PDA

View Full Version : dros pistol and long gun


ady
10-12-2009, 6:26 PM
Can my ffl dros a new pistol and a long gun at the same time and only charge me for the $25 or would it be $50 due to seperate form on pistol
TIA.

Quiet
10-12-2009, 6:52 PM
Handgun needs a seperate DROS.
However, you can do multiple long guns on a single DROS.

tenpercentfirearms
10-13-2009, 6:51 AM
This has been debated before.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=31037

kemasa
10-13-2009, 10:55 AM
It has been debated before, but if you look at the Penal Code, you will see that you can not transfer a longgun with a handgun DROS. You can also confirm this by calling the CA DOJ.

striker3
10-13-2009, 12:17 PM
It has been debated before, but if you look at the Penal Code, you will see that you can not transfer a longgun with a handgun DROS. You can also confirm this by calling the CA DOJ.

What penal code is that? From reading through that thread, it doesn't seem as if anyone, DOJ included, can cite the exact code...

kemasa
10-13-2009, 1:32 PM
Penal Code 12076.

It is broken up into two parts, handguns and non-handguns.

Here are some of the sections:

(h) Where the electronic or telephonic transfer of applicant
information is used, the department shall establish a system to be
used for the submission of the fees described in subdivision (e) to
the department.
(i) (1) Only one fee shall be charged pursuant to this section for
a single transaction on the same date for the sale of any number of
firearms that are not pistols, revolvers, or other firearms capable
of being concealed upon the person or for the taking of possession of
those firearms.
(2) In a single transaction on the same date for the delivery of
any number of firearms that are pistols, revolvers, or other firearms
capable of being concealed upon the person, the department shall
charge a reduced fee pursuant to this section for the second and
subsequent firearms that are part of that transaction.

(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of
sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction"
means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that
are not handguns.

It is stupid, but it is the law. You should be able to include long guns with a handgun DROS, but that is not the way the law is written.

The reason that you can not add long guns is because it would not be consider part of a single sale, it is really a separate sale.

ady
10-13-2009, 8:12 PM
Thanks! that was was i was looking for but could not find it.

tenpercentfirearms
10-13-2009, 11:13 PM
Thanks! that was was i was looking for but could not find it.

Kemesa, you are not being very intellectually honest here. You actually just cut and paste definitions from different sections of penal code. There is no PC 12076(h)(4) as you are claiming here.

Please use The DOJ Website (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/12070.php) for a clear reference to what we are talking about and read it yourself in its unaltered entirety.

12076(h) and (i) only state what the state may charge for these transactions. They are not regulations on what you may or may not do as an FFL submitting DROS.

However PC 12077 does state what is required on the electronic register. It does state what is required for a handgun DROS in 12077(b)(1) through (3). That is pretty simple.

12077(c)(1) through (3) states what is required for a long gun.

12077(d) states what occurs in general. That is where he gets the (d) Where the register is used, the following shall apply:
(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns.Now the interesting thing is you can only report one firearm transaction per document. That is fine. I will only report one transaction, which can be any number of long guns. However, that is kind of confusing as technically a handgun sale is not a transaction as it is specifically exempted in 12077(d)(4). So if a handgun sale is not a transaction by definition as it is excluded, then what in the hell is it?

So if I can submit a handgun sale, which is not a transaction as it is specifically exempted, using the guidelines of 12077(b)(1) through (3) and at the same time satisfy all of the requirements of 12077(c)(1) through (3), then am I violating this law by adding long guns to it?

It is also interesting to note that the DOJ does not specify how long a single sale, loan, or transfer lasts. Kemesa has also claimed that you cannot add long guns to a long gun DROS (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=193222&highlight=single+transaction) because of this single sale language and because the DROS software asks for a number and you can't change it in the software. It is interesting to note that no where in 12077(c)(1) through (3) is "number of long guns" a required entry. Additionally, is a Dealer Record of Sale complete when it is run? Or is it complete only when "(3) The firearms dealer shall record on the register or record of electronic transfer the date that the firearm is delivered."? After all can't the DOJ deny a person? Until the ten days pass, is the transaction over? Even when the ten days pass is the transaction over because if their 30 days expire, they still may not take the firearm home with them?

Remember 12076 doesn't really apply as that just specifies what the DOJ may charge and how they are submitted. So I am not really sure why kemesa even quotes that section and why he then tags on sections from 12077 without properly citing them.

So again, there is still no clear evidence that you are prohibited from adding long guns onto a handgun DROS. The feds clearly allow it and nothing in the penal code prohibits it. Additionally, until you sign the 4473, you can add as many long guns as you want as you can claim you left the customer transaction open and they didn't finish paying and you were following federal guidelines that "Additional firearms purchases by the same buyer may not be added to the form after the sller has signed and dated it. A buyer who wishes to purchase additonal firearms after the seller has signed and dated the form must complete a new ATF Form 4473. The seller must conduct a new NICS check."

Moral of the story, always check the code yourself. Obviously kemesa is cutting and pasting code from different sections to fit his world view. I am not sure why, but it doesn't lead to a very credible argument when disclosed.

If calling the DOJ to confirm, be sure to have them give you the specific penal code sections that prohibit it. If they can't answer, give them your number and tell them to call you back when they find it. Better yet, ask for it in writing. Don't hold your breath waiting for a response and the more I think about it, don't be surprised if it isn't the same exact argument kemesa makes.

Kemesa, which gun shop do you run?

Never mind, I found it. http://www.net-ffl.com/ffl.html

Is Kemesa your given name? That is kind of interesting that you don't have your business name and address anywhere. I did manage to find an e-mail link.

Sorry for the questions, I am just trying to establish exactly who you are. Everyone knows who I am and knows where my shop is located and even the name of it. Just trying to establish your credibility beyond your flawed arguments. Maybe I should just stick to your flawed arguments.

One final edit: Please understand that not all FFLs will do this, in fact probably few will actually run a handgun DROS and add long guns. If they do not wish to do it, do not force the issue as this is a bit of a gray area. I think I make a solid argument that it is not prohibited; however, should an FFL be expected to take a large financial risk to prove this is correct? As an FFL it makes more economic sense to just run the customer for another $25 and not worry about it. So just because I think you can do it and just because I have heard of other FFLs doing it (and the BATFE told me they have seen other FFLs do it during their audits), doesn't mean your FFL is going to want to do it. In the grand scheme of things if $25 is going to make or break the deal, you probably don't need the guns anyway.

kemasa
10-14-2009, 11:06 AM
10%, it is offensive for you to falsely claim that I am not being honest. If I grabbed from a different section, it was by mistake. Quite clearly you are not accurate since you can not even get my name correct, which is a simple thing.

You are not being honest nor accurate when you say "Kemesa has also claimed that you cannot add long guns to a long gun DROS because of this single sale language and because the DROS software asks for a number and you can't change it in the software." This is completely FALSE since I stated that the reason that you can not add longguns is because it would be a different sale. I know that you claim that until it is all said and done it is the same sale, but that is that what a reasonable person would say that a single sale is.

Why do you bring up the Feds in terms of the DROS? Don't you understand that the Feds have NOTHING to do with the CA DROS and CA law? Clearly, this is to try to support your view, but is it bogus. You also bring up adding firearms to the 4473, but again this is bogus because it has nothing to do with CA law and the requirements for CA. At the end you again refer to the BATF, but why? This is NOT a BATF issue at all. The BATF does not know CA law and the CA DOJ does not know the Federal law. You need to contact the correct group.

The penal code states what a DROS submission is and it is separated into handguns and non-handguns. You want to merge the two, but it can not be done. As I said, common sense would state that you should be able to include longguns with a handgun purchase since a background check is being done and they don't keep track of the serial numbers, but the problem is that you expect that the law be based on common sense.

It is a mistake to claim that the penal code has to prohibit it. While that is one way, the other is to look at the DROS requirements and see if you can submit a handgun DROS, as well as a long gun DROS, which you can't.

The summary is that 10% is giving bad advice and giving deceptive arguments (Feds) to support his position. 10% does not understand that if the CA Penal Code states how the DROS is to be submitted for a handgun and for a longgun, that it does not have to specifically prohibit something which not does follow the law.

I challenge 10% to tell the CA DOJ that he adds longguns to handgun purchases and adds longguns to a previous longgun sale and see what happens.

tenpercentfirearms
10-16-2009, 7:03 AM
10%, it is offensive for you to falsely claim that I am not being honest. If I grabbed from a different section, it was by mistake. Quite clearly you are not accurate since you can not even get my name correct, which is a simple thing.You moved down a whole section by mistake in your cutting and pasting? Are you serious? Come on Kemasa, that is down right ludicrous. Misspelling your name is a mistake. Splicing two completely different sections together is clearly not a mistake. You just got caught by someone who actually thinks for a living.

You are not being honest nor accurate when you say "Kemesa has also claimed that you cannot add long guns to a long gun DROS because of this single sale language and because the DROS software asks for a number and you can't change it in the software." This is completely FALSE since I stated that the reason that you can not add longguns is because it would be a different sale. I know that you claim that until it is all said and done it is the same sale, but that is that what a reasonable person would say that a single sale is.Speak English man! You're contradicting yourself. Above you state, "As I said, common sense would state that you should be able to include longguns with a handgun purchase since a background check is being done and they don't keep track of the serial numbers, but the problem is that you expect that the law be based on common sense." I expect the law to be based on common sense? No actually, you think the law is based on common sense. I have always advocated that the law is the law. If it doesn't prohibit it, then they can't prosecute you for it. You are the one that is claiming a transaction only lasts for some specific set of time outside of the law based on "a reasonable person would say that a single sale is." WRONG and you know it. There is no reasonable person standard here. How long does the penal code state a single sale lasts? It doesn't. Therefore, my single sale can last as long as the 30 days are in process. Or, by federal guidelines, until I sign the 4473.

Why do you bring up the Feds in terms of the DROS? Don't you understand that the Feds have NOTHING to do with the CA DROS and CA law?Oh you are right. I don't even fill out the 4473 anymore because I only have to follow state law. It is kind of scary when a dealer doesn't understand we are bound by two sets of rules. Sometimes those two sets vary with each other. CLEARLY if one set of rules does not prohibit an act, then you can do it. DROS and Penal Code makes no mention of how long a single transaction lasts. Sorry. It is that simple. However, the 4473 states a single transaction lasts as long as it takes for me to sign the 4473. Since state law doesn't define how long the transaction lasts, I could add long guns all the way up to the 30 day expiration date.

Clearly, this is to try to support your view, but is it bogus. You also bring up adding firearms to the 4473, but again this is bogus because it has nothing to do with CA law and the requirements for CA. At the end you again refer to the BATF, but why? This is NOT a BATF issue at all. The BATF does not know CA law and the CA DOJ does not know the Federal law. You need to contact the correct group.Again, a serious lack of understanding on your part as I have explained.

The penal code states what a DROS submission is and it is separated into handguns and non-handguns. You want to merge the two, but it can not be done. As I said, common sense would state that you should be able to include longguns with a handgun purchase since a background check is being done and they don't keep track of the serial numbers, but the problem is that you expect that the law be based on common sense.

It is a mistake to claim that the penal code has to prohibit it. While that is one way, the other is to look at the DROS requirements and see if you can submit a handgun DROS, as well as a long gun DROS, which you can't.Actually you can. You submit the handgun DROS and that meets every single requirement set forth in 12077(c)(1) through (3). You kill two birds with one stone and follow the federal rules and properly fill out the 4473. It really is that easy.

The summary is that 10% is giving bad advice and giving deceptive arguments (Feds) to support his position. 10% does not understand that if the CA Penal Code states how the DROS is to be submitted for a handgun and for a longgun, that it does not have to specifically prohibit something which not does follow the law.

I challenge 10% to tell the CA DOJ that he adds longguns to handgun purchases and adds longguns to a previous longgun sale and see what happens.

Well the main problem with your little challenge is if I am not doing those things, then I would by lying to them. However...

I called the CA DOJ on Wednesday on my way home, which is pretty much a worthless thing to do because they usually are going to speak off the record, the call was not recorded, and I don't have anything in writing. However, I wanted to play Kemasa's little game.

The agent I spoke to seemed to think that you could not add additional long guns to the DROS after they left the building. I asked how long a single sale lasts and they didn't have a penal code answer. I asked if I made a mistake on the DROS and put the wrong number if I could cross it out and put the correct number. They said that is fine as long as it doesn't happen very often. I don't know about yall, but that pretty much tells me there isn't really a way to stop us. However, he/she stated in the end it would probably be up for the lawyers to hash out if someone really wanted to make an issue of it.

Then I moved on to adding long guns to a handgun DROS. This agent actually agreed that his/her reading is that is legal as long as it was on the same day before they left the shop. I thought that was interesting as they seem to think a single sale lasts while the customer is in the shop. Again, no reference to where that comes from.

The main reason I think this is interesting is that this agent thinks the number of long guns you put on a long gun DROS is significant; however, on a handgun DROS, you wouldn't be putting down how many long guns you DROSed. So the issue of adding long guns would be moot since they would have no clue how many you added. A flaw in their reasoning.

So according to one nameless agent at the DOJ, you can't add additional long guns, but you can piggyback long guns onto handgun DROS. If you guys want, call and ask the same questions and let's see how many answers we get. Also keep in mind that of course agents are going to tell you that you can't add additional long guns because they want more of your money. Ask them if a customer can change their mind and if you can cross out the number and make it less. They have no problems with that for some reason. You would think since the penal code doesn't give you permission to do that, you would be forced to sell the guns to the customer anyway, right Kemasa?

In the end you will have to know the penal code and relevant sections and be ready to defend yourself if they try and write you up for it. Is that worth the $25 savings to your customers? You have to make that decision.

I think it is clear from my arguments that they cannot pin you down on this, but that doesn't mean they might not try.

kemasa
10-16-2009, 9:56 AM
10%, you are making false statements. I looked at the Penal in a text file, searching for a keyword. Then I went to the top to find the number. If I grabbed from two sections, it was a mistake, but the simple fact is that those are sections in the Penal code, so your personal attack is unwarranted.

You say that you made a mistake in my name, yet you claim that I could not have made a mistake. You are a hypocrite.

Again, you make false a false statement when you claim that "No actually, you think the law is based on common sense". You have NO basis for that and your comments are purely an attack in order to try to support your position.

You are completely wrong when you say "If it doesn't prohibit it, then they can't prosecute
you for it". The law states how you are to process a handgun purchase and how to process a longgun purchase. If you do not follow the law, then they can prosecute and the law does not have to say that you can not include a longgun with a handgun purchase. That is a simple concept.

You are also wrong about a single transaction. In part of your support, you include the 4473 requirements, which does not apply. Talk to an attorney andtalk to the CA DOJ and see if they agree with your view. Federal guidelines do NOT apply, why can't you understand that????

You say "Oh you are right. I don't even fill out the 4473 anymore because I only have to
follow state law.", then you go onto to say "It is kind of scary when a dealer doesn't understand we are bound by two sets of rules." Clearly. you don't understand the difference between state and federal law. You try to use Federal law to justify violating state law. I never claimed that you did not have to follow Federal, so your comments are just plain stupid and false.

tenpercentfirearms
10-17-2009, 7:37 AM
10%, you are making false statements. I looked at the Penal in a text file, searching for a keyword. Then I went to the top to find the number. If I grabbed from two sections, it was a mistake, but the simple fact is that those are sections in the Penal code, so your personal attack is unwarranted.

You say that you made a mistake in my name, yet you claim that I could not have made a mistake. You are a hypocrite.Ok, you mistakenly cut and pasted two sections of penal code together. Again, it shows how thorough you are in reading the sections and understanding them.

Again, you make false a false statement when you claim that "No actually, you think the law is based on common sense". You have NO basis for that and your comments are purely an attack in order to try to support your position.Actually I quoted your own words for you. It appears you are now completely ignoring the facts. I will quote you again.

This is completely FALSE since I stated that the reason that you can not add longguns is because it would be a different sale. I know that you claim that until it is all said and done it is the same sale, but that is that what a reasonable person would say that a single sale is.Claiming that the length of a reasonable sale is up to the definition of a "reasonable person" is relying on common sense to determine what the law is. Again, your job here is simple. Show us in the penal code where it defines how long a single transaction lasts. Reasonable definition or common sense does not apply.

You are completely wrong when you say "If it doesn't prohibit it, then they can't prosecute
you for it". The law states how you are to process a handgun purchase and how to process a longgun purchase. If you do not follow the law, then they can prosecute and the law does not have to say that you can not include a longgun with a handgun purchase. That is a simple concept.LOL. Are you serious. You are really going to claim that it is a simple concept that if there is no law prohibiting an act, that the authorities can still prosecute you when you have committed no crime. Please don't change the issue anymore and specifically answer this question. What penal code section are they going to charge me with for running a handgun DROS and piggybacking long guns onto it. No more vague references to rogue agencies charging people for laws that are not written down.

As I have stated and as I have confirmed with a DOJ agent, there is nothing that prohibits you from adding a long gun to a handgun DROS. As I have stated, if you run a handgun DROS as stipulated in PC 12077(b)(1) through (3), you are also satisfying all of the requirements of PC 12077(c)(1) through (3). Yet you seem to keep ignoring these facts. So, kemasa, here is your chance to be the DA. Charge me with something. No more dancing around the issue, unless that is you simply don't have a case.

You are also wrong about a single transaction. In part of your support, you include the 4473 requirements, which does not apply. Talk to an attorney andtalk to the CA DOJ and see if they agree with your view. Federal guidelines do NOT apply, why can't you understand that????Are you really this dense? The state does not stipulate how long a single sale lasts. Therefore there is nothing in state law I have to worry about except the expiration of a DROS transaction after 30 days. I am not using federal law to follow CA state law. I am simply following federal law.

Again, I ask you, how long does a single sale last? You to this date have still yet to show how long it lasts. Your own rebuttal has been "what a reasonable person believe" which is in no way used in this penal code section (yes, it is used in other sections of the penal code and as is apparent you seem to like to cut from other unrelated sections and just throw them in to help your case). I even did as you stated and asked the DOJ. They seemed to think it lasted a day, but again, they could not provide this definition.

You and the authorities are simply making up what you believe how long a single sale lasts. Sorry, that isn't going to cut it. My lawyer will rip the DOJ and the DA to shreds with such fuzzy application of the law. Not only that, when the DA cannot show a definition of the length of a single sale, my lawyer is going to show I have been acting in good faith and following the clear federal guidelines of how long a single sale lasts. Absent of a clear guideline by this state, I am following federal law. It shows a trend of following the law which is going to testify to my good character.

You say "Oh you are right. I don't even fill out the 4473 anymore because I only have to
follow state law.", then you go onto to say "It is kind of scary when a dealer doesn't understand we are bound by two sets of rules." Clearly. you don't understand the difference between state and federal law. You try to use Federal law to justify violating state law. I never claimed that you did not have to follow Federal, so your comments are just plain stupid and false.Clearly I don't understand the difference? Your statements and positions on this entire subject I think demonstrate whose comments are just plain stupid and false.

So no more side issues. Answer us this.

1)Specifically, where does the state define the time length of a single sale?

2)What penal code sections would a person be charged with for running a long gun DROS on a handgun DROS?

Nothing else you say or do matters except those two items. Stop dancing around the subject and prove your point. I called the DOJ as you told me to and they said handguns and long guns can mix. You have yet to address this in your replies. I wonder why?

kemasa
10-17-2009, 9:31 AM
You just love to warp things into what you want them to be in order to try to attack others, namely me, and try to make the world fit your view. The law says:

(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns.

Please explain how you can interpret that to mean that you can sell a firearm on one day and then sell another on another day and claim that is a single sale.

Please see the dictionary definition of the word single: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/single

You clearly don't understand the law. Do you honestly think that the law has to prohibit an act to make it illegal and that is the only way to make it illegal? If the law states how you must do something, then if you do not follow that, you are violating the law and can be charged. There are many examples of this, but I doubt that you would get any of them.

12077 states what information has to be submitted for a handgun and a non-handgun. It states what must be submitted for each and if you try to combine then you are not doing that.

First, you need to understand what a firearm transaction is. You need to know the difference between a transaction and a single sale. If you were to understand that, then you would understand that you could have a single sale, but which involves multiple firearm transactions. Each firearm transaction must be reported. If you sell one or more longguns and a handgun, then you have two firearm transactions to report. If you only report the handgun transaction, you are failing to follow the law.

If you do not report each firearm transaction, then you are violating 12077. Since I am not a DA, nor part of the CA DOJ, I clearly can not charge you with anything.

It is rather amusing that you want to claim that a single sale can last some period of time. What part of "single" don't you understand???

The aspect to the same day relates to the discount you get for multiple handguns.

BTW, there are certain people at the CA DOJ I trust with their answers and others that I don't trust so much. So, it really depends on who you talked to. But you can still do as I challenged to do and call the CA DOJ and tell them that you are adding longguns after the DROS is submitted and that you are including longguns to a handgun DROS. Give them the documentation and see what happens. If you don't want to do this, then post the 4473 transaction number with the details of what you did and I am sure that someone will be in contact shortly.

1)Specifically, where does the state define the time length of a single sale? The dictionary. Do you really need each and every word used in the Penal Code to be defined?

2)What penal code sections would a person be charged with for running a long gun DROS on a handgun DROS? 12077.

halifax
10-17-2009, 10:34 AM
I don't get it. What do you care so much how Wes runs his business? He seems to have a defense ready to go IF any agency wants to contest him. Obviously, he thinks there are grey areas here.

BTW, the tax man says a sale isn't complete until the buyer takes possession. If there is a single receipt, why wouldn't that be a single transaction?

kemasa
10-17-2009, 11:01 AM
The reason is because he is breaking the law and if he gets arrested for illegally transfering firearms, the liberal news media might have a field day with it. I also would not want to see a FFL get shut down either, there are enough going out of business.

If he should also not announce to the world what he is doing and should not promote others to do what he is doing.

Who do you think it will help to see him arrested on the 6 o'clock news? I am sure that the Brady Bunch would love it.

In regards to firearms, the transaction is different than a sale. Each handgun is a transaction and each multiple non-handguns single sale are a transaction. When the sale is complete is a different story.

striker3
10-17-2009, 11:05 AM
Your definition of single is irrelevant to 10%'s question. He is not disputing that you can only process a single sale, he is asking that someone show him what California defines as a single sale. In absence of a CA definition, he reverts back to the federal law.

Going back to your own source, did you look up the definition of sale? Obviously not: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sale

Legal Dictionary

Main Entry: sale
Function: noun
1 a : the transfer of title to property from one party to another for a price; also : the contract of such a transaction

So the legal definition is that it is the transfer of property. Now could the DROS be viewed as a contract to only accept or deliver a specific amount of firearms? Obviously not if the DOJ allows a reduction in the amount of items delivered without notifying them first...

So, a single sale would be the single transfer of goods. Since that transfer does not take place until after the 10 day wait, why couldn't additional items be transferred on that same day in a single transfer, or in other words, a single sale.

[quote]Do you honestly think that the law has to prohibit an act to make it illegal and that is the only way to make it illegal?[/b]

Yes, that is honestly the way that it is. If the law states an explicit means to accomplishing something, that automatically prohibits other avenues. But, if there are gray areas, which it really looks like here there are, then nothing is prohibited until a court rules that it is.

kemasa
10-17-2009, 11:14 AM
What does the definition of sale change anything? Add to that the word single and what most people with some sense would mean to be a "single sale".

Then look at the Penal Code with respect to "firearm transaction".

You should then see that his boat is sunk.

If the law says that you must report each firearm transaction and defines what a firearm transaction is, but you ignore that and try to group handguns with non-handguns, which is not specifically mentioned, what have you done?

The law may prohibit actions, but it also may say what you have to do. If you don't do what is said, then you are violating the law.

striker3
10-17-2009, 12:12 PM
What does the definition of sale change anything? Add to that the word single and what most people with some sense would mean to be a "single sale".

It applies as a sale does not complete until the transfer of goods is accomplished. Add on single and someone with common sense would see that it is a single transfer of goods. I am not sure why you would think the definition of single is more applicable than the definition of sale.

Then look at the Penal Code with respect to "firearm transaction".

You should then see that his boat is sunk.

(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns.

It says that a handgun is not considered a transaction. There is nothing in the PC that defines what a handgun only transaction would be. Since the above PC excerpt only excludes the combining of non-handgun transactions, it does not limit the combining of non-handgun/handgun transactions.

If the law says that you must report each firearm transaction and defines what a firearm transaction is, but you ignore that and try to group handguns with non-handguns, which is not specifically mentioned, what have you done?

Okay, so you cannot combine firearms transactions...a handgun is exempt form being a firearm transaction. So where does that prohibit you from combining handgun/non-handgun transactions?

The law may prohibit actions, but it also may say what you have to do. If you don't do what is said, then you are violating the law.

The only portion of the law that may prohibit the combination of handgun/non-handgun sales is:

12077 (a) The Department of Justice shall prescribe the form of the register and the record of electronic transfer pursuant to Section 12074.

It then goes on to detail what information must be included for a handgun purchase, and then what information must be included for a non-handgun purchase.

Now, I do not have access to the DROS software. Does the DOJ have an explicitly separate forms for handgun and non-handgun DROS? The blank DROS worksheet on the DOJ site combines both types and you fill out the portions that apply to the type.

Looking at the information required for each type of firearm according to 12077, there is no reason that a handgun DROS would not fulfill the requirement for a non-handgun DROS. The requirements for the non-handgun DROS do not even state that the number of firearms transferred be annotated.

So my question's are:
1. Is there an official ruling from the DOJ that prescribes the exact form that must be used for a non-handgun DROS, and another that must be used for a handgun DROS?

2. Has there ever been a dealer who was fined/cited or warned during an audit for adding long-guns onto a handgun DROS?

kemasa
10-17-2009, 12:24 PM
Say what? "It says that a handgun is not considered a transaction."???? Where does it say that??? EACH handgun is considered a firearms transaction. Each firearm transaction must be reported by law.

The DROS entry has more than two possible entries, but specifically to what you are talking about there are handguns and longguns. In the past, the paper forms were of two types, handgun and longgun. Two separate and distinct forms. The DROS has two separate entries for them, as well as private party transfers, exempt transfers, etc.

I doubt that the information regarding dealer fined/cited is public, but in any case I don't know any place that it is made available.

The real question is why would a dealer want to take a chance. If you wanted to take a chance, why would you make a public statement that you were doing something which, at best, is questionable. Could it be that making such a public statement is to get others to be the test case?

striker3
10-17-2009, 1:13 PM
Say what? "It says that a handgun is not considered a transaction."???? Where does it say that??? EACH handgun is considered a firearms transaction. Each firearm transaction must be reported by law.

I mistyped in my original statement. I meant to say that a handgun is not considered a firearm transaction with reference to 12077 (c)(4) which states:
One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns.

There is nothing in 12077 (b) that defines what a handgun transaction would be classified as. No where in 12077 for that matter, is a handgun transaction ever defined as a firearm transaction. Doing a search of the firearms section, there is not another instance that refers to a firearms transaction either. Does it make sense to label a handgun as not being part of a firearm transaction? Nope, and that is why there are gray areas.

Now if the DROS software has specific forms that have been prescribed by the DOJ to be used individually for long guns and handguns, that may be the problem.

The real question is why would a dealer want to take a chance. If you wanted to take a chance, why would you make a public statement that you were doing something which, at best, is questionable. Could it be that making such a public statement is to get others to be the test case?

From previous statements, it does not seem as if Wes is willing to risk his livelihood to run a long gun on a handgun DROS, and I do not blame him. Is he trying to bait someone to be a test case? I doubt it...He is just stating what a possible defense would be. Although, there probably is someone with enough money to burn to be a test case. Ever hear of the Milpitas group buy?

I also think that there are two different debates going on here:

1. Can you add a long gun to a handgun DROS?

I think that this hinges on if the DOJ prescribes in a policy letter of some sort that each long gun has to be on a specific type of form and that form is distinctly separate from the handgun DROS form. Remember, while the handgun requirements would cover all of the long gun requirements, the DOJ has the authority due to 12077 (a) to prescribe the form.

2. Can you add additional long guns to a long gun DROS at time of delivery?

This applies to the debate as the length of a sale has been called into question. I see no where in the penal code that states that a single sale must be initiated on the same day. By definition, a sale is complete when the goods have been transferred. Since the requirements of the form listed in 12077 (c) do not include the amount of firearms transferred, and since the Penal Code states that "the requirements shall be..." and does not include "but not limited too" then you cannot be prosecuted for entering a number that is different from what is actually delivered.

kemasa
10-18-2009, 9:26 AM
#1 A FFL is required to report all firearm transactions under CA Penal Code. Each firearm is a firearm transaction, but there is an exception for non-handguns. So, ignoring the requirements to make multiple non-handguns a single transaction, that means if you have a handgun and a longgun, there are two firearm transactions. There is nothing in the law which says that you can have a single firearm transaction with a handgun and non-handgun. That means there are two transactions to report, not just one. If you try to include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction.

#2 It is reasonable to say that a single sale ends when it is reported. A firearm transaction for multiple non-handguns includes the requirement for it to be a single sale, loan or transfer. If you report the transaction, then add another firearm later, quite clearly that is not really a "single" event.

If Wes is not doing as he says that you can do, thereby risking his livelihood, then is he promoting something that he is not actually willing to do, which means that he baiting others.

tenpercentfirearms
10-18-2009, 10:04 AM
#1 A FFL is required to report all firearm transactions under CA Penal Code. Each firearm is a firearm transaction, but there is an exception for non-handguns. So, ignoring the requirements to make multiple non-handguns a single transaction, that means if you have a handgun and a longgun, there are two firearm transactions. There is nothing in the law which says that you can have a single firearm transaction with a handgun and non-handgun. That means there are two transactions to report, not just one. If you try to include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction.You are so confusing. One second you say a handgun and a non-handgun are two transactions to report and then in the very next sentence you agree with us and say that they would be just one transaction. Make up your mind! And you wonder why I am not giving you an credibility on this subject.

It isn't going to help, but let's quote the penal code one more time for you since you obviously don't understand it when you read it as is evident by this comment here.Say what? "It says that a handgun is not considered a transaction."???? Where does it say that??? EACH handgun is considered a firearms transaction. Each firearm transaction must be reported by law.And here is where it says a handgun is not considered a firearms transaction.

12077(d)(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns. A handgun is not a "transaction" as the penal code clearly exempts it as a transaction. So, if you run a DROS on a handgun, you are not running a firearm transaction as the handgun does not meet the PC definition of a transaction. You can use common sense and make your own rules up all you want, but the penal code is clear.

Therefore, if you run a handgun DROS, and include all of the data from PC 12077(c)(1) through (3) then you have met and followed all of the penal code requirements for submitting a firearm transaction.

You have yet to give us a penal code definition of what a single sale is. A single sale is a sale of any number of firearms. As has clearly been stated, if I take a down payment on some guns and leave them an open sales order, then then sale is not over yet. The sale is not complete in my point of sale software until I run the sales receipt at the end when they pick up. That is a single sale.

You can use fast food restaurant examples all you want, because I will just use real world long gun transaction samples. Either way what we believe is inconsequential. What does the penal code say? It does not define how long a single sale lasts. Therefore, I am not violating state law until they define that a single sale ends at the time of DROS submittal. Until then, I have no requirement to follow a rule that does not exist.

I do have to follow federal law which states a 4473 is closed when the dealer signs the 4473. I am comfortable doing that and I believe I have sufficient evidence to back this up.

#2 It is reasonable to say that a single sale ends when it is reported. A firearm transaction for multiple non-handguns includes the requirement for it to be a single sale, loan or transfer. If you report the transaction, then add another firearm later, quite clearly that is not really a "single" event.No it is not reasonable to say that. It is reasonable to say a single sale is over when the customer takes possession of the firearms. It is reasonable to say the single sale ends when I run a sales receipt, concluding the sale. It is quite clearly a single event because despite there being multiple guns on the sales receipt, there is only one receipt number association with the transaction.

Again, reasonable doesn't mean a damn thing. What does the penal code say? You have yet to quote where the penal code defines single sale. I guess the DA could always bring you in as an expert witness.

If Wes is not doing as he says that you can do, thereby risking his livelihood, then is he promoting something that he is not actually willing to do, which means that he baiting others.
Whatever you do, don't refute me with facts. Just keep making up rules and definitions and then claim I am baiting people. I answer you with penal code definitions. Definitions you still can't refute so you take us off on a tangent.

Kemasa, just play it safe and do whatever the DOJ tells you to do. This reading the penal code and understanding it is evidently not for you as is clear by your glaring number of errors in this thread.

For the rest of you dealers, do what you feel you are comfortable doing. I should have given you sufficient evidence to prove your case should you decide to take such risks.

kemasa
10-18-2009, 10:27 AM
Quite clearly someone can't read and understand simple English.

"If you try to include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction."

How is this saying that I agree with you? I said above that there are two transactions to report and if you include them both together then you are reporting only one, which is violating the law which states that you must report each firearm transaction.

If you can not read and understand simple English sentences, I strongly suggest that you stay away from the Penal Code and don't try to claim you can understand it.

Please point out to me where it says, not what you want to try to imply, that a handgun is NOT a firearm transaction. You have pointed out the definition of what a non-handgun tranaction is. It most certainly does not say that a handgun is not a firearm transaction.

Is this REALLY what you think or are you just playing games?

Again you miss the concepts involved. There are sales and there are transactions. Both of which are important, but both are separate concepts.

The "single sale" is over when you report the Dealer Record Of Sale.

The 4473 has nothing to do with what CA determines to be a firearm transaction nor what a single sale is.

Please let me know when the trial will be. I want to watch the show. Sooner or later that is going to end up if you are actually doing what you say you are doing.

Please answer these questions for the record:

Do you include longguns with a handgun only DROS?

Do you add longguns after the DROS is submitted?

Here is the simple way to determine who to listen to:

Do you want to listen to anything the person who claims that a handgun is not a firearm transaction says?

SanSacto
10-18-2009, 11:42 AM
Quite clearly someone can't read and understand simple English.

"If you try to include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction."

How is this saying that I agree with you? I said above that there are two transactions to report and if you include them both together then you are reporting only one, which is violating the law which states that you must report each firearm transaction.

If you can not read and understand simple English sentences, I strongly suggest that you stay away from the Penal Code and don't try to claim you can understand it.

Please point out to me where it says, not what you want to try to imply, that a handgun is NOT a firearm transaction. You have pointed out the definition of what a non-handgun tranaction is. It most certainly does not say that a handgun is not a firearm transaction.

Is this REALLY what you think or are you just playing games?

Again you miss the concepts involved. There are sales and there are transactions. Both of which are important, but both are separate concepts.

The "single sale" is over when you report the Dealer Record Of Sale.

The 4473 has nothing to do with what CA determines to be a firearm transaction nor what a single sale is.

Please let me know when the trial will be. I want to watch the show. Sooner or later that is going to end up if you are actually doing what you say you are doing.

Please answer these questions for the record:

Do you include longguns with a handgun only DROS?

Do you add longguns after the DROS is submitted?

Here is the simple way to determine who to listen to:

Do you want to listen to anything the person who claims that a handgun is not a firearm transaction says?

Real classy. :rolleyes:

tenpercentfirearms
10-18-2009, 1:03 PM
Quite clearly someone can't read and understand simple English.

"If you try to include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction."

How is this saying that I agree with you? I said above that there are two transactions to report and if you include them both together then you are reporting only one, which is violating the law which states that you must report each firearm transaction.

If you can not read and understand simple English sentences, I strongly suggest that you stay away from the Penal Code and don't try to claim you can understand it.You made a simple statement. You said that if you try and include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction." It was a simple statement by you and it is exactly what we are saying.

You keep telling me I can't read and yet we continue to show you exactly what we are talking about and you just ignore it completely.

12077(d)(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns.It says right there, a transaction are not handguns. Handguns are not transactions. Therefore you can't limit handguns to a single sale. For some reason you just ignore this and comment on me instead. I think that is pretty much a sign you have no argument.

Please point out to me where it says, not what you want to try to imply, that a handgun is NOT a firearm transaction. You have pointed out the definition of what a non-handgun tranaction is. It most certainly does not say that a handgun is not a firearm transaction.

The "single sale" is over when you report the Dealer Record Of Sale.Please cite a reference. That is your definition of a single sale and is no where found in the regulations or penal code. Around here we like to quote the law, not what you think the law should be.

The 4473 has nothing to do with what CA determines to be a firearm transaction nor what a single sale is.That is right keep coming back to this one. We all understand this, but you keep thinking it proves something. CA law does not specify how long a single sale lasts. Therefore I consider it to last until I finish the sale by generating a sales receipt. Further, I also follow federal law and do not add any new guns to that sales receipt after I have signed the 4473. This issue is dead, quit brining it up and ignoring the other facts.

Please let me know when the trial will be. I want to watch the show. Sooner or later that is going to end up if you are actually doing what you say you are doing.As I stated before, just continue to take orders from the DOJ. This game is a bit over your head and you are obviously not comfortable with it.

Quite clearly someone can't read and understand simple English.

"If you try to include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction."

How is this saying that I agree with you? I said above that there are two transactions to report and if you include them both together then you are reporting only one, which is violating the law which states that you must report each firearm transaction.

If you can not read and understand simple English sentences, I strongly suggest that you stay away from the Penal Code and don't try to claim you can understand it.You made a simple statement. You said that if you try and include a longgun with a handgun, then you are reporting just one firearm transaction." It was a simple statement by you and it is exactly what we are saying.

You keep telling me I can't read and yet we continue to show you exactly what we are talking about and you just ignore it completely.

12077(d)(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns.It says right there, a transaction are not handguns. Handguns are not transactions. Therefore you can't limit handguns to a single sale. For some reason you just ignore this and comment on me instead. I think that is pretty much a sign you have no argument.

Please point out to me where it says, not what you want to try to imply, that a handgun is NOT a firearm transaction. You have pointed out the definition of what a non-handgun tranaction is. It most certainly does not say that a handgun is not a firearm transaction.

The "single sale" is over when you report the Dealer Record Of Sale.Please cite a reference. That is your definition of a single sale and is no where found in the regulations or penal code. Around here we like to quote the law, not what you think the law should be.

The 4473 has nothing to do with what CA determines to be a firearm transaction nor what a single sale is.That is right keep coming back to this one. We all understand this, but you keep thinking it proves something. CA law does not specify how long a single sale lasts. Therefore I consider it to last until I finish the sale by generating a sales receipt. Further, I also follow federal law and do not add any new guns to that sales receipt after I have signed the 4473. This issue is dead, quit brining it up and ignoring the other facts.

Please answer these questions for the record:

Do you include longguns with a handgun only DROS?

Do you add longguns after the DROS is submitted?

Yes and yes.

Here is the simple way to determine who to listen to:

Do you want to listen to anything the person who claims that a handgun is not a firearm transaction says?I think most people would since I clearly showed in Penal Code Section 12077(d)(4) the state does not consider handguns a transaction. Again, for some reason you keep missing that. Not sure why. You are able to question my English reading skills, but it is clear to anyone reading this you are completely in over your head.

kemasa
10-18-2009, 1:25 PM
Did you read my statement: "So, ignoring the requirements to make multiple non-handguns a single transaction, that means if you have a handgun and a longgun, there are two firearm transactions."

Read and try to understand the complete paragraph I wrote previously.

As required, you need to report all firearm transactions. Since there are two transactions, you need to report both. Quite simple, but you don't seem to be able to get that.

It does NOT say that handguns are not firearm transactions. Read the whole sentence and don't read what you want into it. Go talk to the CA DOJ and tell them that handguns are not firearm transactions and they will most likely laugh at you. What that second sentence is saying is that if you have multiple non-handguns which are part of a single sale, loan or transfer, then it is considered a single transaction and only one DROS need to be submitted. Otherwise, based on the first sentence, each firearm has to be submitted with a DROS.

Please quote the law in which it says that a single sale can occur over the timespan which you think that it should be. Remember, around here we like to quote the law, not what you think that the law should be.

Either you are not being honest or you really don't get it.

Ok, so you say that you include longguns on a handgun DROS and that you add longguns after the DROS is submitted. Could you please provide the 4473 Transferor's Transaction Serial Number? It will save the DOJ inspector time to have that available for your upcoming inspection. The DOJ does read this forum.

Perhaps when you are put out of business you will realize the error of giving bad advice.

tenpercentfirearms
10-18-2009, 7:34 PM
It does NOT say that handguns are not firearm transactions. Yes actually, it does say that handguns are not a firearm transaction. Not sure how you have missed it like ten times. Read it again.

PC 12077(d) Where the register is used, the following shall apply:
(4) One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns. Sorry Kemasa, but the law is clear. A handgun is not included in a firearm transaction. It says it clear as day that a single sale of any number of firearms that are not handguns. The law is clear that handguns are not considered a firearm transaction. Now why would the morons in the legislature do this? I don't particularly care. They just did it.

Read the whole sentence and don't read what you want into it. Go talk to the CA DOJ and tell them that handguns are not firearm transactions and they will most likely laugh at you. What that second sentence is saying is that if you have multiple non-handguns which are part of a single sale, loan or transfer, then it is considered a single transaction and only one DROS need to be submitted. Otherwise, based on the first sentence, each firearm has to be submitted with a DROS.Yes, that was created to allow us to DROS multiple long guns on a single sale. However, they were not careful and they have worded it to where handguns are not included in a firearms transaction. Again, why they did that is irrelevant. What only matters is that they did it. Does it make sense? No. Again, it doesn't have to.

They also forgot to include purchase or buy in the large capacity magazine language. You cannot be prosecuted for purchasing or buying a large capacity magazine in this state, because they left it out of the language. You see they can't create these complicated laws and then later on say, "Well that isn't what we meant." Sorry, you can't have your cake and it it too legislators. You want to play these games, then we will play them. Learn to write better legislation.

You appear to be an "intent of the law" kind of guy. Sorry, intent doesn't mean a damn thing. Either it is in the law or it isn't.

Please quote the law in which it says that a single sale can occur over the timespan which you think that it should be.Remember, around here we like to quote the law, not what you think that the law should be.Sorry, it is not my job to quote penal code that allows me to conduct a single sale over the time span of a sales order. It is your job to show where the penal code prohibits it. If the penal code does not specifically limit the amount of time a single sale can occur, then there is no restriction. Since there is no restriction, it is up to me to determine how long a single transaction lasts. I think it lasts until I print a sales receipt when the customer picks up. I further think it ends when I sign the 4473 so I can stay out of trouble with the feds. The burden of proof is now on your prosecutor to show where I have been violating the clearly laid out law. I suspect you won't find it as you have been asked dozens of times and have failed.

Ok, so you say that you include longguns on a handgun DROS and that you add longguns after the DROS is submitted. Could you please provide the 4473 Transferor's Transaction Serial Number? It will save the DOJ inspector time to have that available for your upcoming inspection. The DOJ does read this forum.I am not afraid of the DOJ. For some reason you sure seem to be. That is your choice.

Perhaps when you are put out of business you will realize the error of giving bad advice.Perhaps when I am still in business as a free man, you will realize you don't have to live in servitude to your master. There is a reason the DOJ inspector I talked to on the phone stated he believes long guns can be added to a handgun DROS. There is a reason my ATF inspectors have stated they see this happen in California quite a bit and it hasn't been an issue.

You don't want to acknowledge that and that is fine. Continue to live your life in fear of your keepers. Publicly cower down to them here on these forums and question anyone else that doesn't play their game.

I have respect for the DOJ. I will not talk trash about them on here and I am not looking for a fight. I will however read the law and exercise my rights. Free men must do that on occasion.

I have already played these games. The DOJ is not the all knowing, all powerful organization dealers like you make them out to be. They are human beings and they are public servants. They can be held accountable and their job is to hold us accountable as well.

I think we will end this thread here. We know where you kneel on the issue and we know where I stand.

jksupplyco
10-18-2009, 9:36 PM
:owned:

jamesob
10-18-2009, 9:56 PM
:boxing_smiley:

kemasa
10-19-2009, 11:13 AM
That section does not state that is the one and only definition of a transaction. It does not say that handguns are excluded as a firearm transaction.

It is not my job to explain comment sense aspects to you. You must report the sale, not a partial sale. Once you report the sale, that is the sale.

If you are not afraid of the DOJ, then please post a 4473 transaction number where you have included a longgun with a handgun purchase and where you have added longguns after the DROS was submitted. Prove you are not afraid.

I am not afraid of the CA DOJ because I follow the law. They are not my "master", as you like to attack me with. That is so grade school of you to resort to personal attacks, but it also shows that you really don't have a real defense to your position. The fact is that you are looking for a fight with the DOJ when you state publically that you are not going to follow the law, or at least what they believe to be the law. I would love to see that fight happen since if you happen to win, things will get better for everyone. If you lose, well, then the point is made.

I do not "kneel" on the issue. Quite clearly you are not so sure of your position to post a 4473 transaction number to settle the issue. I am not sure that you really do what you say you do. I suspect you are just baiting others so that they are a test case. Prove me wrong, post the numbers.

For you to claim that handguns are firearm transactions is just a joke. It would not hold up in court. If you really believed that, then you need not submit a DROS for a handgun, right?