PDA

View Full Version : Sheriff refuses to ship handgun to owner..... what is the law??


ErikTheRed
03-27-2010, 12:47 AM
Ok fellas, heres the deal...... the quick n' dirty......

A good friend of mine (we'll call him "Mike") recently returned from Arkansas, where he was living with his now-ex-wife (a long but typical story). He moved back to California in a hurry, hoping to take advantage of a job that he thought might pan out. Before leaving AK, he worked out a deal with his ex to get his things shipped back to CA. She agreed to box up his belongings and ship them, but now shes refusing. (like I said..... typical story.) Anyhow, his ex has since found a new boyfriend and he has moved in with her. Just about 2 weeks ago, there was a situation (not sure the details) involving the new boyfriend and "Mike's" oldest son, who is still living with the ex-wife in AK. "Mike" was forced to call the Pike County Sheriff from California to deal with the situation, and he informed the Sheriff that his ex still has possesion of his pistol, a Golan .40 (Israeli-made Glock copy, fyi). The Sheriff went to the house to resolve the issue and while there, confiscated the pistol on "Mike's" request. There were no charges filed on anyone and the reason for the call to the sheriff did NOT involve the gun in any way, although "Mike" was concerned and knew that having a gun in that house with his son and the new boyfried was not a good idea. The gun is legally registered to "Mike" and "Mike" is in no way barred from handgun ownership.

Now, fast forward to just a few days ago. "Mike" called the Pike County Sheriff to see about getting his gun shipped out to California. "Mike" offered to pay any shipping charges and provided the names and addresses of a few local FFL's to ship it to. The Sheriff agreed and told "Mike" the pistol would be sent. Welp, just yesterday "Mike" received a phone call from a Pike County deputy who informed him that they would not be able to ship the pistol. When "Mike" asked why, the deputy simply told him, "Because its illegal. You'll need to come pick it up in person and provide identification."

I can't figre out why the sheriff would tell him this. Is the deputy correct? What am I missing? Could it be a local law in Pike County or even an AK state law? Please advise. Thanks!

Scratch705
03-27-2010, 1:11 AM
it is the cops, i thought they never release guns without the person being there?

ErikTheRed
03-27-2010, 1:13 AM
it is the cops, i thought they never release guns without the person being there?


That may be, I dunno..... but I thought that would only apply if the gun were used in a crime or was used as evidence.

ke6guj
03-27-2010, 1:44 AM
one thing that does come to mind is that the roster may apply in this situation. I don't know for sure, but it is possible.

SJgunguy24
03-27-2010, 2:19 AM
one thing that does come to mind is that the roster may apply in this situation. I don't know for sure, but it is possible.

The roster shouldn't matter he already owns the pistol. From what I can see is the Sheriff is not an FFL and maybe doesn't feel comfortable shipping the pistol. Now if he were to take it to an FFL for shipment then the DOJ might have something to say about it (CFLC and roster issues). They could come up with some BS that it's not on the roster and since it arrived at an FFL, it's now LEO only. Is there any handgun registration in Arkansas? If so that could be the only proof, if not with all of the possible BS the BOF/DOJ might try it sounds easier to jump on a plane and pick it up.

Just thought of this. The only way I can see of getting around the roster is "Mike" PPT's the gun to the sheriff then the sheriff ships to CA FFL as a PPT. There isn;t a roster requirement for PPT's but "Mike " would still need to go to Arkansas to make the transaction. Get on a plane and be done with it.

SJgunguy24
03-27-2010, 2:25 AM
it is the cops, i thought they never release guns without the person being there?
Not sure about Arkansas law, but maybe the Sheriff needs to run a NCIC check before the gun is released.

That may be, I dunno..... but I thought that would only apply if the gun were used in a crime or was used as evidence.

I do know in California they will try to keep it for destruction as a "public nuisance". That almost happend to me, ACSO flat refused to give me my gun back after they took it for no reason. After playing their game for a week I made a phone call and got an apology from the Sergent in charge of the case and picked up my gun that evening.

Whatever happens good luck.

Bobula
03-27-2010, 2:32 AM
you're title is EXTREMELY misleading......

Wild Squid
03-27-2010, 3:54 AM
I don't think the cops have any responsibility to ship a gun for someone. He ought to go pick it up himself, and this thread title is misleading, sounds like they don't want to return it to him at all. Who does "Mike" think they are anyways? The US Postal Service?

geeknow
03-27-2010, 4:25 AM
That may be, I dunno..... but I thought that would only apply if the gun were used in a crime or was used as evidence.

dont know about the police in AR, but I can tell you for sure that the police out here wont release a pistol without;

1. a court order
2. a lot of phone calls by the owner
3. making an "appointment" to get your stuff back...which was wierd.
4. presenting yourself in person, ID in your outstreched hand.

this, from personal experience.

oh yeah, and when the gun did come back, it was smashed all to heck.

again, from personal experience.

search my name, read the thread.

g

B Strong
03-27-2010, 6:41 AM
I believe there may be a couple of problems here, and I don't think the LEA is pulling shenannigins.

The agency does not in fact "know" that "Mike" is currently permitted to possess firearms in California, they don't know if in fact Mike is legal that the pistol itself is legal, and in shipping the pistol to a California FFL they don't know if they're breaking any laws there.

My advice would be to engage the services of an Attorney in Arkansas, and have him take the pistol into possession on Mike's behalf, then work out the mechanics of a transfer - having an FFL ship it direct to Mike (as the legal owner it would be legal) may be the best solution.

misterjake
03-27-2010, 7:18 AM
For how much it'll cost from a lawyer, shipping fees, FFL he might as well sell it through gunbroker in Arkansas and purchase a new gun here.

sniper5
03-27-2010, 7:46 AM
Well, how about a call back to the sheriff's office asking why it's illegal? Non confrontational, just asking which sections of the law apply so he can see how the return could be completed within the law. That might be a start.

1911_sfca
03-27-2010, 8:26 AM
If I were the deputy, I would have done the exact same thing. If "Mike" wants the gun so bad he should go pick it up. Otherwise, he should just buy a new Glock and consider it part of the cost of starting a new life and separating himself from that relationship. Probably money well spent in order to move on.

loather
03-27-2010, 8:50 AM
Because it's illegal to ship a pistol through the mail to someone not an FFL. If the pistol is not on the roster, it can't come into California through that manner.

If he wants it back, he's going to have to head back to AR (to the OP: AK is Alaska) and get it. He needs to do that to get his stuff (and the kid!) anyways if the woman won't box it up for him.

All in all, sounds like a pretty fecal situation.

SJgunguy24
03-27-2010, 9:12 AM
Because it's illegal to ship a pistol through the mail to someone not an FFL. If the pistol is not on the roster, it can't come into California through that manner.

If he wants it back, he's going to have to head back to AR (to the OP: AK is Alaska) and get it. He needs to do that to get his stuff (and the kid!) anyways if the woman won't box it up for him.

All in all, sounds like a pretty fecal situation.


Yes it's illegal to mail, but not a contract courier. "Mike" can ship that gun to himself from one state to another. Also he can directly receive that handgun from an FFL. The problem is it needs to be shipped by or received by an FFL. The Sheriff isn't an FFL and "Mike" isn't an FFL. See my post on page 1. The roster has nothing to do with it untill a California FFL receives that handgun. There is a way around that but "Mike" would have to go to Arkansas to complete that anyway.
Get on a plane and pick up the gun.

B Strong
03-27-2010, 9:14 AM
Because it's illegal to ship a pistol through the mail to someone not an FFL. If the pistol is not on the roster, it can't come into California through that manner.

If he wants it back, he's going to have to head back to AR (to the OP: AK is Alaska) and get it. He needs to do that to get his stuff (and the kid!) anyways if the woman won't box it up for him.

All in all, sounds like a pretty fecal situation.

I know that I've had pistols and wheelguns shipped to me through a common carrier - if you're the legal owner of a firearm, it is legal for it to be shipped to you by a licensee.

Whether or not the pistol would have to be on the SGR, that's another question.

Librarian
03-27-2010, 9:42 AM
Whether or not the pistol would have to be on the SGR, that's another question.
And the answer is no - the Roster applies to transfers through an FFL. Since Mike already owns the weapon, there's no transfer.

SkyStorm82
03-27-2010, 9:48 AM
Change your thread title.

thedrickel
03-27-2010, 9:59 AM
The sheriff is not going to mail it, and he's not going to give it back to anyone in person that is not the legal owner. Dude has to go back to Arkansas to get it.

garandguy10
03-27-2010, 11:29 AM
Just one thought here, does this handgun have a normal capacity [over 10 round] magazine with it? if so, then the mag is definitly illegal to ship to California to your average citizen. Also, it is probably against state law for the LEO to release a firearm that does not belong to them, to a out of state FFL. He will have to pick it up in person and prove who he is and prove ownership.

bigcalidave
03-27-2010, 12:27 PM
Thread title needs to change... Seriously

You expect a Sheriff to put a gun what, in a fedex box and send it out? No WAY are they gonna take that liability.

ErikTheRed
03-27-2010, 12:51 PM
A few of you fellas need to chill out. Seriously. This was just a question, hoping to get some advice for my buddy. Nobody said anything about "Mike" being angry or demanding or unreasonable, he simply doesn't understand the law enough to argue with the Sheriff. He isn't being a jerk and if he can't get his gun back, then so be it--- he was just curious, and so am I. I told him I'd ask about it on CalGuns and maybe get some advice, or find out what laws, if any, are applicable here. So whats the big deal? Good grief, some of you make too many assumptions.

Anyhow, as far as the thread title, again, I don't know what the big deal is. But, how bout this....

"Sheriff says its illegal to ship a handgun to FFL, refuses to ship." Is that better?

To those of you who read the entire post and gave some helpful advice, thank you.

ErikTheRed
03-27-2010, 12:53 PM
Actualy, now that I think about it, I see how the post title could be misleading...... I get it. Didn't mean to insinuate that the cops took my gun, which from a reader's persective, it could appear. TOTALLY not intentional. Tried to edit the post title, but I don't know how.

Bobula
03-27-2010, 1:55 PM
Actualy, now that I think about it, I see how the post title could be misleading...... I get it. Didn't mean to insinuate that the cops took my gun, which from a reader's persective, it could appear. TOTALLY not intentional. Tried to edit the post title, but I don't know how.

Don't you mean "Mike's"

:43:

turbosbox
03-27-2010, 4:18 PM
well, since the title doesn't read true, I can't infer the rest of the story is true either. So tell "mike" to "chill out" he doesn't need it anyway, that's why he left it there. Or maybe you both expect the sheriff to drive out to California, CA and deliver it from Alaska AK.

BTW, you say to chill out, ok. Why did you waste our time reading your story under false pretenses in a forum to give u advice which isn't warranted?
You can post a misleading story, and we can in turn say ur both losers.

thefurball
03-27-2010, 4:30 PM
800 pound gorilla in the room. Things generally go their way.

Book a cheap flight on Southwest and make a field trip of it.

ErikTheRed
03-27-2010, 9:55 PM
well, since the title doesn't read true, I can't infer the rest of the story is true either. So tell "mike" to "chill out" he doesn't need it anyway, that's why he left it there. Or maybe you both expect the sheriff to drive out to California, CA and deliver it from Alaska AK.

BTW, you say to chill out, ok. Why did you waste our time reading your story under false pretenses in a forum to give u advice which isn't warranted?
You can post a misleading story, and we can in turn say ur both losers.

Oh. My. God. Some people just piss me off. Dude, screw your head on straight. I was referring to the post title, and since this post is MINE, then I could see how someone reading the POST TITLE could think the sheriff took MY gun....... hence my understanding that post title could be misleading. Ya dig? I am happily married (13 years) living in Marysville with three daughters, thank you very much. Been here for the better part of my 37 years. I've never been to Arkansas, I don't have a son, and I've never been divorced. And I'd never buy a butt-a** ugly piece of crap like a Golan. There are several people on this forum who know me personally, including my brother, who know damn good and well who "Mike" is. Get ahold of yourself and stop searching for pathetic reasons to bag people, or in this case, to call them liars and losers.

The minority always seems to ruin it for the majority. In a community thats supposed to be made up of brothers in common interest helping each other out and supporting a common cause, there sure seems to be fair amount of a**holes.

ErikTheRed
03-27-2010, 10:02 PM
BTW, why don't you relieve some of that senseless hostility by making a donation to CalGuns!! You obviously need an outlet.

Ron-Solo
03-28-2010, 9:41 AM
Well, how about a call back to the sheriff's office asking why it's illegal? Non confrontational, just asking which sections of the law apply so he can see how the return could be completed within the law. That might be a start.

This is a good start.

CSACANNONEER
03-28-2010, 10:04 AM
Does Arkansas register guns? I really don't think so. I'm betting that the gun is not "registered" to anyone since, I'm betting that there is no such thing as "registration" (when it comes to title one firearms) in Arkansas!

The sheriff is not going to mail it, and he's not going to give it back to anyone in person that is not the legal owner. Dude has to go back to Arkansas to get it.

Yep, The SO probably need to realease it in person and not through a third party.

Tried to edit the post title, but I don't know how.
Go to "edit" and then "advanced" or something like that. You'll find it.


Book a cheap flight on Southwest and make a field trip of it.

Hell, that's the best way. Then, he could visit his kid(s) too.

Sheepdog1968
03-28-2010, 10:13 AM
I don't think the cops have any responsibility to ship a gun for someone. He ought to go pick it up himself, and this thread title is misleading, sounds like they don't want to return it to him at all. Who does "Mike" think they are anyways? The US Postal Service?

+1
From what you posted sounds like they are willing to give it back to him. They want to make sure it is indeed him and not someone who stole his idenity. Sounds very reasonable to me. I wouldn't make a special trip to pick it up but I'm sure he will go back at some point. I'd call the sherrif and just explain its going to be a while to see if there isn't a time that it must be picked up. Bottom line is sherrif is protecting his son from not doing something stupid.

turbosbox
03-28-2010, 1:19 PM
Oh. My. God. Some people just piss me off. Dude, screw your head on straight. I was referring to the post title, and since this post is MINE, then I could see how someone reading the POST TITLE could think the sheriff took MY gun....... hence my understanding that post title could be misleading. Ya dig? ...Get ahold of yourself and stop searching for pathetic reasons to bag people, or in this case, to call them liars and losers.

The minority always seems to ruin it for the majority. In a community thats supposed to be made up of brothers in common interest helping each other out and supporting a common cause, there sure seems to be fair amount of a**holes.

I didn't call you a liar, it was a loser. The reason I said it, is because other people strongly suggested you change the title to reflect a more true representation of the "story". It isn't as much about who Mike is or isn't.
Your title says 'a LEO confiscated a weapon and won't return it'.
Now, that isn't really at all true in the context. The weapon was voluntarily relinquished in the interest of public safety and had relation to domestic dispute. The true story was distorted because of anger towards the LEO for not being a personal pick up and delivery service in the line of duty.

And yes, I feel the same towards you, as you do to me. A person who ruins public discourse on gun ownership and attitudes towards good LEO folks by twisting the facts. Hey, the LEO didn't make a stink that the weapon wasn't properly locked stored and secured from a minor etc etc.

And yes, I DO make regular monetary donations to Calguns and the server side of it too. If the moderators think I'm too controversial and ban me or warn me, that's fine too. I'd use the future donation money for a sling or scope or something instead.

ErikTheRed
03-28-2010, 2:23 PM
Does Arkansas register guns? I really don't think so. I'm betting that the gun is not "registered" to anyone since, I'm betting that there is no such thing as "registration" (when it comes to title one firearms) in Arkansas!

The gun was originally purchased in California. In fact, I was with him when he bought it from a local pawn shop several years ago. He took it with him when he moved out there but didn't want to mess around trying to get a gun on an airplane when he flew back home.

Yep, The SO probably need to realease it in person and not through a third party.

And if thats the case then thats the case. Thats what this thread was intended to find out.


Go to "edit" and then "advanced" or something like that. You'll find it.

Found it under "advanced".... thanks!

Hell, that's the best way. Then, he could visit his kid(s) too.

He is flying his kids out for the summer, and hopefully, they'll stay here premanently. But thats a whole 'nuther challenge.

And hey man, thanks for being cool with a reply.

Clinton
03-28-2010, 2:53 PM
....and for the record, I've seen post titles a lot more misleading than this one that nobody seemed to mind or even comment on. What was the big deal on this one that made several of you just flip out? Some of you forum police need to chill. (and I'm not refering to the legit moderators)

ErikTheRed
03-28-2010, 3:02 PM
+1
From what you posted sounds like they are willing to give it back to him. They want to make sure it is indeed him and not someone who stole his idenity.

Yeah, they'll give it back to him. I just can't figure out why the deputy would tell him its "illegal" to send it and cite that as the reason they're not sending it. If they don't want to send it, thats fine. But then why didn't they just say that? Its the "illegal" part that I don't get, so I wrote this thread to find out what I don't know. I haven't talked to my buddy in a couple of days, but he was waiting on me to find out something he before he called the sheriff back.


Bottom line is sherrif is protecting his son from not doing something stupid.

Its not his son that is the risk, its the new boyfriend (apparently).

ErikTheRed
03-28-2010, 3:42 PM
I didn't call you a liar, it was a loser.

Nope, you called me both. But whatever.

The reason I said it, is because other people strongly suggested you change the title to reflect a more true representation of the "story".

And I agreed with that. I tried to change it but didn't see the ability to change the title in the edit screen. Its under "advanced", and its changed now.

Your title says 'a LEO confiscated a weapon and won't return it'.

It said nothing about "confiscation", and I described in detail how and why the sheriff got it.

The weapon was voluntarily relinquished in the interest of public safety and had relation to domestic dispute.

Relinguished voluntarily, yes. Had relation to a domestic dispute, no. The gun had nothing to do with anything, my buddy just didn't want it there. Its all in the story, man..... read it again.

The true story was distorted because of anger towards the LEO for not being a personal pick up and delivery service in the line of duty.

That is a complete fabrication on your part. Nobody is 'angry' about anything. Nobody expects or has asked the sheriff to do anything unreasonable. Again as the story clearly explains, the sheriff first told "Mike" that there would be no problem shipping the gun to him, which expressed their willingness to ship it. But then, on a subsequent call, they said they wouldn't ship the gun, claiming that its illegal to do so. The entire purpose of this thread was to discover the illegality, if any, of the sheriff shipping the gun to a California FFL for pickup by the owner. We discuss on this forum all the time the confusion brought about by crazy California laws to out-of-state sellers and shippers and businesses, so I figured this was just another of those cases. If I were to discover a provision or prohibition in the law that made it a crime for the sheriff to send the gun, then I'd know what to tell "Mike". And so I started this thread, albeit with an innappropriate title that I have since acknowledged and changed. Had the sheriff quoted a inter-department policy or simply said "we don't want to ship it", then there would have been no reason for this thread.

And yes, I feel the same towards you, as you do to me. A person who ruins public discourse on gun ownership and attitudes towards good LEO folks by twisting the facts.

You just called me a liar again. There are no twisted facts here, now you're just trying to justify what you said in a previous post. And please don't question my respect for law enforcement.

And yes, I DO make regular monetary donations to Calguns and the server side of it too. If the moderators think I'm too controversial and ban me or warn me, that's fine too. I'd use the future donation money for a sling or scope or something instead.

Well good, glad to hear you're making donations. But I'm not so glad to hear that if you were to be reprimanded for calling people liars and losers without reasonable cause to do so, that you'd take your ball and run home and and consider the 2A cause not worthy of fighting for. Dude, you carried this much farther than calling out my post title (which was NOT intentionally written the way it was, it was simply poor wording on my part)--- you have gone on to say that I'm misleading people with my OP story, lying about my identity, and then calling me a loser for it. And that just sucks. The vast majority of the GalGuns community is my brotherhood, fighting alongside each other for the most important Amendment in the Constitution. I wish many of us would fight a little harder, but we all aspire to reach the same goal none-the-less.

Cokebottle
03-28-2010, 3:56 PM
....and for the record, I've seen post titles a lot more misleading than this one that nobody seemed to mind or even comment on. What was the big deal on this one that made several of you just flip out? Some of you forum police need to chill. (and I'm not refering to the legit moderators)
+1

The last 48 hours have been chock full of people (usually low post count, but members anywhere from a month to several years) getting their panties in bunch over absolutely nothing, with nothing constructive to add to the thread.

Is school out for spring break or something?

Doheny
03-28-2010, 4:02 PM
I can't figre out why the sheriff would tell him this. Is the deputy correct? What am I missing? Could it be a local law in Pike County or even an AK state law? Please advise. Thanks!

The deputy is correct because that's what the sheriff told him to say.

What's your friend going to do -- sue over a handgun?

ErikTheRed
03-28-2010, 9:29 PM
What's your friend going to do -- sue over a handgun?

See what I mean? What the hell kind of a question is that? Yeah dude, he's SOOOOOOO pissed, he's gonna SUE!!!

:rolleyes:

CSACANNONEER
03-29-2010, 5:33 AM
See what I mean? What the hell kind of a question is that? Yeah dude, he's SOOOOOOO pissed, he's gonna SUE!!!

:rolleyes:

Why? Even if it is legal for a non-FFL to ship to an out of state FFL, it might be against dept. policy. I really doubt that there is any kind of law on the books which would REQUIRE a LEA to ship any personal property to anyone period.

Doheny
03-29-2010, 5:37 AM
See what I mean? What the hell kind of a question is that? Yeah dude, he's SOOOOOOO pissed, he's gonna SUE!!!

Well, if he's got a short a fuse like you do, and goes off half-cocked like you do, anything is possible.

:sarcasm:

KylaGWolf
03-29-2010, 3:09 PM
Because it's illegal to ship a pistol through the mail to someone not an FFL. If the pistol is not on the roster, it can't come into California through that manner.

If he wants it back, he's going to have to head back to AR (to the OP: AK is Alaska) and get it. He needs to do that to get his stuff (and the kid!) anyways if the woman won't box it up for him.

All in all, sounds like a pretty fecal situation.

Not necessarily true. If you are sending the gun to the gun manufacturing it does not have to go through an FFL nor do they have to send it back to you through an FFL. But that is a totally different situation.

In this case I would say I can understand why they do not want to send the gun to him without knowing that he is legal to have the gun in CA. Or if they are even actually giving the gun to the person that is the owner of the gun. Might be worth taking a quick two or three day trip to go pick up the gun if it means enough to him.

CSACANNONEER
03-29-2010, 6:22 PM
Because it's illegal to ship a pistol through the mail to someone not an FFL. If the pistol is not on the roster, it can't come into California through that manner.

If he wants it back, he's going to have to head back to AR (to the OP: AK is Alaska) and get it. He needs to do that to get his stuff (and the kid!) anyways if the woman won't box it up for him.

All in all, sounds like a pretty fecal situation.

Not necessarily true. If you are sending the gun to the gun manufacturing it does not have to go through an FFL nor do they have to send it back to you through an FFL. But that is a totally different situation.

In this case I would say I can understand why they do not want to send the gun to him without knowing that he is legal to have the gun in CA. Or if they are even actually giving the gun to the person that is the owner of the gun. Might be worth taking a quick two or three day trip to go pick up the gun if it means enough to him.

Kyla,

It's my understanding that it is illegal for any non-FFL to mail a handgun PERIOD. They can be shipped via common carriers like UPS and Fed Ex though. I have shipped on of my Kimbers back to Yonkers via Fed Ex and Kimber was able to send it back to me via USPS because, they have an FFL.

taperxz
03-29-2010, 7:57 PM
See what I mean? What the hell kind of a question is that? Yeah dude, he's SOOOOOOO pissed, he's gonna SUE!!!

:rolleyes:

Wouldn't it be easier to go the CG'S private firearm sales than the sue or go back to AR? He should not have left the gun behind if it meant that much to him. I know it would be a lot less costly.

Cokebottle
03-29-2010, 8:02 PM
Jeez.... You guys are so blind by your absolute need to bag on someone that you don't even see the ":rolleyes:" that you're quoting.


HE'S FREAKING JOKING!!!!!

taperxz
03-29-2010, 8:06 PM
I'm not baggin on the guy just making a statement overall that sometimes in life you gotta lose the battle to win the war.

Cokebottle
03-29-2010, 8:10 PM
I'm not baggin on the guy just making a statement overall that sometimes in life you gotta lose the battle to win the war.
Unless the mods have edited the thread, go back to the first page and read the whole thing.

The full moon has been out in force and some have been in this thread for no other reason than to bash the OP, make demands, etc...

That's where his bit of sarcasm came from that you quoted and appeared to take seriously.

taperxz
03-29-2010, 8:14 PM
I got ya. The sue part was a little bit of sarcasm i missed. Just saying that even to go back just for the gun would be costly. I would hate to lose a gun that way but the circumstances don't look like they are real easy to resolve.

I didnt read the whole thread cause some of it was, well, not helpful

Cokebottle
03-29-2010, 8:24 PM
I got ya. The sue part was a little bit of sarcasm i missed. Just saying that even to go back just for the gun would be costly. I would hate to lose a gun that way but the circumstances don't look like they are real easy to resolve.

I didnt read the whole thread cause some of it was, well, not helpful
Ya, I agree.
Southwest is cheap, but it's still $200-$300 and probably a rental car, overnight stay, a few meals, parking at his local airport... it could end up being a $500-$700 trip.

If it's a $3,000 Baer 1911.... ya, maybe it's worth it.
If it's a .38 snubbie, best to just be happy that it's not in the hands of someone who might use it to do harm to someone he cares about.
Contact the SO that has it and inform them that he will not be picking it up and give them permission to dispose of it, and file the proper paperwork with the CaDOJ to inform them that he is no longer in possession... problem solved and an expensive lesson learned.

taperxz
03-29-2010, 8:30 PM
He can at least take comfort that when he goes back to see his kid which i hope he remembers to do he may be able to pick up the gun. AND BRING IT BACK WITH HIM. ;0

Cokebottle
03-29-2010, 8:33 PM
Ya, depends on how long the SO is willing to store it and when his next trip is planned.

I wouldn't bank on the SO holding it more than a couple of months.

ErikTheRed
03-29-2010, 9:33 PM
Cokebottle, thank you for the words of reason. At least some of us know how to comprehend and process what we read.

He talked to Pike Co. S/O today, and while they didn't quote an actual law, they told him that they cannot send any firearms to anyone--- must be picked up in person with a current identification. Apparently they were poltite about the whole thing, apologized for the miscommunication, and said they would hold the pistol for 60 days. If he needs more time he only has to call before then. Sounds reasonable to me. "Mike" will likely not return for the gun (too expensive) and instead bought 3 new ones a few days ago. ;) (He bought a new Taurus PT140, a used Ruger P95, and a Mossberg 500.) Mostly he's just happy the gun is out of his ex's house.

To those of you who were helpful in this thread, thank you.

taperxz
03-29-2010, 9:39 PM
Great, time to get on with life. He must have a special license to be able to get those two pistols in the same 30 day period.

Cokebottle
03-29-2010, 9:55 PM
Great, time to get on with life. He must have a special license to be able to get those two pistols in the same 30 day period.
PPT, consignment, or he has an 03FFL and CoE (just clear DOJ and FBI background. Total cost is around $100-$120 for both certs).

taperxz
03-29-2010, 9:59 PM
:yes:

ErikTheRed
03-29-2010, 10:09 PM
Great, time to get on with life. He must have a special license to be able to get those two pistols in the same 30 day period.

:rolleyes:

He purchased three guns, a NEW Taurus, a USED Ruger, and a Mossberg 500. NEW Taurus, 30-day period applies. USED Ruger, was not dealer inventory, consignment sale, PPT, 30-day limit does not apply. All you had to do was ask.

CSACANNONEER
03-30-2010, 8:33 AM
:rolleyes:

He purchased three guns, a NEW Taurus, a USED Ruger, and a Mossberg 500. NEW Taurus, 30-day period applies. USED Ruger, was not dealer inventory, consignment sale, PPT, 30-day limit does not apply. All you had to do was ask.

JFYI,

The 30 day rule would have applied if he tried to purchase the second handgun in the City of Los Angeles. This applies even if the first purchase was made outside of that city and the second purchase was a PPT. I realize this was not the case but, don't just assume that everyone knows where he purchased them and what the laws are in those municipalities. Anyway, just keep in mind that consignment sales and PPTs DO apply in some areas.

Big Jake
03-30-2010, 9:45 AM
It may be illegal under AK law to ship it. I don't know,but when the deputy said it was illegal I doubt he was reffering to California law as how would he know what the law here is?

randy
03-31-2010, 1:26 AM
Sounds right to me.

If he wants it go get it. If its not worth the cost to go there then buy one here.