View Single Post
  #6  
Old 11-24-2012, 7:55 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Super Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 35,515
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by scld1354 View Post
Ok, but then it states 'as defined by section 478.11 of the ...' I believe that section of Title 27 CFR states in order to qualify as C&R it has to be 50 years old, unless valued for it's collectibility, or has been approved by the attorney general (?).
So: CA allows FFL-free transfer of the 50-year-old-and older group, and requires the FFL for less than 50 years old - even if it's on the BATF C&R list.

A C&R FFL is an FFL. Inside California, C&R licensees don't need a 'regular' FFL to handle their C&R long gun transfers, 50 years old or not.
__________________
Once again, we're in CA Bill Season.

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

Let us simply oppose them all - write, call, attend meetings with legislators and tell them they're wrong.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote