PDA

View Full Version : Need Help! Relative getting jerked around by DOJ!!


drgonzo
01-07-2010, 6:13 PM
So my father in law had inherited on old british enfield from his father and had had it for a few years and decided to get it registered. He took it to a gun shop 6 months ago and he still hasn't gotten it back yet.

He contacted the Cali DOJ on why it was taking so long and the said he'd have to do a live scan and a fingerprint check...he has done both (about 2 months ago) and he has no convictions of any kind. He has a old arrest from 20, 30 years ago from which the charges were dropped. Other than that he's clean as a whistle.

The lady at the doj won't shoot straight (no pun intended) with him, won't return phone calls and keeps giving him the runaround. he's getting impatient and he keeps asking me what he should do... I have no idea?

Any suggestions?

SteveH
01-07-2010, 6:15 PM
Enfield rifle? took it to a gun shop? to get registed? Doesnt make sense.

dustoff31
01-07-2010, 6:16 PM
I would suggest that he go to the gunshop and get his gun back. There is no requirement to register a rifle. I'm assuming it's an Enfield Rifle.

drgonzo
01-07-2010, 6:16 PM
he wanted to be legal. He's almost 70 years old and he's really stubborn. Anyway, if anyone has some constructive input i'd welcome it.

drgonzo
01-07-2010, 6:17 PM
yeah it's a rifle. The gun shop is telling him they can't release it to him until the doj ok's it.

bigcalidave
01-07-2010, 6:19 PM
I don't get it. What did he say to the gun shop when he brought it there? Why would a gun store accept a rifle to "register"

bwiese
01-07-2010, 6:20 PM
Yep, something doesn't make sense here.

Taking a gun to a gunshop to get it back to yourself is probably what's screwing things up since that doesn't need to happen.

Or, he has something on his background that's screwing things up [felon? violent misdemeanor? greencard problem? name similar to a prohibited person? ]

If a Californian inherits a long gun, he doesn't need to paper/register it. Just go shoot it and enjoy it. (Applicable even more so for an old C&R rifle.)

Even if he really wanted to register the rifle, that's just done by mailing in a voluntary registration form and a small fee.

Why did he do what he did?
And, are you recounting this story's full details?
Something's screwy...

From what you have outlined, it's his rifle. Legitmately. He can go take it back from the gunshop. Of course if the situation is as screwed up as you say it is the gunshop may balk, dunno.

dorkytom
01-07-2010, 6:28 PM
Umm to "register" your rifle... don't you only send this form in through the mail.

This form is completely voluntary for an enfield rifles, definitely does not require a gun shop to hold it.

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


Also per california attorney general bureau of firearms website: http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php

How do I know if my firearms need to be registered?

There is no firearm registration requirement in California except for assault weapon owners and personal handgun importers. However, you may submit a Firearm Ownership Record to the DOJ for any firearm you own. Having a Firearm Ownership Record on file with the DOJ may help in the return of your firearm if it is lost or stolen. With very few and specific exceptions, all firearm transactions must be conducted through a firearms dealer.

Geo
01-07-2010, 6:38 PM
he wanted to be legal.

He already was legal. Inviting the law into his life was a huge mistake.

RP1911
01-07-2010, 6:43 PM
I suspect he took it in and had DROS run and or dealer may have thought something was fishy and notified DOJ and hence the hold.

ChuckBooty
01-07-2010, 6:47 PM
My opinion is that either you're not divulging the entire situation or your Dad did not divulge some details to you. He had the gun for a while then decided to register it? OK...even if he DID want to do that, he didn't have to go to a gun store. He could simply fill out the volunteer registration paperwork and mail it to the DOJ. Something isn't right here. Especially with the gun shop not releasing it to him. Which shop is it?

ChuckBooty
01-07-2010, 6:49 PM
The more I think about it, the more it sounds like it's the SHOP and not the DOJ thats jerking him around.

dustoff31
01-07-2010, 6:57 PM
The more I think about it, the more it sounds like it's the SHOP and not the DOJ thats jerking him around.

I was thinking that. Maybe trying to scam the old guy out of $35.00 for a DROS. Probably try to make him buy a lock too.

The Director
01-07-2010, 8:48 PM
it could be the Enfield itself. When I moved here from Canada 12 years ago, I had an Enfield with me that I bought legally in Canada and had owned for 5 years prior. I declared it at the border - it was in the moving van. They took it away, saying firearms could not be brought in in that manner. They said I needed to import it using ATF forms.


Long story short, I filled out the ATF forms and they responded promptly....the ATF gave me authorization to import all of my other rifles except the Enfield, which they said was military surplus or something and disallowed it. It still sits in rotting in a locker in Eastport, Idaho. I paid a hundred for the thing, and it wasn't worth more battle.

M1A Rifleman
01-08-2010, 9:32 AM
Assuming he recently inherited the rifle and only wanted to inform DOJ that he now owns, all that was needed was to submit the form from DOJ's webpage with $20. There is not need for taking the gun to any shop or providing any finger prints.

This story seems odd on so many levels. :TFH:

Bugei
01-08-2010, 9:47 AM
Assuming he recently inherited the rifle and only wanted to inform DOJ that he now owns, all that was needed was to submit the form from DOJ's webpage with $20. There is not need for taking the gun to any shop or providing any finger prints.

This story seems odd on so many levels. :TFH:


Maybe it only looks that way to us. Some of us more than others, but all of us frequent a forum that all about firearm law. We get educated as we go. All of us complain that the laws are arcane, self-contradictory, unconstitutional, etc.

For most folks, firearm law is just plain opaque. They can't make hide nor hair of it. People think that all firearms have to be registered here, especially if they come here from states where that is actually true. So here we have a guy whose 70-year-old father just wants to do the right thing. Through ignorance, he did something we wouldn't have done and now he's getting hosed. DOJ, dealer, somebody.

So when the OP comes online here and asks about it, there may not be anything fishy about it at all. Just a misunderstanding of what needs to be done and what doesn't.

One note about Enfields, though; the standard Ishapore magazine holds 12 rounds of .308. That may or may not be an issue, but DOJ or a gun shop might think it was. Why? Because the laws are arcane, self-contradictory, unconstitutional, etc.

RP1911
01-08-2010, 10:00 AM
One note about Enfields, though; the standard Ishapore magazine holds 12 rounds of .308.

I thought about that too. But then looked up 12276.1 again and it relates to semi-autos. The Enfield is bolt action.

ke6guj
01-08-2010, 11:25 AM
I thought about that too. But then looked up 12276.1 again and it relates to semi-autos. The Enfield is bolt action.

12276.1 isn't the issue, it is 12020, the large capacity magazine ban that would be the issue. the 12-round mag of the Enfield could be an issue at that point, even if it is bolt-action.

RP1911
01-08-2010, 11:34 AM
Good catch. Forgot about that.

On the other hand, it was his to begin with. If he brought the rifle in without the mag, there wouldn't be an issue in that regard.

Maybe the prior charges are still showing up.


ETA: I can see where a 12 round mag imheritance may be an issue. If the inheritance happened before the law change, then it should be ok. Unless of course grandpa was in his late eighties or nineties and dad only got the rifle after the law changed.

rideanddive
01-08-2010, 6:46 PM
I know drgonzo and his father-in-law. The story is as was originally posted. His father-in-law isn't very experienced with gun ownership. He inherited the gun when his father died and wishes to keep it more from sentimental reasons than as a gun collector.

bodger
01-08-2010, 7:30 PM
It seems strange that any FFL dealer would take custody of the rifle to begin with. Wouldn't they just tell him it doesn't need to be registered, or point him to the appropriate form for whatever he needed to do?
I don't see any DROS needed.

dixieD
01-08-2010, 7:51 PM
Isn't it a C&R also.

drgonzo
01-09-2010, 1:25 PM
Well my father in law talked to this lady from the doj and she said there is something on his record from 50 or more years ago in texas. Not a conviction or anything like that. He doesn't know what it's from (or he won't tell me).

But should he try to get this lady's supervisor on the phone? Maybe that might help or maybe it will just piss her off and she'll turn it down out of spite?
I don't know but he's going to call again on monday to see if it's cleared up yet... but damn it's been like 6 months!

leelaw
01-09-2010, 1:31 PM
Well my father in law talked to this lady from the doj and she said there is something on his record from 50 or more years ago in texas. Not a conviction or anything like that. He doesn't know what it's from (or he won't tell me).

Your FIL wasn't telling you the truth from the beginning. I wouldn't trust him to be telling you the truth now.

There is a reason why he became paranoid about "registering" it to himself. I suspect the thing he won't tell you about is why.

DedEye
01-09-2010, 1:31 PM
Tell him to talk to a lawyer.

bodger
01-09-2010, 2:14 PM
If not a conviction, then only an arrest, from 50 years ago, in another state, can't be something that would prohibit him from owning a firearm in CA. I have a felony arrest in CA from 30 years ago, with charges dropped, and I can own whatever legal firearm I want.
Whatever tangled FIL up with the DOJ is what we don't know, and apparently he isn't telling.

Your FIL wasn't telling you the truth from the beginning. I wouldn't trust him to be telling you the truth now.

There is a reason why he became paranoid about "registering" it to himself. I suspect the thing he won't tell you about is why.

leelaw
01-09-2010, 2:20 PM
If not a conviction, then only an arrest, from 50 years ago, in another state, can't be something that would prohibit him from owning a firearm in CA. I have a felony arrest in CA from 30 years ago, with charges dropped, and I can own whatever legal firearm I want.
Whatever tangled FIL up with the DOJ is what we don't know, and apparently he isn't telling.

He's been caught hiding something, and he's keeping mum on it. I'm saying that I wouldn't trust him if he were my FIL, and that this sudden urge to register it to himself is odd. Sign of a guilty conscience from 50 years ago? Who knows. He's not telling.

JDay
01-09-2010, 8:23 PM
he wanted to be legal. He's almost 70 years old and he's really stubborn. Anyway, if anyone has some constructive input i'd welcome it.

There's no paperwork required for a father-son long gun transfer.

JDay
01-09-2010, 8:26 PM
it could be the Enfield itself. When I moved here from Canada 12 years ago, I had an Enfield with me that I bought legally in Canada and had owned for 5 years prior. I declared it at the border - it was in the moving van. They took it away, saying firearms could not be brought in in that manner. They said I needed to import it using ATF forms.


Long story short, I filled out the ATF forms and they responded promptly....the ATF gave me authorization to import all of my other rifles except the Enfield, which they said was military surplus or something and disallowed it. It still sits in rotting in a locker in Eastport, Idaho. I paid a hundred for the thing, and it wasn't worth more battle.

Yeah, you have to fill out the importation paperwork. Its not like moving from one state to the next.

JDay
01-09-2010, 8:31 PM
Well my father in law talked to this lady from the doj and she said there is something on his record from 50 or more years ago in texas. Not a conviction or anything like that. He doesn't know what it's from (or he won't tell me).

But should he try to get this lady's supervisor on the phone? Maybe that might help or maybe it will just piss her off and she'll turn it down out of spite?
I don't know but he's going to call again on monday to see if it's cleared up yet... but damn it's been like 6 months!

Well he can always transfer it to you.