.com
07-20-2005, 5:23 AM
You're in luck. There's one up for sale in the Classifieds (http://calguns.net/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/7736030741/m/93010535621). Do you feel like driving? http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

saki302
07-20-2005, 7:15 AM
As far as I know, there is only one surefire way to import a non-tested pistol into CA.

If a policeman buys it (LE are exempt from SB15), then transfers it to you later, you can have it.

I have *heard* that people moving to CA from out of state can bring their pistols (but no hicaps) in legally as well.

I also heard mention of a rule that allows you to import an untested pistol if it's part of an inheritance (I overheard my FFL talking to another guy about the new rules awhile back), but don't quote me on that- I may have heard wrong.

-Dave

bwiese
07-20-2005, 8:53 AM
Dave A.'s assertion about LEO purchase & subsequent transfer of an 'unsafe' handgun is correct. However, I think you'll find few - if any - cops to do that. Most probably don't even know the law and/or wouldn't transfer it to you.

It is also true a person from outside CA can indeed move into CA with 'unsafe' handgun(s) and transfer them after becoming a resident. (Within 60 days he must register them w/DOJ as a 'personal handgun importer'.) This person would merely execute a PPT to you at a local FFL dealer after acquiring residency.

Exemptions are for single-action revolvers, curio & relic guns, and specifically-named 22LR/32S&W Olympic sport pistols.

I know no other ways of importing 'unsafe' handguns that can be transferred to regular CA resident. The FFL's assertion that this can be done for inheritance does not seem to be supported by law


Bill Wiese
San Jose

esskay
07-20-2005, 10:22 AM
Isn't it for a PPT just that the seller needs to have either a CA driver's license or CA ID? I don't know if that is the same as being a resident.

bwiese
07-20-2005, 10:57 AM
Esskay,

Yes, perhaps I shoulda rephrased that. Having CA ID or DL should be good enough for PPT...

Bill Wiese
San Jose

esskay
07-20-2005, 5:51 PM
Cool, good to know.

Trader Jack
07-20-2005, 8:11 PM
It is not that simple for a LEO to buy a non approved gun. They must have a letter from there department stating under penalty of perjury that the gun is to be used for duty and not for personal use. They can also get a department letter requesting a waiver on the 10 day waiting period.

This has been a subject of some abuse with Leo's getting letters to waive the 10 day wait on sporting shotguns and hunting rifles. Some dealers have reported This abuse to the DOJ and the practice has dwindled quire a bit.

bwiese
07-21-2005, 9:25 AM
Trader Jack wrote:
It is not that simple for a LEO to buy a non approved gun. They must have a letter from there department stating under penalty of perjury that the gun is to be used for duty and not for personal use.

BZZZZT, wrong!

More 'gunshop lore law', which is usually wrong.

You're making up law that doesn't exist. READ THE LAW.

CPC section 12125-12133 covers the unsafe handgun laws. Specifically - and the italics are mine - we have:

PC 12125(a)(4) - The sale or purchase of any pistol, revolver or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, if the pistol, revolver, or other firearm is sold to, or purchased by, the Dept. of Justice, any police department, any sheriff's official, any marshal's office, the Youth & Adult Correctional Agency, the California Highway Patrol, any district attorney's office, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. Nor shall anything in this section prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.

The unsafe gun laws are separate from waiting period laws, etc. While you may have seen the latter may be abused, the former isn't much of an issue: I find no law extant requiring LEOs to have departmental signoff or papers to buy unsafe guns, nor is there any legal requirment that the unsafe gun is for duty use. If the LEO wants to buy nice unapproved toys we mere mortals without million-dollar pensions can't buy, he can.

As long as he has ID as currently-serving sworn LEO, I imagine the computer screen allows exemption/override for this, and perhaps record the ID etc that allows this sale to occur. If this doesn't occur, then the computer software writers have made their own law and it needs to be challenged because it is not supported in black-letter law or from the DOJ admin regulations I've seen (not all are available on their website, but even if they were, there's nothing supported by law or legislative intent).

[Departments would likely ban unsafe guns for duty use anyway, but that is a dept/agency matter, not a general legal issue.]



Bill Wiese
San Jose

gunnm619@aol.com
07-21-2005, 12:23 PM
So Bill. It is ok for LE to buy non-approved handguns and then have them transfered to any civilian? Is there a certain time frame? I have a friend that is LE, and Id like to get my hands on a new Colt 1911 WWI repro.

bwiese
07-21-2005, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by xGONZOx:
So Bill. It is ok for LE to buy non-approved handguns and then have them transfered to any civilian? Is there a certain time frame? I have a friend that is LE, and Id like to get my hands on a new Colt 1911 WWI repro.

It appears that your LEO friend could buy a gun, and then sell it to you via PPT.


However, this should probably not be a frequent thing - might raise eyebrows, and more than infrequent use of this allowance without retaining any of the unsafe guns - or instantly turning around and reselling the gun via PPT - might be thought of as bypassing intent of law.


Bill Wiese
San Jose

Trader Jack
07-21-2005, 2:10 PM
Bill Wiese is for the most part correct in his postings, but, not this time. Call the DOJ for your self Bill then retract your erroneous statement. LEO CANOT just walk in and purchase a firearm that is not on the list. PERIOD.

This is not gun store lore. It is fact.

bwiese
07-21-2005, 2:20 PM
Trader Jack,

I never believe what the idiot desk clerks/phone op folks at any agency say.

IF the DOJ is doing anything more than checking if the cop is indeed a sworn cop, the DOJ is arrogating itself legislative privilege. DOJ DOES NOT MAKE LAWS - IT ONLY IMPLEMENTS ADMINISTRATION OF THEM!

I've seen NO codified law ANYWHERE that says a cop needs paperwork to get an off-list/'unsafe' handgun in CA. The DOJ cannot legally make a go/no-go decision on whether a sale goes thru because of duty vs off- duty usage - the law is clear, if a LEO, he can buy off-list guns.

Just because the DOJ is doing it doesn't make it legal.

Perhaps we can get a cop to sue DOJ for a denial.

I'd love to be proved wrong on this, as I don't believe cops should get special privileges. Can you show me _LAW_ that refutes the law in my prior post - not just a phone assertion from a pimply-faced phone moron at DOJ who is not capable of giving legal advice?



Bill Wiese
San Jose

icormba
07-22-2005, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by bwiese:
pimply-faced phone moron

Bill Wiese
San Jose

http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://www.calguns.net/laughroll.gif http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


anyway, I'm just trying to figure out how a cop could just walk in and find a gun in a gun shop that isn't on the Ca approved list and not be able to buy it?

bwiese
07-22-2005, 1:58 PM
Chris...

If you go to TargetMasters in Milipitas they have a whole pile of handguns that are 'off list' and aren't consignment and are marked For LEO Only.

When doing the DROS paperwork I guess there's some sort of LEO override - show the badge, etc. Not sure on the details, but as I said, the relevant law does NOT require departmental permission for this (I have no idea of LEO override for 10 day wait, etc.)

Bill W
San Jose

imported_kantstudien
07-22-2005, 5:21 PM
The only way LEO can get a gun "off-list" and without the 10 day wait is with department letterhead, just like getting "assault weapons" or "hi-caps." They have to have the letter signed by their chief or sheriff stating that it will be "for duty use only"

gunsmithcat
07-22-2005, 5:52 PM
U can get a gun through inheritance if ur direct father or mother (not brother) or son or daughter live in another state and then transfer it to you. All you need to do is register and make sure it doesnt have any assault features

bwiese
07-22-2005, 5:55 PM
Originally posted by kantstudien:
The only way LEO can get a gun "off-list" and without the 10 day wait is with department letterhead, just like getting "assault weapons" or "hi-caps." They have to have the letter signed by their chief or sheriff stating that it will be "for duty use only"

Kantstudien...

I am only discussing the off-list part, not the bypassing of the 10 day wait, which is an entirely separate issue. It could be that some LEO folks have that perception because they try to get an off-list gun AND do it without waiting period.

I believe the avoidance of 10 day wait is entirely separate from off-list gun issue. Yes, avoidance of 10 day wait could require signature etc. - but that's the case whether or not the gun's off-list.

As I have said here before, I see IS NOTHING IN THE SUPPORTING LAW that requires LEOs getting dept permission to buy off-list guns. The badge or whatever proof of current sworn service should be good enough if cop's willing to wait 10 days (again, waiting period separate issue).

I would love to be proved wrong - show me some law, or DOJ regulations referring to the supporting law, that require this.

Bill Wiese
San Jose

Inoxmark
07-22-2005, 9:17 PM
Information Bulletin 2000 FD-07
Implementation of Senate Bill 15
DROS Entry and Processing Changes and Requirements
Page 4
SB 15 EXEMPT TRANSACTIONS
The following transaction types are also exempt from the requirements of SB 15:
• Sale/transfer/loan of a non-certified handgun that is exempt from the
provisions of subdivision (d) of PC section 12072 pursuant to any applicable
exemptions contained in PC section 12078 including, but not limited to, the
sale to any law enforcement agency or the military for use in the discharge of
official duties. This includes sales to a peace officers purchasing a “duty
weapon,” provided the officer presents the dealer with a letter from the
employing agency indicating that the handgun is to be used in the discharge of
the officer’s official duties.

Trader Jack
07-22-2005, 9:28 PM
Thank you for that work "Inoxmark"

I hope Bill Wiese will accept this. He is a good man and I have a lot of respect for him but I felt it important to point out to him that he was wrong in an earlier post regarding this.

saki302
07-23-2005, 6:57 PM
THe LEO expemtion is how I just got my hands on a near-new Kel-Tec P3AT http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
I swapped him for an old Kahr MK9 I had, probably in nearer-new condition than the P3AT.
I think he got the P3AT for off-duty or secondary weapon carry, but figured a backup 9mm is preferable to a backup .380 any day.

Either way, he's happy, and I'm happier http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
He DID have to wait the 10 days- we both left without our guns. I wasn't around when he bought it, but I can ask next time I bump into him.

-Dave

PS- gunsmithcat, I nearly pissed myself reading your signature:
S3
*****
$hower
$have

I have the same system, but I call it the 'triple s' HAHAHAHAHA!
I must shave in the shower with a blade, otherwise it feels like someone poured muriatic acid on my face.

imported_kantstudien
07-24-2005, 9:03 AM
Does this mean BWiese can never become Pope? http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://www.calguns.net/laughroll.gif

Trader Jack
07-24-2005, 7:13 PM
Well at this point in time Bill will have to drop to Cardinal. <VBG>

DNA
07-28-2005, 9:21 PM
Hey Dave,
9mm is a happy place. The P3AT was an experiment, the MK9 is a better fit. The 10 day exemption is like pulling teeth, it's a little easier to just wait the 10 days than trying to fill out all the paper work witht he department.

Hope you're enjoying the P3AT. I've gotta get the MK9 out to the range sometime this coming week, can't wait. http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Dan

gunnm619@aol.com
07-29-2005, 3:20 AM
Originally posted by kantstudien:
The only way LEO can get a gun "off-list" and without the 10 day wait is with department letterhead, just like getting "assault weapons" or "hi-caps." They have to have the letter signed by their chief or sheriff stating that it will be "for duty use only"

LEO do not need a letterhead for "hi-cap" mags. I was with my friend last week, and he just picked up a couple hi-cap mags for his Kimber without no letterhead.

imported_EOD Guy
07-29-2005, 5:28 AM
Originally posted by Inoxmark:
Information Bulletin 2000 FD-07
Implementation of Senate Bill 15
DROS Entry and Processing Changes and Requirements
Page 4
SB 15 EXEMPT TRANSACTIONS
The following transaction types are also exempt from the requirements of SB 15:
• Sale/transfer/loan of a non-certified handgun that is exempt from the
provisions of subdivision (d) of PC section 12072 pursuant to any applicable
exemptions contained in PC section 12078 including, but not limited to, the
sale to any law enforcement agency or the military for use in the discharge of
official duties. This includes sales to a peace officers purchasing a “duty
weapon,” provided the officer presents the dealer with a letter from the
employing agency indicating that the handgun is to be used in the discharge of
the officer’s official duties.

Sorry, but all that refers to is an exemption from the 10 day waiting period which applies to the purchase of a handgun for duty use. The purchase of "off list" guns is still a seperate matter.

Bill is still correct. There is no requirement for a department letter for purchase for personal use. The 10 day wait would still apply in that case.

Here is the applicable portion of the law:

CHAPTER 1.3. UNSAFE HANDGUNS

12125. (a) Commencing January 1, 2001, any person in this state who manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale, gives, or lends any unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.
(b) This section shall not apply to any of the following:
(1) The manufacture in this state, or importation into this state, of any prototype pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person when the manufacture or importation is for the sole purpose of allowing an independent laboratory certified by the Department of Justice pursuant to Section 12130 to conduct an independent test to determine whether that pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person is prohibited by this chapter, and, if not, allowing the department to add the firearm to the roster of pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed upon the person that may be sold in this state pursuant to Section 12131.
(2) The importation or lending of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person by employees or authorized agents determining whether the weapon is prohibited by this section.
(3) Firearms listed as curios or relics, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(4) The sale or purchase of any pistol, revolver or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, if the pistol, revolver, or other firearm is sold to, or purchased by, the Department of Justice, any police department, any sheriff's official, any marshal's office, the Youth and Adult Correctional Agency, the California Highway Patrol, any district attorney's office, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. Nor shall anything in this section prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.


Notice that there is no requirement for any letters or for the firearm to be for duty use.

Trader Jack
07-29-2005, 8:38 AM
Eod and Bill are both mistaken regarding a peace officer and non roster guns.

10 day waiting period not withstanding, a letter from there department stating under perjury MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE SELLER that the firearm is to be used in the performance of his\her duties.

If either of you have any doubts, call the DOJ for your self and ask.

stillbigmac
07-29-2005, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by xGONZOx:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kantstudien:
The only way LEO can get a gun "off-list" and without the 10 day wait is with department letterhead, just like getting "assault weapons" or "hi-caps." They have to have the letter signed by their chief or sheriff stating that it will be "for duty use only"
I would require letterhead.

Just because you have a badge doesn't mean your above the law.
LEO do not need a letterhead for "hi-cap" mags. I was with my friend last week, and he just picked up a couple hi-cap mags for his Kimber without no letterhead. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

bwiese
07-29-2005, 6:41 PM
Hi folks...

I'm on vacation in eastern Oregon so I will have to keep my reply brief.

EODGuy Thanks for your support. I agree and I think we both read this the same way - the issues discussed by the DOJ memo regard the 10 day wait vs bypassing it for LEOs - reference the cited PC 120xx laws.

TraderJack & others - remember, DOJ memos are not law!!!

There is NO _law_ in PC 12xxx supporting requiring LEOs to get permission from dept to buy off-list guns. The only permission they need is to have the 10-day wait waived. Since LEOs buying off-list guns would prob also wanna avoid the 10 day wait, they get paperwork from dept - ONLY REQ'D FOR AVOIDING 10 DAY WAIT.

There is NO _law_ specifying differing requirements for off-list duty vs non-duty weapons.

The only thing required to buy off-list gun is appropriate written ID from LEO agency (apparently, just a badge isn't good enough). There does NOT need to be PERMISSION from the agency, just ID - as long as the 10-day wait period is honored.

If a DOJ memo makes up things not supported in the PC 12xxx law, they have made up law, and those requirements are illegal.

READ THE LAW FIRST, and DOJ REGULATIONS SECOND.

If we can find a cop that wants to buy an off-list gun w/10 day wait and - despite a cooperating dealer's efforts - is denied by DOJ because of lack of 'departmental permission', DOJ needs to be sued for making regulatory law that has zero support in written law.

Again, with a 10-day waiting period, I say it is legal for a cop to buy an off-list gun without agency approval: duty or non-duty use is irrelevant.

TraderJack, DOJ procedural memos like you quoted are not law. (and in fact the cited laws really don't have anything to do with 'unsafe guns', which are totally treated in section PC 12125).

Bill Wiese
San Jose (on vacation in E. Oregon)

Trader Jack
07-29-2005, 8:54 PM
Bill why don't you call the DOJ and get the answer yourself. You are correct the DOJ does not make law but they do have the authority to implement the law and in a manner that they see fit.

gunsmithcat
07-31-2005, 10:07 AM
feels like a classroom discussion http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Dave, if i dont do those three things my day will not start off well.
And it has to be in that order...not all at once either. http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif