PDA

View Full Version : Voluntary Reg for Pistol In CA


Hopi
12-13-2009, 8:34 PM
Considering that, federally, a 'virgin' receiver is eligible to be built into a semi-auto pistol, I have question based on the following scenario....

Hypothetically;
-A CA resident owns a 'virgin' AR receiver
-They also own an AR-15 style pistol with dimensional compliance

Could that person install a single shot sled, and a bullet button onto the virgin receiver and then submit the registration paperwork for it as a single shot/dimensionally-compliant pistol?

What do you think would be the response?

wildhawker
12-13-2009, 8:54 PM
Methinks Hopi is http://www.camdenny.com/oneidalake/fishing.jpg for a non-SBR outcome :43:

thedrickel
12-13-2009, 9:05 PM
What happens if you take that bare, virgin receiver to an FFL and PPT it to someone else as a pistol?

Hopi
12-13-2009, 9:06 PM
What happens if you take that bare, virgin receiver to an FFL and PPT it to someone else as a pistol?

hmmmmmmm

bigcalidave
12-13-2009, 9:42 PM
Are you just trying to make a second pistol ? Cause you have a spare lower ?
Always wondered about the ppt idea. Roster exempt. Wouldn't need to have been a pistol but it now would be one. No reason for the new owner to have any supporting paperwork because they just bought a pistol.

Cokebottle
12-13-2009, 10:12 PM
Problem is, while the original 4473 would say "receiver", the original DROS would say "long gun" because California only recognizes handguns and long guns... and any handgun would need to be roster-compliant.

You can't import a stripped receiver and DROS it from the FFL as a "pistol" or as "receiver".

The only way to do it, short of importing a complete, assembled pistol, would be to build up your own 80% lower, which would be unregistered.
Build it into a pistol, and at that point you're home free until you decide to sell it.

You could vol'reg the completed pistol as long as it is a dimensionally compliant single shot (6"<barrel<16" with OAL>10.5").
Once registered, it could be freely sold PPT as off-roster, or it could be returned to single-shot status and transferred through an FFL.

lorax3
12-13-2009, 10:15 PM
It comes down to wether or not a longun-DROS'd receiver in anyway makes it no longer pistol eligible. (To avoid SBR)

If we can confirm that it doesn't, then AR pistols would be much easier to get.

There are some issues on trying to PPT a 'virgin' receiver due to the safety test which requires dropping the mag etc. Although IIRC, you can also use a 'similar' pistol, so you just need an FFL with an AR pistol on hand.

Not sure if the DOJ would be much help, but perhaps a letter asking this question may help. (Longgun-DROS'd receivers)

If however you were able to get a virgin receiver via a roster-exempt option. (Purchased as exempt pistol by LEO; intra-familial out of state exemption etc.)then I would see no issues vol. reg'ing it at all if it never went through the DROS process.

If I recall someone on CG tried to vol. reg a virgin stripped receiver but the DOJ sent the paperwork back as they did not fill in the 'barrel length' field. They may have put N/A.

ke6guj
12-13-2009, 10:38 PM
If I recall someone on CG tried to vol. reg a virgin stripped receiver but the DOJ sent the paperwork back as they did not fill in the 'barrel length' field. They may have put N/A.

IIRC, it was a guy trying to do a new resident registration that CADOJ made him put in dimensions describing a pistol that did not exist. He had a pistol receiver and tried to register it with N/A for many of the fields. CADOJ wanted all the fields filed out with a measurement, so he had to edit the registration with data that really didnt exist.

Quiet
12-14-2009, 6:01 AM
ATF 4473 = handgun, long gun or other
CA DROS = handgun or long gun

unless, you have lots of money on hand for legal fees, it is strongly recommended that you only make a virgin stripped AR lower reciever into a pistol if it was 4473'd as a handgun or other and DROS'd as a handgun. Because, if it was 4473'd as a other and DROS'd as a long gun, then you could be busted for making a SBR.

Hopi
12-14-2009, 11:59 AM
Thanks guys.....I understand all the DROS and transfer stuff.

I'm more interested in the 'flow'... how would the registration request be handled by the DOJ?

Is there is a requirement for the pistol to be complete when submitting for registration?

Without it being completed into a pistol-build, there wouldn't be the risk of an SBR violation in CA. Upon receipt of registration, the firearm would be a Pistol in CA and could be built as such, of course making sure to avoid building an 'unsafe' handgun.......

How would the DOJ verify exactly what the receiver is? Would they even care?

Spyder
12-14-2009, 12:27 PM
Idea here...

What if a virgin bare receiver, which was not a listed AW and therefore legal to possess in California, and had been 4473'd as a "other" in another state, was legally brought in to California by a person who lived in another state but was moving here.

That lower was then given to an immediate family member in a legal way, ie intrafamilial transfer. Could that family member then voluntarily register it as an exempt pistol?

Or, could the person who moved into California with an unlisted AR lower that had never been built as a rifle, and which had been 4473'd as an "other", build it into a legally configured single shot pistol with the correct dimensions, and voluntarily register it as a pistol in the time before they have to register all of their handguns, as a new resident?

lorax3
12-14-2009, 12:38 PM
If you had a 'virgin' receiver that has never been through a DROS process I doubt the DOJ would even care if you tried to vol. reg or new resident register an AR pistol as long as it had an upper on it.

A we have seen before, a stripped receiver alone seems a no-go due to only the way the DOJ forms are setup.

Even if the DOJ did care, I do not think they would do much besides deny your request for some unrelated reason. If that was the case it would be time for some underground regulation paperwork claiming that the DOJ was not letting in 'certain' off-roster pistols from out of state residents.

Hopi
12-14-2009, 12:42 PM
As we have seen before, a stripped receiver alone seems a no-go due to only the way the DOJ forms are setup.



I think this is an error in filling-out the form. Why not just enter the compliant dimensions, whether the pistol is actually assembled or not?

If you own a compliant upper, and that upper is sitting in a box...you haven't yet built an SBR (according to CA), and you haven't yet built a pistol. No constructive possession applies because in my hypothetical, the owner already has a legal AR pistol (for CA), and a non-rifle receiver (for Feds). All that my hypothetical person would be doing is waiting for the DOJ response....

lorax3
12-14-2009, 12:48 PM
I think this is an error in filling-out the form. Why not just enter the compliant dimensions, whether the pistol is actually assembled or not?

Right it was. IIRC the person did not yet have a pistol upper receiver so he did not want to just 'make up' dimensions. I will go look for the thread in a sec.

Does it even need to be in a single-shot from for a vol. reg? I didn't think so as it isn't going through an FFL.

As long as you comply with AW regs you should be fine.

I wouldn't try it with a longgun DROS'd receiver but on a true 'virgin' receiver I bet it would be approved just fine.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 12:54 PM
Is there is a requirement for the pistol to be complete when submitting for registration?
Legally, yes.

To be roster exempt, it must be a dimensionally-compliant single shot.
The sled takes care of the single shot exemption, but to be dimensionally complaint, the barrel must be installed... over 6", less than 16", and OAL 10.5" or greater.

Now, since the vol'reg is by mail only, there is nothing stopping you from lying and claiming that the above is true, but it would be illegal to lie on the DOJ paperwork.

Again, the problem is getting a stripped lower into your hands legally without it already being in the DOJ system as a long gun.
You can't buy it out of state because CA requires an in-state FFL to process purchases by CA residents.
You can't have a non-resident import it and PPT it to you because unless it is complete, the FFL will still have to DROS it as a long gun if it does not already exist in the DOJ system as a pistol.... and with the non-resident selling through an FFL to a resident, it would not be treated as a normal FTF/PPT... it would go through the same process as an out of state transfer, which is not roster-exempt.
If this would work, it would work for any non-roster handgun and there would be huge towns on both sides of the NV/AZ borders supported by transfers of handguns into CA.
What if a virgin bare receiver, which was not a listed AW and therefore legal to possess in California, and had been 4473'd as a "other" in another state, was legally brought in to California by a person who lived in another state but was moving here.
Again, the problem is getting it into the DOJ system as a pistol.
The DROS and vol'reg only recognize "handguns" and "long guns", so it must be one or the other to be registered with the state.

While there is no requirement to register a gun that has been in the state (and in your possession) since before 1991, there is a requirement for new residents to declare their firearms.
That lower was then given to an immediate family member in a legal way, ie intrafamilial transfer. Could that family member then voluntarily register it as an exempt pistol?
Again, the problem is getting it into the state and into the DOJ database as a "handgun". Roster exemption covers in-state FTF/PPT as well, so it would not even need to be intrafamilial... if I have an AR pistol, I could strip it down to the lower and PPT it to you and it would still go through DROS as a pistol.
Also, out of state intrafamilial handgun transfers are non roster-exempt except under the condition of bequest.

The problem is, currently, the only way to get a lower into the DOJ system recognized as anything other than a long-gun is to either build it from an 80% and vol'reg, or to import it as a roster-exempt single shot.
Or, could the person who moved into California with an unlisted AR lower that had never been built as a rifle, and which had been 4473'd as an "other", build it into a legally configured single shot pistol with the correct dimensions, and voluntarily register it as a pistol in the time before they have to register all of their handguns, as a new resident?
This could work... but the problem is, there are so many "ifs" that it makes the situation highly unlikely and DOJ may raise some eyebrows over the legitimacy of the importation by the new resident, especially if the newly vol'reg'd pistols are sold soon after.
It would appear as if the ultimate owner had made arrangements with the new resident prior to his relocation... might get into "strawman" issues doing that.

Hopi
12-14-2009, 12:54 PM
Right it was. IIRC the person did not yet have a pistol upper receiver so he did not want to just 'make up' dimensions. I will go look for the thread in a sec.

Does it even need to be in a single-shot from for a vol. reg? I didn't think so as it isn't going through an FFL.

As long as you comply with AW regs you should be fine.

I wouldn't try it with a longgun DROS'd receiver but on a true 'virgin' receiver I bet it would be approved just fine.

I only added the single-shot stuff as to avoid complicating this discussion with warnings about manufacturing an 'unsafe handgun'...


Why would it hurt to try with a receiver that was DROSd in CA as a long rifle? My above post should clear that nothing illegal is happening. What is the risk? On the other hand, the upside seems HUGE.....

Hopi
12-14-2009, 12:57 PM
Legally, yes.

To be roster exempt, it must be a dimensionally-compliant single shot.
The sled takes care of the single shot exemption, but to be dimensionally complaint, the barrel must be installed... over 6", less than 16", and OAL 10.5" or greater.



Well, if true, that is the game-stopper.

Where is it explicitly outlined that the barrel must be installed for roster exemption?


Thanks!

thedrickel
12-14-2009, 1:04 PM
It's doable. The bureaucrat that handles the volreg forms will more than likely process it as long as all of the required data fields are complete.

Would I advise trying it? Not really.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 1:10 PM
I think this is an error in filling-out the form. Why not just enter the compliant dimensions, whether the pistol is actually assembled or not?
This would be providing false information on a DOJ form.
C. Declaration
I declare under penalty of perjury (Sections 126 and 672 PC) that all statements made by me on this application are true and complete. I expressly authorize DOJ to perform firearms eligibility checks of all relevant state and federal databases, including the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. I also understand that if I currently possess/own firearms and the results of this check reveal that I am ineligible either to lawfully possess or purchase firearms, I must relinquish any and all firearms in my possession.
If you own a compliant upper, and that upper is sitting in a box...you haven't yet built an SBR (according to CA), and you haven't yet built a pistol. No constructive possession applies because in my hypothetical, the owner already has a legal AR pistol (for CA), and a non-rifle receiver (for Feds). All that my hypothetical person would be doing is waiting for the DOJ response....
If you have a pistol-length upper and you do not have a lower that is on-record as being a "pistol" lower and you have either a complete AR15 rifle or a lower that has been DROS'd as "long gun", then you do fall under California Constructive Possession. This would be exempted if you also have (as you mentioned) a legal AR pistol.

Again, the problem is obtaining a stripped lower that has not been DROS'd as a long gun in the first place.

Hopi
12-14-2009, 1:16 PM
This would be providing false information on a DOJ form.




Only if there is an explicit requirement that the pistol be assembled. I'm still searching for that language....

This is what I find:

b) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a
single-shot pistol with a barrel length of not less than six inches
and that has an overall length of at least 101/2 inches when the
handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 1:17 PM
Does it even need to be in a single-shot from for a vol. reg? I didn't think so as it isn't going through an FFL.
As a "new" registration, it must be roster-exempt.

It's unenforceable, as they have no way to verify that you in fact had the sled in place at the time you mailed the application. Even if you no longer own the sled, there's no law that says you can't sell the sled after it has served it's purpose (though I would keep it simply to make it easier to transfer to someone else through a non-FTF).

Likewise with dimensional compliance. Even if the ultimate dimensions don't match that on the form, that isn't to say that a different upper or longer/shorter buffer tube wasn't installed after the form was mailed. The only way they could potentially pop you on that would be if there were no records of a commercial transaction indicating that you owned an upper that would create the claimed dimensions prior to the mailing of the form.
But even at that, there's no law that says that you couldn't have borrowed an upper and buffer tube from a friend to complete your build and register the lower.

It's a matter of honor and honesty.

lorax3
12-14-2009, 1:20 PM
Why would it hurt to try with a receiver that was DROSd in CA as a long rifle?

Right, well that is the issue. Let us look at it from a federal standpoint.

In other states if you bought a lower and it was marked 'rifle' on the 4473 can you still build this lower into a pistol? Let us assume that even though the lower was marked, perhaps my mistake, 'rifle' it has never had a shoulder stock attached.

Would doing so make an SBR, or an AR Pistol? To be honest, I do not know. It shouldn't have been marked rifle to begin with, but perhaps it was by mistake.

Should a longgun DROS'd receiver according to the common ATF stance on 'never had a shoulder stock' be able to be made into a pistol?

Sure, it should. But the risk is CA calling it an SBR since at some point paperwork calls it a longgun.

I would have no problems doing it when a never-DROS'd receiver.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 1:22 PM
Well, if true, that is the game-stopper.

Where is it explicitly outlined that the barrel must be installed for roster exemption?
If the barrel is not installed, then the "firearm" (the receiver) does not meet dimensional compliance WRT barrel length (and most likely not WRT OAL, however, there is no entry on the vol'reg form for OAL).

Hopi
12-14-2009, 1:24 PM
If the barrel is not installed, then the "firearm" (the receiver) does not meet dimensional compliance WRT barrel length (and most likely not WRT OAL, however, there is no entry on the vol'reg form for OAL).



[QUOTE]b) The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to a
single-shot pistol with a barrel length of not less than six inches
and that has an overall length of at least 101/2 inches when the
handle, frame or receiver, and barrel are assembled.

It says "when" assembled. Not that it must be assembled.

Of course these are semantics and this is mostly just an exercise...


Follow ("you" are the same hypothetical person as above, already owns and possesses an AR pistol).....You possess a virgin frame. You posses a compliant upper. You possess single-shot compliance parts. When assembled, they meet compliance for roster exemption. However, you don't assemble them until after you've completed registration.

You do not have CP federally, nor in CA. You have not manufactured an unsafe handgun. After a positive registration comes back, you are building a pistol that CA has allowed and registered.....What's the issue here?

lorax3
12-14-2009, 1:28 PM
As a "new" registration, it must be roster-exempt.


Are you saying guns registered via voluntary registration must be roster exempt?

What if I had a handgun pre-91 and wanted to register it even though it is not rostered.

You are saying I cannot do this? That is not correct.

I am not talking about unsafe manufacture here, just addressing your comment that vol. regg'ing a pistol requires it to be rostered or roster-exempt.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 1:29 PM
In other states if you bought a lower and it was marked 'rifle' on the 4473 can you still build this lower into a pistol? Let us assume that even though the lower was marked, perhaps my mistake, 'rifle' it has never had a shoulder stock attached.

Would doing so make an SBR, or an AR Pistol? To be honest, I do not know. It shouldn't have been marked rifle to begin with, but perhaps it was by mistake.
It would be an SBR according to BATF regs.
The 4473 is what "breathes life" into a receiver.

But the transfers (in other states) would be listed as "other" for stripped receivers to avoid this problem. It would not be listed as "handgun" or "rifle" until it were transferred in assembled form.

The problem is that the CADOJ DROS only recognizes "handgun" and "long gun"... there is no provision for "other" as there is on the 4473.
If we could legally get an "other" stripped lower into CA, then pistols wouldn't be a problem, but we effectively can't. With DOJ and the DROS being the legal "gateway" for any import or for the sale of a manufactured piece, it's going to be branded one way or another.

lorax3
12-14-2009, 1:31 PM
The problem is that the CADOJ DROS only recognizes "handgun" and "long gun"... there is no provision for "other" as there is on the 4473.



I understand this. The point eluded to why longugn DROS'd receivers may be dangerous to be built into pistols.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 1:36 PM
Are you saying guns registered via voluntary registration must be roster exempt?

What if I had a handgun pre-91 and wanted to register it even though it is not rostered.

You are saying I cannot do this? I do not that is correct.
I'm not 100% certain in that situation.
It would certainly be possible to get it into the DOJ system through a FTF/PPT, but everything that I've learned WRT building AK-based pistols from flats (same as an 80% build) is that it must be in roster-exempt form when vol'reg'd, and technically, within the letter of the law, must be "manufactured" as roster-exempt, IE, prior to inserting a 10rd magazine, the sled must first be installed, then removed.
Installing the sled completes the "manufacturing" process and a legal, roster-exempt pistol has been manufactured (since regs prohibit the manufacture of a non-roster pistol in California). Removing the sled and installing the 10rd mag would be a legal modification of a manufactured handgun.

Yes, it's a silly thing to have to do, but to remain within the letter of the law, it needs to be done.

Hopi
12-14-2009, 1:38 PM
I'm not 100% certain in that situation.
It would certainly be possible to get it into the DOJ system through a FTF/PPT, but everything that I've learned WRT building AK-based pistols from flats (same as an 80% build) is that it must be in roster-exempt form when vol'reg'd, and technically, within the letter of the law, must be "manufactured" as roster-exempt, IE, prior to inserting a 10rd magazine, the sled must first be installed, then removed.
Installing the sled completes the "manufacturing" process and a legal, roster-exempt pistol has been manufactured (since regs prohibit the manufacture of a non-roster pistol in California). Removing the sled and installing the 10rd mag would be a legal modification of a manufactured handgun.

Yes, it's a silly thing to have to do, but to remain within the letter of the law, it needs to be done.


I think that these were CYA recs and are not codified. Correct me if I'm wrong.

lorax3
12-14-2009, 1:39 PM
Yes, it's a silly thing to have to do, but to remain within the letter of the law, it needs to be done.

Right, but that is due to avoiding manufacturing an unsafe handgun; not because the vol. reg form requires it to be roster exempt.

ke6guj
12-14-2009, 1:42 PM
, but everything that I've learned WRT building AK-based pistols from flats (same as an 80% build) is that it must be in roster-exempt form when vol'reg'd,

I'm not sure that position is backed up by law. Yes, there have been reports that CADOJ has rejected vol-regs of flat builds that state that an handgun is semi-auto, because the throught is that if it was built as a semi-auto, then it wasn't built as roster-exempt handgun.

However, legally, couldn't I build a roster-exempt single-shot handgun, never vol-reg it, legally convert it to semi-auto, and then in the future decide to vol-reg it. Nothing in the PC seems to prohibit it.

Spyder
12-14-2009, 4:42 PM
I bet that the conversion from single shot to semi-auto would be considered a manufacturing step and hence manufacturing a handgun that is not on the roster.

Hopi
12-14-2009, 4:47 PM
I bet that the conversion from single shot to semi-auto would be considered a manufacturing step and hence manufacturing a handgun that is not on the roster.

No. Once you manufacture a firearm, you cannot manufacture it again. You are free to alter it however you wish, or course respecting CA AW and FED NFA laws.....

Spyder
12-14-2009, 4:47 PM
Again, the problem is getting it into the DOJ system as a pistol.
The DROS and vol'reg only recognize "handguns" and "long guns", so it must be one or the other to be registered with the state.

While there is no requirement to register a gun that has been in the state (and in your possession) since before 1991, there is a requirement for new residents to declare their firearms.

Again, the problem is getting it into the state and into the DOJ database as a "handgun". Roster exemption covers in-state FTF/PPT as well, so it would not even need to be intrafamilial... if I have an AR pistol, I could strip it down to the lower and PPT it to you and it would still go through DROS as a pistol.
Also, out of state intrafamilial handgun transfers are non roster-exempt except under the condition of bequest.

The problem is, currently, the only way to get a lower into the DOJ system recognized as anything other than a long-gun is to either build it from an 80% and vol'reg, or to import it as a roster-exempt single shot.


What would keep a new resident from just registering their "other" 4473'd bare and never built receiver as a pistol instead of as a long gun? Couldn't they move to California with their new unbuilt "other" lower, buy a sled and set it up as a single shot, roster exempt handgun, and register it that way.

The same thing with a intrafamilial transfer, couldn't the person who moves to California with a bare "other" 4473'd receiver give it to a family member BEFORE their timeframe to register it is up, and then the person who has always been a California resident build it into a compliant single shot roster exempt handgun and register it to themselves?

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 4:57 PM
What would keep a new resident from just registering their "other" 4473'd bare and never built receiver as a pistol instead of as a long gun? Couldn't they move to California with their new unbuilt "other" lower, buy a sled and set it up as a single shot, roster exempt handgun, and register it that way.
California DOJ does not recognize "other".
All of the paperwork... vol'reg, intrafamilial, and DROS, have options only for "handgun" and "long gun".
"Other" is a 4473 thing, which is BATF.

For the lower to be registered by DOJ as a handgun, it would have to be a handgun, not simply a stripped lower (with or without a sled), as there is a barrel length entry spot.

And yes, as I mentioned above, it might be possible for a non-resident to move to the state with a stripped lower, then assemble it before the expiration of his 30-day "window" for declaring his guns to the DOJ...
But it's a silly "what if" scenario.
He could only do it once (to as many lowers as he'd like) and could not do it with intent to sell.
You may sell or transfer a home built gun, but you may not manufacture with intent to sell without an 007 FFL.

Spyder
12-14-2009, 5:04 PM
That's what I mean...it would have been 4473'd as an "other" in another state. Person buys it one day, moves to California to establish residency here, and has a certain period of time before his handguns must be registered. Why couldn't he, in that period of time, build it into a compliant handgun? He doesn't have to DROS it because he already owns it. Unless I'm wrong and he DOES have to dros it as a new resident.

It's not a silly what if scenario. What IF...some people on here have family members who are going to moving to California shortly and have an "other" stripped lower that they bought back in the 08/09 scare and decided they don't need anymore. Nothing that I can figure out would prevent them from giving it to a family member and having the family member build it into a a compliant pistol, then register it by way of voluntary registration?

It would not be manufacturing with intent to sell because its a spare lower that he decides he no longer needs.

I understand the difference between DROS And the 4473 form. If the lower was purchased OUTSIDE of California then it was NEVER a long gun but an "other." As such, it SHOULD be able to be built into a compliant single shot handgun with proper barrel length and then registered as a handgun.

Spyder
12-14-2009, 5:08 PM
Another thought I just had... The way I see it, The 30 day limit to register handguns would NOT apply to an AR lower that was bought out of state on a 4473 as an "other" because it is NOT a handgun.

Therefore, it is entirely feasible that there are plenty of people who have moved to California in past years and own stripped and never before built AR lowers that are NOT dros'd as long guns OR handguns. They should be able to build their lowers into a roster exempt handgun as well, and then voluntarily register it, correct?



Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing with you or saying you're wrong at all...I just think that this thread could be on to something fairly big. This is pretty much how the OLL thing came about in the first place, with people trying to figure out how to buy or build a rifle without getting in any sort of legal trouble.

Getting heads together and figuring this stuff out is nothing but good for everyone!

_____and on that note, I'm going grocery shopping...be back in an hour or so... :D

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 5:26 PM
It's not a silly what if scenario. What IF...some people on here have family members who are going to moving to California shortly and have an "other" stripped lower that they bought back in the 08/09 scare and decided they don't need anymore. Nothing that I can figure out would prevent them from giving it to a family member and having the family member build it into a a compliant pistol, then register it by way of voluntary registration?
I don't see why that situation would be a problem.
The reason that I say it's "silly" is because it is still an unlikely scenario.
The family member moving into the state would have to construct the pistol for themselves. They could not construct it with intent to then sell/transfer.
Would it fly under the radar? Probably. Would it be legal? No. Would it be an easy prosecution? Probably not.
It would not be manufacturing with intent to sell because its a spare lower that he decides he no longer needs.
If this were the case, then why would they go forward with manufacturing the pistol (and then transfer it to someone else)?
If they no longer wanted it, they would simply sell the lower.
I understand the difference between DROS And the 4473 form. If the lower was purchased OUTSIDE of California then it was NEVER a long gun but an "other." As such, it SHOULD be able to be built into a compliant single shot handgun with proper barrel length and then registered as a handgun.
That is correct.
Another thought I just had... The way I see it, The 30 day limit to register handguns would NOT apply to an AR lower that was bought out of state on a 4473 as an "other" because it is NOT a handgun.
CADOJ requires that ALL guns brought into the state by new residents be declared. Only handguns are actually "registered", but the long guns and receivers would still need to be reported... at which point, the receivers would become "long guns".
Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing with you or saying you're wrong at all...I just think that this thread could be on to something fairly big. This is pretty much how the OLL thing came about in the first place, with people trying to figure out how to buy or build a rifle without getting in any sort of legal trouble.
And "the right people" have been pouring over the laws since the OLL thing began, and at this time, they are advising that AR pistols not be built from anything other than an 80% build or a lower that is already in the DOJ system as a handgun.

This will all change, hopefully next year or 2011.
Step 1, favorable ruling by the SCOTUS on McDonald.
Step 2, move forward with Pena c Dic http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Pena_v_Cid

thedrickel
12-14-2009, 5:28 PM
So . . . who wants to buy this NDS3 from me, PPT as a pistol? I swear it's a virgin, I've molested it a little bit but there was no penetration. :)

Fate
12-14-2009, 7:50 PM
Also, out of state intrafamilial handgun transfers are non roster-exempt except under the condition of bequest.

False. It's completely legal to do an intrafamilial transfer from out of state parent/child with a handgun that's not on the roster...and they don't even have to die first.

I actually think it's legal to do an out of state, intrafamilial transfer of a stripped pistol lower, but have never gotten one of the "right people" to comment on if it's possible.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 7:59 PM
False. It's completely legal to do an intrafamilial transfer from out of state parent/child with a handgun that's not on the roster...and they don't even have to die first.
According to Bill, you are indeed correct:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=137527&highlight=intrastate

However, that still does not allow for a stripped lower that has been 4473'd as "other" to be DROS'd into California as a "pistol".... but it would allow for an intrafamilial transfer of a semi-automatic pistol directly into the state without having to go through the step of shipping it in with a sled.

Though it could avoid some headaches with some FFLs.

Spyder
12-14-2009, 9:17 PM
But do you have to DROS things for an intrafamilial transfer to legally occur?

Hopi
12-14-2009, 9:20 PM
However, that still does not allow for a stripped lower that has been 4473'd as "other" to be DROS'd into California as a "pistol"

The important point would be, what prohibits it?



But do you have to DROS things for an intrafamilial transfer to legally occur?


Yes.

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 9:25 PM
The important point would be, what prohibits it?
Without a barrel, it's not a pistol, so the receiving FFL would log it through the way he would any other stripped lower.

Whether it could be legally done? Possibly.
Finding an FFL willing to stick his neck out and do it?
How's your relationship with your black-rifle FFL?
The biggest problem is likely the "barrel length" entry on the DROS.

Hopi
12-14-2009, 9:32 PM
Without a barrel, it's not a pistol, so the receiving FFL would log it through the way he would any other stripped lower.

Whether it could be legally done? Possibly.
Finding an FFL willing to stick his neck out and do it?
How's your relationship with your black-rifle FFL?
The biggest problem is likely the "barrel length" entry on the DROS.

It can be done legally. I've been in contact with a few FFLs that will do it.....fwiw, 1911 frames are at the top of everybody's *please bring with you list* when folks volunteer that they are moving into CA.....frames are frames.

Spyder
12-14-2009, 9:41 PM
The important point would be, what prohibits it?

Yes.

...K, thought that father could give to son and unregistered pistol that he has owned since pre -91 and that the son could then send in the $19 voluntary registration paperwork. Didn't think it had to be DROS'd through a dealer...

Hopi
12-14-2009, 9:42 PM
...K, thought that father could give to son and unregistered pistol that he has owned since pre -91 and that the son could then send in the $19 voluntary registration paperwork. Didn't think it had to be DROS'd through a dealer...

and the son would need to get an HSC.

Spyder
12-14-2009, 10:23 PM
This doesn't say anything about a DROS...

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/oplaw.pdf

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Transferring_Firearms_Among_Some_Family_Members#Ha nd_guns_need_paper_and_fee

Cokebottle
12-14-2009, 10:50 PM
This doesn't say anything about a DROS...

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/oplaw.pdf
I've been using the term "DROS" loosely to refer to the registration procedure in general using any of the three forms.
The Operation of Law and Vol'Reg forms still only have options for "handgun" and "long gun", and there is a barrel-length space.
Technically, yes, "DROS" is "Dealer Record Of Sale" and is only used when a gun is purchased from or transferred through an FFL.
http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/Transferring_Firearms_Among_Some_Family_Members#Ha nd_guns_need_paper_and_feeIn-state intrafamilial transfers can go person to person without involving an FFL. $19 and the Operation of Law and you're set.
Interstate intrafamilial transfers are still required to go through an FFL due to BATF requirements. They are roster-exempt, but it is not treated as a PPT and the normal FFL fees will apply.
The FFL will then process a DROS rather than an Operation of Law. A couple of the FFLs were discussing which roster exemption is used on the DROS and I believe it is the "Olympic pistol" exemption... I'm not positive on that.

Spyder
12-14-2009, 11:50 PM
Ok...that makes sense.
If the family member is moving to California, or HAS moved to California, how long until they are considered a resident so that the interstate intrafamilial transfers would become an in-state intrafamilial transfer?

I don't know what kind of time frame it takes to become a California resident, as applies to this particular set of laws. I'm assuming that once you move here and have a residence/get a drivers license/etc., residency would be set, since you only have 30 days to declare your firearms?

...I'm going to bed. Thanks for putting up with my brain throughout this! I'll check back in tomorrow after work and probably have more questions/brainstorming! Good night to ya for now!

Cokebottle
12-15-2009, 12:40 AM
Ok...that makes sense.
If the family member is moving to California, or HAS moved to California, how long until they are considered a resident so that the interstate intrafamilial transfers would become an in-state intrafamilial transfer?
Residency requirements vary depending on the purpose.
For divorce, you must be in the state for 6 months or longer.
For in-state tuition in college, it's 1 year and 1 day prior to the beginning of the semester.
For DMV purposes, it's established by voting in a California election, paying resident tuition, filing for a homeowner’s property tax exemption, or any other privilege or benefit not ordinarily extended to nonresidents (vehicles must be registered within 20 days).
For Medi-Cal, it's established if an applicant is physically present and is living in California and intends to remain permanently or for an indefinite period or enters the state with a job commitment or to seek employment, whether or not currently employed.
For tax purposes, it's merely physical presence in California with the intent of making it your home (so I don't have to pay state income taxes if I'm here but no longer intend to make CA my home? :D )

The only thing that I can find on the DOJ site is references to what is required to show proof of residency to an FFL.

Spyder
12-15-2009, 7:04 AM
Haha, great. That clears it up a bit! :ack2:

Dirtbiker
02-17-2010, 3:23 PM
So . . . who wants to buy this NDS3 from me, PPT as a pistol? I swear it's a virgin, I've molested it a little bit but there was no penetration. :)

This is possible but you have to have a FFL with some guts.

A ppt is exempt from the "safe" list.

Hopi
02-17-2010, 3:25 PM
This is possible but you have to have a FFL with some guts.



There are many among us these days.

aermotor
02-17-2010, 3:46 PM
Doesn't it all depend how the receiver was DROSed in the first place and nothing else?

wildhawker
02-17-2010, 4:11 PM
Doesn't it all depend how the receiver was DROSed in the first place and nothing else?

Not necessarily. If the receiver is DROSed as a long gun (and only because the DROS system is incapable of recognizing "other", which is likely an underground regulation), the DROS records are [theoretically] expunged >15 days. If so, the only records are that of the 4473 which now would utilize the "other" firearm type designation.

nobody_special
02-17-2010, 11:29 PM
CADOJ requires that ALL guns brought into the state by new residents be declared. Only handguns are actually "registered", but the long guns and receivers would still need to be reported... at which point, the receivers would become "long guns".


I realize this thread is slightly old but you have some bad information here. In particular, there is no requirement to report long guns to the DoJ (or any other government agency) upon moving into California. See this (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php#24).