PDA

View Full Version : gun safe affidavit form


Tacobandit
04-24-2012, 6:25 PM
I hope a turners rep can answer this question. I am in my 10 day wait period on a ppt for an hk compact. 40 i purchased from a CG member. The owner did not have the cable lock for the gun however i looked on the DOJ website and it states I can sign an affidavit that i own a gun safe. What do i need to do to sign the affidavit? Would a pic of my safe on my cell phone suffice?

ke6guj
04-24-2012, 6:34 PM
the safe affidavit does not satisfy the Federal handgun safety law, even though it does satisfy CA law. Plan on having to buy a lock when you pick up.

monk
04-24-2012, 6:39 PM
the safe affidavit does not satisfy the Federal handgun safety law, even though it does satisfy CA law. Plan on having to buy a lock when you pick up.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there is no federal law requiring a gun lock, it's actually CA law. But yes, the safe affidavit is just for long guns.

ke6guj
04-24-2012, 6:43 PM
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but there is no federal law requiring a gun lock, it's actually CA law. But yes, the safe affidavit is just for long guns.

922(z) SECURE GUN STORAGE OR
SAFTEY DEVICE—
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as
Provided under paragraph (2), it shall
be unlawful for any licensed
importer, licensed manufacturer, or
licensed dealer to sell, deliver, or
transfer any handgun to any person
other than any person licensed under
this chapter, unless the transferee is
provided with a secure gun storage
or safety device (as defined in sec
tion 921(a)(34)) for than handgun.

LBDamned
04-24-2012, 7:38 PM
922(z) SECURE GUN STORAGE OR
SAFTEY DEVICE—
(1) IN GENERAL- Except as
Provided under paragraph (2), it shall
be unlawful for any licensed
importer, licensed manufacturer, or
licensed dealer to sell, deliver, or
transfer any handgun to any person
other than any person licensed under
this chapter, unless the transferee is
provided with a secure gun storage
or safety device (as defined in sec
tion 921(a)(34)) for than handgun.
you didnt read the reference you posted:

921(a)(34):
The term “secure gun storage or safety device” means—
(A) a device that, when installed on a firearm, is designed to prevent the firearm from being operated without first deactivating the device;
(B) a device incorporated into the design of the firearm that is designed to prevent the operation of the firearm by anyone not having access to the device; or
(C) a safe, gun safe, gun case, lock box, or other device that is designed to be or can be used to store a firearm and that is designed to be unlocked only by means of a key, a combination, or other similar means.

Also, the fact that many manufacturers now make guns to comply with (B) makes the lock unnecessary (based on 921)

LBDamned
04-24-2012, 7:51 PM
can someone show me legal reference to the long gun only (for safe meeting definition of safety device)...

I've read/heard Turners stating this - but the references I find do not stipulate "long guns" when referencing a gun safe as a suitable safety device:

http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/fsdcertlist

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=23001-24000&file=23620-23690

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/infobuls/0205.pdf#xml=http://search.doj.ca.gov:8004/AGSearch/isysquery/752f4c29-7c3c-43ea-a4c8-ad3c3646df54/2/hilite/

Tacobandit
04-24-2012, 7:55 PM
Okay then i do have the key that can be used to "lock" the gun making it non-fireable. Will that satisfy b?

ke6guj
04-24-2012, 7:56 PM
you didnt read the reference you posted:

921(a)(34):
The term “secure gun storage or safety device” means—
(A) a device that, when installed on a firearm, is designed to prevent the firearm from being operated without first deactivating the device;
(B) a device incorporated into the design of the firearm that is designed to prevent the operation of the firearm by anyone not having access to the device; or
(C) a safe, gun safe, gun case, lock box, or other device that is designed to be or can be used to store a firearm and that is designed to be unlocked only by means of a key, a combination, or other similar means.

Also, the fact that many manufacturers now make guns to comply with (B) makes the lock unnecessary (based on 921)

but an internal lock is still a lock that is being provided to the buyer when he takes posssesion of the handgun.. And if the FFL wants to provide the buyer with a safe each time he purchases a handgun, then that would satisfy law. but having the customer sign an affidavit that he owns a safe is not the same thing as being provided with one.



can someone show me legal reference to the long gun only (for safe meeting definition of safety device)...

I've read/heard Turners stating this - but the references I find do not stipulate "long guns" when referencing a gun safe as a suitable safety device:

http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/fsdcertlist

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=23001-24000&file=23620-23690

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/infobuls/0205.pdf#xml=http://search.doj.ca.gov:8004/AGSearch/isysquery/752f4c29-7c3c-43ea-a4c8-ad3c3646df54/2/hilite/not sure what you are asking here. CA law says that a safe affidavit satisfy CA's firearms lock law, which applies to handguns and long guns. It is just that the feds have their own handgun lock law, and the combination of both of those laws means that the CA affidavit is basically only useful when buying a long gun. CA's law does not state that the safe affidavit is only good for long guns.

ke6guj
04-24-2012, 8:06 PM
Okay then i do have the key that can be used to "lock" the gun making it non-fireable. Will that satisfy b?what key is that? ARe you talking about the HK Lock-Out Device? If so, that might satisy the federal handgun lock requirement, but would not satisfy CA's firearm lock law (As far as I can tell, the HK lock-out device is not on the Roster) so you would need to fill out the safe affidavit to satisfy CA law and that assumes that the HK lock is acceptable to the feds (and since they have never published any supporting regulations to explain the law, many FFLs might not accept an internal lock as being compliant).

LBDamned
04-24-2012, 9:44 PM
but an internal lock is still a lock that is being provided to the buyer when he takes posssesion of the handgun.. And if the FFL wants to provide the buyer with a safe each time he purchases a handgun, then that would satisfy law. but having the customer sign an affidavit that he owns a safe is not the same thing as being provided with one.

then why wouldnt the internal lock satisfy? And where does it say "provided at time of sale"?... it just says "provided" - why wouldnt an affidavit satisfy?


not sure what you are asking here. CA law says that a safe affidavit satisfy CA's firearms lock law, which applies to handguns and long guns. It is just that the feds have their own handgun lock law, and the combination of both of those laws means that the CA affidavit is basically only useful when buying a long gun. CA's law does not state that the safe affidavit is only good for long guns.
the post you replied to has the fed and state law... I'm not following your logic that the combination of the two means a safe affidavit is only good for long guns. How is that? Nothing in the Fed requirements would negate use for hand gun (from what I read).

manuelcardenas77
04-24-2012, 9:54 PM
So by browsing these post assuming you guys don't purchase much handguns,all I'm saying is your going to need a lock no older then 30 day old with proof of purchase or I usually just go to my local PD and ask for some gun locks... But if your going to big deal a 7-10$ and that's going to hurt you... Maybe you shouldn't of bought the handgun....

manuelcardenas77
04-24-2012, 9:56 PM
And the form is good for long guns unless your near a school zone,then you also need a lock... Or you can just call the store!

ke6guj
04-24-2012, 10:26 PM
then why wouldnt the internal lock satisfy? because that internal lock is not CA-rostered.

And where does it say "provided at time of sale"?... it just says "provided" - why wouldnt an affidavit satisfy?
because the federal law is unclear whether having the purchaser already possessing the safe is the same as the purchaser being provided a safe. A common reading of the law would see those as two separate things.


the post you replied to has the fed and state law... I'm not following your logic that the combination of the two means a safe affidavit is only good for long guns. How is that? Nothing in the Fed requirements would negate use for hand gun (from what I read).two separate laws. CA says that you must have a lock for that firearm that you purchase, or fill out a safe affidavit. This applies to both handguns and long guns, per CA law. any arguement there?

Federal law says that you must be provided with "secure gun storage or safety device" when a handgun is transfered to you. Can we agree that this only applies to handgun, not long guns?

looking at each transfer type separately;

long gun transfer, CA law applies, federal law does not apply. pretty simple then, safe affidavit works to satisfy CA law.

handgun transfer, CA law applies and so do federal law. So, in order to comply with CA law, you have to get a lock or have a safe affidavit. And in order to comply with federal law you have to be provided with a "secure gun storage or safety device". Each law is separate. You could do a safe affidavit to satisy CA law, but federal law still has to be satisfied with a "secure gun storage or safety device" being provided to you.

ke6guj
04-24-2012, 10:28 PM
So by browsing these post assuming you guys don't purchase much handguns,all I'm saying is your going to need a lock no older then 30 day old with proof of purchase or I usually just go to my local PD and ask for some gun locks... But if your going to big deal a 7-10$ and that's going to hurt you... Maybe you shouldn't of bought the handgun....it isn't the $10, it is the principle of the matter. Some of us have multiple safes and many lockable cases, why do we need another lock?

And the form is good for long guns unless your near a school zone,then you also need a lock... Or you can just call the store!not sure why you think the safe affidavit isn't valid if you are near a schoool zone? What is your PC/CCR to back that up.

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 8:44 AM
So by browsing these post assuming you guys don't purchase much handguns,all I'm saying is your going to need a lock no older then 30 day old with proof of purchase or I usually just go to my local PD and ask for some gun locks... But if your going to big deal a 7-10$ and that's going to hurt you... Maybe you shouldn't of bought the handgun....

only 6 :rolleyes:

what relevance is the amount of the lock? People are looking for clarification of the "safe" affidavit...

For me, the cost of the lock isn't an issue - I just don't like the space they take up (as I've had to buy them for long guns too since FFL is next to a school - so yes, I've had many)... These days I just buy them, and return them.

But I still haven't seen/read/heard clarification that addresses the safe affidavit - other than it's not clear enough for FFLs to allow it to happen (that is not an explanation of the law, that is an explanation why they make you buy a lock).

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 8:50 AM
because that internal lock is not CA-rostered.

because the federal law is unclear whether having the purchaser already possessing the safe is the same as the purchaser being provided a safe. A common reading of the law would see those as two separate things.

two separate laws. CA says that you must have a lock for that firearm that you purchase, or fill out a safe affidavit. This applies to both handguns and long guns, per CA law. any arguement there?

Federal law says that you must be provided with "secure gun storage or safety device" when a handgun is transfered to you. Can we agree that this only applies to handgun, not long guns?

looking at each transfer type separately;

long gun transfer, CA law applies, federal law does not apply. pretty simple then, safe affidavit works to satisfy CA law.

handgun transfer, CA law applies and so do federal law. So, in order to comply with CA law, you have to get a lock or have a safe affidavit. And in order to comply with federal law you have to be provided with a "secure gun storage or safety device". Each law is separate. You could do a safe affidavit to satisy CA law, but federal law still has to be satisfied with a "secure gun storage or safety device" being provided to you.
I walk in with a lock and receipt (less than 30 days old) all the time... the seller of the firearms didnt "provide it to me"... again, the law does not indicate provide at time of sale... so the verbiage is not something that should prevent use of affidavit (unless I'm missing something - but so far, there hasn't been an explanation that addresses what I'm referring to).

sd_fox_racer
04-25-2012, 8:55 AM
short and simpe your going to need a lock :)

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 8:58 AM
it isn't the $10, it is the principle of the matter. Some of us have multiple safes and many lockable cases, why do we need another lock?
+1


not sure why you think the safe affidavit isn't valid if you are near a schoool zone? What is your PC/CCR to back that up.

I think he's referring to 626.9

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 9:01 AM
short and simpe your going to need a lock :)

we get it, we're asking for clarification of the law...

The concept of "short and simple, just do it" is what makes kalifornia the communist style that it is.

ke6guj
04-25-2012, 9:02 AM
you're still mixing CA and federal law. There is no 30-day receipt verbage in the federal law. Thats CA law.

Federally, they just say that it be provided to you. In theory, you should be able to hand the seller a rostered handgun lock (even without a receipt) and he could "provide" it back to you in order to comply with federal law. You would then fill out the safe affidavit to comply with state law. But swearing that you have a safe at home does not mean that the seller is providing you with one (unless you wanted to haul the safe to the seller so he could provide it back to you).

ke6guj
04-25-2012, 9:07 AM
I think he's referring to 626.9which does not apply to long guns.

626.9. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the
Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.
(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person
knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in
paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written
permission of the school district superintendent, his or her
designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as
specified in subdivision (f).
(c) Subdivision (b) does not apply to the possession of a firearm
under any of the following circumstances:
(1) Within a place of residence or place of business or on private
property, if the place of residence, place of business, or private
property is not part of the school grounds and the possession of the
firearm is otherwise lawful.
(2) When the firearm is an unloaded pistol, revolver, or other
firearm capable of being concealed on the person and is in a locked
container or within the locked trunk of a motor vehicle.
This section does not prohibit or limit the otherwise lawful
transportation of any other firearm, other than a pistol, revolver,
or other firearm capable of being concealed on the person, in
accordance with state law.

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 9:13 AM
you're still mixing CA and federal law. There is no 30-day receipt verbage in the federal law. Thats CA law.

Federally, they just say that it be provided to you. In theory, you should be able to hand the seller a rostered handgun lock (even without a receipt) and he could "provide" it back to you in order to comply with federal law. You would then fill out the safe affidavit to comply with state law. But swearing that you have a safe at home does not mean that the seller is providing you with one (unless you wanted to haul the safe to the seller so he could provide it back to you).

the 30 day rule wasn't a part of the point (I put in in parenthesis just to be clear of it's legality) ...

the point is, the "provided lock" doest need to be "provided at time of sale"... therefore the safe being "provided" doesn't matter if it's at time of sale (I'm referring to Fed language)... If the Feds mean provided at time of sale, then coming in with a lock from 30 days ago doesn't qualify (regardless if the lock changed hands).

if CA FFL wont accept an affidavit, that's an entirely different issue - it has nothing to do with when/where/how the safe was "provided", it has everything to do with an affidavit being a valid method of proof (which is not even part of any law we've been discussing - and would open up an entirely different dialog).

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 9:16 AM
this could literally go on for days (and has in many threads)...

The bottom line is, there is nothing clearly defining these questions/concerns... and most FFLs admit this... the ambiguous verbiage in the law is why they simply require the lock. It has less to do with the definition of the law and more to do with lack of clarification of the law.

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 9:22 AM
which does not apply to long guns.

are you suggesting it is legal to have an unlocked long-gun within 1K feet of a school?

ke6guj
04-25-2012, 9:22 AM
the 30 day rule wasn't a part of the point (I put in in parenthesis just to be clear of it's legality) ...

the point is, the "provided lock" doest need to be "provided at time of sale"... therefore the safe being "provided" doesn't matter if it's at time of sale (I'm referring to Fed language)... If the Feds mean provided at time of sale, then coming in with a lock from 30 days ago doesn't qualify (regardless if the lock changed hands).

if CA FFL wont accept an affidavit, that's an entirely different issue - it has nothing to do with when/where/how the safe was "provided", it has everything to do with an affidavit being a valid method of proof (which is not even part of any law we've been discussing - and would open up an entirely different dialog).

that is because the CA FFL has no idea whether or not the safe affidavit meets the requirements of the federal handgun lock law, as written.

this could literally go on for days (and has in many threads)...

The bottom line is, there is nothing clearly defining these questions/concerns... and most FFLs admit this... the ambiguous verbiage in the law is why they simply require the lock. It has less to do with the definition of the law and more to do with lack of clarification of the law.exactly. There have been dozens of threads dealiing iwth this issue. And until ATF does their job and publishs the supporting regulations that they said they would, the murkiness of the law will continue to make CA FFLs play CYA and not accept a safe affidavit for a handgun transfer.

ke6guj
04-25-2012, 9:29 AM
are you suggesting it is legal to have an unlocked long-gun within 1K feet of a school?CA's GFSZ law does not make it illegal, per the PC I posted above.

per the federal GFSZ law,, there is an exemption for possession on private property (but you'd have to determine if there was bad federal case law defining "private propery" to exclude publicly-accessable private property).

(2) (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual
knowingly to possess a firearm
that has moved in or that otherwise affects
interstate or foreign commerce at
a place that the individual knows, or
has reasonable cause to believe, is a
school zone.
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not
apply to the possession of a firearm—
(i) on private property not part of
school grounds;


the next question would be, are there any gunshops located in a school zone? If not, then it isn't an issue one way or another.

LBDamned
04-25-2012, 11:24 AM
the next question would be, are there any gunshops located in a school zone? If not, then it isn't an issue one way or another.

yep. That's why I posted this:


For me, the cost of the lock isn't an issue - I just don't like the space they take up (as I've had to buy them for long guns too since FFL is next to a school - so yes, I've had many)... These days I just buy them, and return them.

Turner's Outdoorsman
04-27-2012, 10:03 AM
Mike, Jack-

I'm not sure the OP knew what he was getting into when the poor guy asked this one ....:D

Both of you guys are always on top of things and Mike, you're right this could be another great, never-ending CGN thread.

From our perspective, we've had two attorneys (both great guys that are well known, frequently referred to and much respected both on CGN and elsewhere) give us the same guidance and it parallels Jack's comments.

We abide by CA state law with respect to long guns and their acceptance of the safe affidavit. With respect to the CSLA, we make sure that a lock accompanies every handgun purchase regardless of source- OEM, new sale, customer supplied lock with receipt, etc.- as long the lock is CA approved and any other CA conditions are met. Likewise a customer who bought a safe/lockbox at the same time would be go to go on that purchase but only that first time.

And yes, the mash up/overlap of meeting those two requirements at once is the mother of all CharlieFoxtrots ....

Tacobandit
04-27-2012, 1:12 PM
Its all good the original owner found the lock and turned it in to turners the other day.

IrishPirate
04-27-2012, 1:22 PM
You could do a safe affidavit to satisy CA law, but federal law still has to be satisfied with a "secure gun storage or safety device" being provided to you.

no gun store has ever provided me with a lock....they have offered to let me make me buy one from them before i can pick up my gun, but they have never provided me with one (except when the gun i'm purchasing comes with a lock from the manufacturer).

does that satisfy the law? they aren't really providing you with a lock, they're forcing you to spend and extra $10-$15 for a paper weight and then usually not allowing you to return it either. I don't know of ANY store that actually provides you with locks for free (which to me is what "provide" means) if you need them...

Personally i just pick up the $5 winchester lock from wal-mart and bring it in with the receipt, then swing by wal-mart on my way home and return the lock. (and yes, the gun is locked when i transport it, just not with the lock from wal-mart)

halifax
04-27-2012, 1:40 PM
The ATF hasn't published their clarification yet, but I did get this official response when I wrote and asked about the CA Safe Affidavit:

U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives
Washington, DC 20226
DEC 8, 2008
903010:LHB
5300

Dear Mr. xxxxxxx:

This is in response to your letter to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). In your letter, you asked if the California State Form, Affidavit Stating Ownership of an Acceptable Gun Safe or Lock Box. is an acceptable form for customers in lieu of purchasing an 800+-pound full safe.

As you may know, a major mission of ATF is enforcement of the provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), its subsequent amendments, and other Federal firearms laws. A significant part of the GCA concerns the requirements pertaining to the manufacture, importation, distribution, possession, and sale of firearms.

Section 921 (a)(34)(C) of Title 18 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) defines a secure gun storage or safety device as a safe, gun safe, gun case, lock box, or other device that is designed to be or can be used to store a firearm, and that designed to be unlocked only by means of a key, combination, or other similar means. 18 U.S.C. 922(z), regarding secure gun storage or safety device, states in part that it shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to sell, deliver, or transfer any handgun to any person other than any person licensed, unless the transferee is provided with a secure gun storage or safety device for that handgun at the time of the firearm sales transaction.

The form used by the State of California Department of Justice with the standards set forth by section 977.50 of the California Code of Regulations may comply with California laws but does not comply with the laws and regulations set forth by ATF. This form is not an ATF form and is not an acceptable form in lieu of presenting a secure gun storage or safety device at the time of each firearm sales transaction.

We regret that our response was not more positive. If you should have any further questions, we invite you to review our Web site at www.atf.gov. You may also contact our office at (202) 648-7090.

Sincerely yours,


Raymond G. Rowley
Chief, Firearms Programs Division

So, although the ATF recognizes that the CA Safe Affidavit is a legal document, they won't accept it because it is not one of "their" legal documents. If you don't want another lock to add to your collection just bring in your safe and you are good to go. ;)

paul0660
04-27-2012, 1:45 PM
If you don't want another lock to add to your collection just bring in your safe and you are good to go.

I hope you are on your front stoop building a ramp RIGHT NOW!

halifax
04-27-2012, 1:54 PM
I hope you are on your front stoop building a ramp RIGHT NOW!

Yep! :D

LBDamned
04-27-2012, 5:30 PM
kudos halifax! That's the most clarifying response I think I've seen... it would be nice if the "letter-of-the-law" was as (relatively) concise. :rolleyes:

This is, of course, providing you didnt write the response and pose as ATF :p

On the other hand - it's like the AZ illegal immigrant issue... state wants to do something Feds agree with, but Feds wont let state do it - and admit, they dont have current capacity to make it happen either :rolleyes:

And (side-note)... Welcome back Bill - good to see you keeping order 'round here :D!

drifter2be
05-01-2012, 11:55 PM
Quit crying, buy the lock, leave, put the gun in your trunk, walk back into the store, return the lock...problem solved /thread.

LBDamned
05-02-2012, 5:49 AM
^^^ LMAO


the thread was dead until your post - welcome to last week.... too bad your genius idea wasnt posted before all the discussion - gee I don't think anyone ever thought of that :rolleyes:

Turner's Outdoorsman
05-25-2012, 12:42 PM
The ATF hasn't published their clarification yet, but I did get this official response when I wrote and asked about the CA Safe Affidavit:



So, although the ATF recognizes that the CA Safe Affidavit is a legal document, they won't accept it because it is not one of "their" legal documents. If you don't want another lock to add to your collection just bring in your safe and you are good to go. ;)

Thanks for sharing.

That's exactly what every dealer (well every one that pushed the point) has been told when CSLA went into effect. Perhaps the absence of seeing/reading that first hand leads to these lengthy discussions that tend to place the monkey on the dealer's back.