Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-23-2019, 10:19 AM
eXcision's Avatar
eXcision eXcision is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default DoJ Delayed my pistol release?

Has anyone had this happen to them? I'm confused since this past year I have purchased 5 rifles and haven't had a problem. It's been a couple of months since my last purchase, Never have I ever had a delay.

I'm trying to get in contact with the DoJ since it said I was supposed to receive something in the mail, But haven't got anything.

what should I expect?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-23-2019, 11:13 AM
Skip_Dog's Avatar
Skip_Dog Skip_Dog is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 1,422
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post

what should I expect?
A letter or a 29 day approval.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-24-2019, 8:13 AM
mlevans66's Avatar
mlevans66 mlevans66 is online now
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Now in a free state
Posts: 9,488
iTrader: 47 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post
Has anyone had this happen to them? I'm confused since this past year I have purchased 5 rifles and haven't had a problem. It's been a couple of months since my last purchase, Never have I ever had a delay.

I'm trying to get in contact with the DoJ since it said I was supposed to receive something in the mail, But haven't got anything.

what should I expect?
Ive had three guns be held longer as well at two suppressors due to my clearance in the military. Why someone with a certain clearance is withheld is total crap to me.
__________________
The liberal see's the glass as half full and tries to take more.
The conservative see's glass as half empty and tries to keep it that way.
I'm with the people on the side just pouring water in the glass trying to get a drink!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-25-2019, 2:29 AM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post
Has anyone had this happen to them? I'm confused since this past year I have purchased 5 rifles and haven't had a problem. It's been a couple of months since my last purchase, Never have I ever had a delay.

I'm trying to get in contact with the DoJ since it said I was supposed to receive something in the mail,
But haven't got anything.

what should I expect?
I'm the answer a question with a question to get a correct answer guy.

What IT?

"DELAY of DROS" is an ever increasing issue, as of the last couple of yrs. And becoming more frequent all the time. Contacting DOJ will only result in the frustration of being ignored. You will get a letter from DOJ if you are DENIED.

If "delayed" all you can do is wait for 30 days. DOJ will not tell you or your FFL the reason for delay.

During that time you may be "approved" or "denied". If neither happens during the 30 days. Your status will be listed as "UNDETERMINED", when the 30 days is up.

If your status is undetermined at that time. Your FFL can, and should, release your pistol to you. But they may not.

The most important thing you can do. Is call the FFL and ask if they release on "undetermined status"?

BTW nice avatar............do you know Rudy @ Chevron in El Segundo?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-25-2019, 9:40 AM
eXcision's Avatar
eXcision eXcision is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
I'm the answer a question with a question to get a correct answer guy.

What IT?

"DELAY of DROS" is an ever increasing issue, as of the last couple of yrs. And becoming more frequent all the time. Contacting DOJ will only result in the frustration of being ignored. You will get a letter from DOJ if you are DENIED.

If "delayed" all you can do is wait for 30 days. DOJ will not tell you or your FFL the reason for delay.

During that time you may be "approved" or "denied". If neither happens during the 30 days. Your status will be listed as "UNDETERMINED", when the 30 days is up.

If your status is undetermined at that time. Your FFL can, and should, release your pistol to you. But they may not.

The most important thing you can do. Is call the FFL and ask if they release on "undetermined status"?

BTW nice avatar............do you know Rudy @ Chevron in El Segundo?

By "IT" I meant the email my FFL gave me, That was sent to him by the DoJ, Thanks for explaining the fact that you will only receive a letter if denied! It's a good thing I haven't received anything then.

I will definitely check back at a later date as well as inquire about the release on undetermined status.
Edit: Now that I think about it, My FFL did tell me that if I get no answer within 30 days, that I need to re-do my DROS which means pay again.

also, If you're referring to Rudy the safety at Brand, Yes, I worked with him for around 11 months at Chevron!

Last edited by eXcision; 04-25-2019 at 9:42 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-25-2019, 10:26 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post
By "IT" I meant the email my FFL gave me, That was sent to him by the DoJ, Thanks for explaining the fact that you will only receive a letter if denied! It's a good thing I haven't received anything then.

I will definitely check back at a later date as well as inquire about the release on undetermined status.
Edit: Now that I think about it, My FFL did tell me that if I get no answer within 30 days, that I need to re-do my DROS which means pay again.

also, If you're referring to Rudy the safety at Brand, Yes, I worked with him for around 11 months at Chevron!
I don't believe know if that is what Pacrat is asking about. It may be, but you should clarify why you would need to do another DROS. If it is because you were never approved during the 30 days of your DROS, but your status went from delay to undetermined, you may have a problem. That suggests that the dealer will not deliver to an undetermined. Use the search function to see what your recourse may be. Some think you can sue, some say you can't sue if the sale depending on the terms of the sale, and some keep a hefty cancellation or restocking fee. If your dealer is refusing to deliver to an undetermined, you may want to get your money back and go to a dealer that will before you pay to do another DROS.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-25-2019, 12:19 PM
Hjrshlmi Hjrshlmi is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post
Thanks for explaining the fact that you will only receive a letter if denied!
That's not correct. I got delayed, not denied, and I received a generic letter from them in the mail. I was freaking out because I thought you only get a letter if denied too, but they sent me a letter for the delay.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-25-2019, 3:17 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
By "IT" I meant the email my FFL gave me, That was sent to him by the DoJ, Thanks for explaining the fact that you will only receive a letter if denied! It's a good thing I haven't received anything then.
That is the "IT", I was asking about. The OP didn't make clear what, or from where, "IT" came from.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hjrshlmi View Post
That's not correct. I got delayed, not denied, and I received a generic letter from them in the mail. I was freaking out because I thought you only get a letter if denied too, but they sent me a letter for the delay.
Hjrshlmi, Welcome to CG. If this is a fairly new DOJ policy regarding now sending delay letters. It hasn't yet made the rounds here information wise.Thanks for info.

As Chewy noted.

Quote:
Some think you can sue, some say you can't sue if the sale depending on the terms of the sale, and some keep a hefty cancellation or restocking fee.
If you are interested in furthering your info on the "UNDETERMINED" release issue. I suggest you start with this thread link.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...s#post22645566

And you can go further using my handle "pacrat" and the search word "undetermined". There have been multiple posts regarding the extra legal practice by FFLs.

FFLs not releasing on undetermined is "extra legal". As in not allowed supported by the Penal Code. But falls short of the "ILLEGAL" standard. So it becomes a CIVIL breech of contract issue. As noted by Jason Davis esq. included in the link. Who is a noted firearms law attorney. That letter was sent to all members of IIRC, Ca FFLs .org., which he represents.

I'm in the "SUE THE BASTARDS", for denying you your lawful purchase, and failing to fulfill their obligation to deliver, according to the law as written, column.

eXcision:
Quote:
If you're referring to Rudy the safety at Brand, Yes, I worked with him for around 11 months at Chevron!
That's the guy. Works for Brand that contracts to Chevron.

10 million peeps in LA Cnty and we have a mutual acquaintance. Small World.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-25-2019, 5:01 PM
eXcision's Avatar
eXcision eXcision is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hjrshlmi View Post
That's not correct. I got delayed, not denied, and I received a generic letter from them in the mail. I was freaking out because I thought you only get a letter if denied too, but they sent me a letter for the delay.
Yeah, I just received my letter about 2 hours ago. I lowkey panicked too after reading that and receiving it, thank god it was just the same thing that the FFL had given me and it does say the FFL can issue it to me at their discretion after 30 days as long as it's not denied.

Hopefully they'll do that, Because I don't want to pay for another DROS and I don't wanna let them have $150-$200 just because they don't wanna release it to me.

Last edited by eXcision; 04-25-2019 at 5:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-25-2019, 10:17 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post
Yeah, I just received my letter about 2 hours ago. I lowkey panicked too after reading that and receiving it, thank god it was just the same thing that the FFL had given me and it does say the FFL can issue it to me at their discretion after 30 days as long as it's not denied.

Hopefully they'll do that, Because I don't want to pay for another DROS and I don't wanna let them have $150-$200 just because they don't wanna release it to me.
The bolded in above quote is the root of the problem. The purpose of the DOJ-BOF is to enforce the laws as written. Just like any other LE agency. Not make up crap opposite of the law as written.

That bolded sentence is a FLAT OUT FREAK'N LIE!!!

The controlling statute AS WRITTEN. NEITHER INFERS, IMPLIES, OR GRANTS, any discretion whatsoever for the FFL to not deliver on an "undetermined status" after 30 days.

The statute uses EXACTLY THE SAME WORDING. For both approved and undetermined after 30 days.

Check out the link in my previous post for full info.

Further on the DENIED letter situation............DOJ may, or may not, tell you why you were denied. They have been known to just check "other". Which leaves the buyer hanging without knowing WHY.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-26-2019, 4:26 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

It all comes down to what you agreed to when you bought the gun. If you agreed that the gun will not be delivered and it will be returned to dealer's stock, if you are not approved and your status changes to undetermined, that's it If you agreed to a restocking fee, that's it. Sure, you can try to negotiate a better deal by showing the dealer a copy of the Davis memo, and you may very well win in small claims court if what the dealer claims wasn't agreed to in writing, but if you so agreed there is little point in taking it to small claims - unless the cancellation fee, restocking charge, or whatever the fee is called is so great as to allow it to be charged is flat unjust.

Unless the fees are inequitable or there is something very unique about the particular firearm, even should you win in small claims you may have trouble establish enough monetary damages to make it worth while to take the dealer to court. Of course you may derive some personal satisfaction in addition to damages.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.

Last edited by Chewy65; 04-26-2019 at 4:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-26-2019, 4:32 PM
Featureless's Avatar
Featureless Featureless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: SLO County
Posts: 609
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I think this "delayed" shiite is extralegal. I think CRPA already took Kameltoe to court when she was AG and it got slapped down. I'm not surprised though that Javi "Trashman" Basura is resurrecting the practice.
__________________
California Native
Lifelong Gun Owner
NRA Member
CRPA Member

"Liberals have two related goals. First, to establish themselves as morally and intellectually superior to the distasteful population of common people; and second, to gather as much power as possible to tell those distasteful common people how they must live their lives"
~Ronald Reagan
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-26-2019, 5:06 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
The controlling statute AS WRITTEN. NEITHER INFERS, IMPLIES, OR GRANTS, any discretion whatsoever for the FFL to not deliver on an "undetermined status" after 30 days.
.
The language at issue provides that "the dealer may then immediately transfer the firearm to the purchaser . . . . " The use of the word "may" instead of the word "shall" implies that the dealer has discretion to decide to deliver or not to deliver.

It never ceases to amaze me how gun owners often denounce socialism and applaud individual rights, but the same persons would force a dealer to risk selling to a person who fails to be approved. I think the dealer should be able to reasonably limit that risk by limiting sales to approved persons. I also think that, given the mess that the DOJ DROS process is, that it is a mistake to buy a gun from a dealer who will not deliver to an undetermined.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.

Last edited by Chewy65; 04-26-2019 at 6:27 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-27-2019, 12:58 AM
eXcision's Avatar
eXcision eXcision is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

I have another question that I'd like clarified just in case it could've been the problem.

So my original FSC card was blurry, After we did the DROS I was instructed to go back to my original FSC Issuer (Different gun store) and get a copy. So apparently the guy who issued mine no longer worked there and I was told I would have to re-take the test and be issued a new FSC with a new number as it's impossible to get the same number back. I asked if it'd affect my DROS and they said no, that now I will have 2 FSC's linked to my name, That's it.

Is that true or is there a possibility that this could be the problem? I took the test about an hour after purchasing the pistol.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-27-2019, 1:16 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 6,359
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

I got a “delay” a few years ago, but I was able to get ahold of someone on the phone at DOJ who straightened it out for me on the spot. It turns out that the release date was going to fall on a Monday, but the investigator didn’t get to my file until the Friday before (Day 7). The NICS system was down, so he slapped a “delay” on it, put it on the shelf, and went home for the weekend. I got a phone call Monday morning from my LGS informing me of the delay. I received the excessively foreboding letter from the DOJ on Tuesday. I got ahold of a very helpful person at the DOJ on Wednesday who found out what happened, ran the NICS, and changed my status from “delayed” to “approved” on the spot, while I waited on the phone.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-27-2019, 1:21 AM
eXcision's Avatar
eXcision eXcision is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor McRifle View Post
I got a “delay” a few years ago, but I was able to get ahold of someone on the phone at DOJ who straightened it out for me on the spot. It turns out that the release date was going to fall on a Monday, but the investigator didn’t get to my file until the Friday before (Day 7). The NICS system was down, so he slapped a “delay” on it, put it on the shelf, and went home for the weekend. I got a phone call Monday morning from my LGS informing me of the delay. I received the excessively foreboding letter from the DOJ on Tuesday. I got ahold of a very helpful person at the DOJ on Wednesday who found out what happened, ran the NICS, and changed my status from “delayed” to “approved” on the spot, while I waited on the phone.
I keep reading that the LGS called the people being delayed, that's awesome. I had to go on the 11th day (my 10th day falls on a day they're closed) to find out that instead of taking my gun home it's being delayed. That's weird, considering they told me that I have to personally show up whenever I want to re-check the status, as they can't say nothing over the phone (Because they can't verify who they're talking to over the phone is what they said).

I also brought up today the "undetermined" release thing, they said they will not release because of the "liability" if I decided to do "Something" with the gun.

*Sigh* I can only hope it changes to approved before my DROS final release day gets here.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-27-2019, 1:34 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 6,359
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post
I keep reading that the LGS called the people being delayed, that's awesome. I had to go on the 11th day (my 10th day falls on a day they're closed) to find out that instead of taking my gun home it's being delayed. That's weird, considering they told me that I have to personally show up whenever I want to re-check the status, as they can't say nothing over the phone (Because they can't verify who they're talking to over the phone is what they said).

I also brought up today the "undetermined" release thing, they said they will not release because of the "liability" if I decided to do "Something" with the gun.
Find a better LGS and give them all your business. Developing a strong relationship with a good LGS is one of the best investments you can make.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-27-2019, 2:33 AM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eXcision View Post
I have another question that I'd like clarified just in case it could've been the problem.

So my original FSC card was blurry, After we did the DROS I was instructed to go back to my original FSC Issuer (Different gun store) and get a copy. So apparently the guy who issued mine no longer worked there and I was told I would have to re-take the test and be issued a new FSC with a new number as it's impossible to get the same number back. I asked if it'd affect my DROS and they said no, that now I will have 2 FSC's linked to my name, That's it.

Is that true or is there a possibility that this could be the problem? I took the test about an hour after purchasing the pistol.
Dude, I gotta ask. Do you have a "LIE TO ME" tat on your forehead? And wear shirts with "KICK ME" on the back?

First off, who told you to go back to FSC issuer for copy?

If FFL did the DROS knowing you didn't have a legible FSC. And did the DROS anyway. They fugged up.

And now want you to fix their mistake. They can go into the electronic DES [DROS Entry System] and change it to a good # in your name. They can do the same if you get the correct number from the lying Ahole that gave you the FSC test.

Your FSC number is shown on your copy of DROS. Lower left in the Buyer info section at top.

Check it against your card.

FFL who issued the FSC is lying to you. Does not matter which employee did the actual test at the store. The FFL holder is required by LAW, to keep all that info on file. If he doesn't, he will lose his license. Or at least get fined during his next audit.

Do they expect you to believe that the guy who "used to work there". Took all "THEIR" legal files with him when he left? Really?

It's likely faster for them to give another test. AND YOU PAY THEM AGAIN. Than for them to get off their A** and pull the file.

Quote:
re-do my DROS which means pay again.
Do you see a pattern forming?

And YES, if the lying Ahole who did your DROS. Put the wrong FSC # on it. DOJ may flag the DROS because the FSC # is issued to someone else.

As to the LIE the FFL told you about liability of an undetermined release in your reply to Mayor McRifle. Please read the link I provided earlier. All that crap is covered there.

Along with total slap down rebuttals to what Chewy again incorrectly claimed in his last two posts.

And here is a quick quote from Jason Davis esq. Attorney for Ca-FFL Association. Included in that link.

Quote:
Note that one purpose of the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901-7903,
is to “prohibit causes of action against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or
ammunition products, and their trade associations, for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful
misuse of firearm products or ammunition products by others when the product functioned as designed and
intended.” 15 U.S.C. § 7901(b)(1).
Disproving that there is even a possibility of any liability due to lawful acts by FFLs. Because they have blanket protection under Federal Law.


As a retired UBC Brotha out of Local 721 in Whittier.

Last edited by pacrat; 04-28-2019 at 3:56 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-27-2019, 2:52 AM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Featureless View Post
I think this "delayed" shiite is extralegal. I think CRPA already took Kameltoe to court when she was AG and it got slapped down. I'm not surprised though that Javi "Trashman" Basura is resurrecting the practice.
As to the delayed nonsense. Previously they could list a DROS as DELAYED and just forget it. Sometimes for years.

It got changed to Delayed for max of 30 days. Don't remember if it was Lockyer or Brown as AG then.

The entire fraudulent claims that an FFL has any discretion in the undetermined release. Was a LIE that K. Harris listed in the FAQ of the DOJ website.


According to the law as written. Not Harris's lie.

NOW at 30 days it becomes "UNDETERMINED" at which time the FFL is instructed by law, to release to buyer.

Using EXACTLY the same wording as DROS's that are APPROVED.

That Harris lie has been repeated so often, that gullible fools who are too lazy, or stupid to read the statute. Repeat it like it is gospel.

Really sad all the grief, money, and time, it has caused to gun buyers in this state. But that was the purpose of the lie. And it has worked well because of self inflicted public ignorance.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-27-2019, 10:44 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

What is the relevance of the use of "must" instead of "shall", when the statutes Pacrat quotes say "may"? "May . . .indicates discretion to act" per Pacrat's own authority. Pacrat's Supreme Court decision never found that "shall" always suggests that action is discretionary, but the particular statute before it was unclear in its use of the word and, by resorting to Congressional intent, the word was found to imply discretion as used in that statute. Due to the word "shall" so often requiring judicial review it has been recommended to avoid its use, but the statutes here did just that! They say, "may"; not "shall".
Quote:
...the dealer may then immediately transfer...
To argue that if "shall" can mean "may" means that "may" means "shall" is no different than arguing that because all squares are rectangles then all rectangles are squares. Why some can't see the ridiculousness of their argument is, to resort to the finest legal jargon, stupid, stupid, and stupider.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.

Last edited by Chewy65; 04-27-2019 at 10:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-27-2019, 1:36 PM
jeremiah12 jeremiah12 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,654
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Pacrat has some serious reading comprehension. Straight from the PC (bolding is mine for emphasis):

Quote:
CA PC 28220 (f)(4) If the department is unable to ascertain the final disposition
of the arrest or criminal charge, or the outcome of the mental
health treatment or evaluation, or the purchaser's eligibility to
purchase a firearm, as described in paragraph (1), within 30 days of
the dealer's original submission of purchaser information to the
department pursuant to this section, the department shall immediately
notify the dealer and the dealer may then immediately transfer the
firearm to the purchaser, upon the dealer's recording on the register
or record of electronic transfer the date that the firearm is
transferred, the dealer signing the register or record of electronic
transfer indicating delivery of the firearm to that purchaser, and
the purchaser signing the register or record of electronic transfer
acknowledging the receipt of the firearm on the date that the firearm
is delivered to him or her.
The "may" is also used in the PC for what to do for those who are approved. The firearm may be immediately transferred to the purchaser. This means the FFL still is not legally obligated to do so or mandated to do so. If it was a legal mandate then the term shall be transferred would be used.

Why the difference? The ATF still gives the opportunity to the FFL to deny the sale if the buyer, upon coming to pick up makes a statement such as I am going to kill my wife, kill myself, or smells like weed or alcohol, or appears to be high on drugs and talking gibberish, or giving some other clear indication they are a danger to themselves or others to not transfer the gun. The FFL might incur some liability if they do transfer the firearm in that situation and the purchaser then follows through on his threat or commits some other crime.

If Pacrat is so sure of his own interpretation of the law he needs get his own FFL and open his own LGS and run it with the rules he he is so quick to preach about. After doing that for 3 years, then he can come back and tell us how it has worked out for him.

I am old school, I do a lot of hanging out at my LGS. They know me. I have never been delayed. But my LGS knows me well enough they would release on day 30 for an undetermined while they would not do it for someone they do not know.
__________________
Anyone can look around and see the damage to the state and country inflicted by bad politicians.

A vote is clearly much more dangerous than a gun.

Why advocate restrictions on one right (voting) without comparable restrictions on another (self defense) (or, why not say 'Be a U.S. citizen' as the requirement for CCW)?

--Librarian
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-27-2019, 1:48 PM
eXcision's Avatar
eXcision eXcision is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 183
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
First off, who told you to go back to FSC issuer for copy?

If FFL did the DROS knowing you didn't have a legible FSC. And did the DROS anyway. They fugged up.
The current FFL That is doing my DROS told me that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
FFL who issued the FSC is lying to you. Does not matter which employee did the actual test at the store. The FFL holder is required by LAW, to keep all that info on file. If he doesn't, he will lose his license. Or at least get fined during his next audit.

Do they expect you to believe that the guy who "used to work there". Took all "THEIR" legal files with him when he left? Really?

It's likely faster for them to give another test. AND YOU PAY THEM AGAIN. Than for them to get off their A** and pull the file.
That's weird though, Since both the original FFL who is doing my DROS and the FFL that issued from FSC originally, told me the same thing, except when I went back for the copy, they waived the fee of the test to get a new one



Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
Do you see a pattern forming?

And YES, if the lying Ahole who did your DROS. Put the wrong FSC # on it. DOJ may flag the DROS because the FSC # is issued to someone else.
Not much choices I have here by me, I could always drive to AMMO BROS but since these are closer to me, I have been sticking to the only 3 FFL's near me (Rettings, Cap Tactical Firearms and Turners).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor McRifle View Post
Find a better LGS and give them all your business. Developing a strong relationship with a good LGS is one of the best investments you can make.

Honestly, I thought I did but after reading all the replies and stuff, I guess I thought wrong. Shame, As I always make it a goal to buy SOMETHING each time I visit whether it's for an inquiry or something else.

Last edited by eXcision; 04-27-2019 at 1:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-27-2019, 3:19 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Jeremiah. I think I got a glimpse of what is going on in Pacrat's mind and, as scary as it is, how he somehow concluded that PC 28220(f)(4) means that a dealer "must" deliver a firearm to an undetermined, though it neither uses "shall" nor "must" but says that "the dealer may then immediately transfer the firearm to the purchaser; . . . ." He reached his remarkable conclusion by virtue of the fact that the identical language is used in PC 28220 (f)(3)(A):

Quote:
If the department ascertains the final disposition of the arrest or criminal charge, or the outcome of the mental health treatment or evaluation, or the purchaser’s eligibility to purchase a firearm, as described in paragraph (1), after the waiting period described in Sections 26815 and 27540, but within 30 days of the dealer’s original submission of the purchaser information to the department pursuant to this section, the department shall . . .(A) If the purchaser is not a person described in subdivision (a) of Section 27535, and is not prohibited by state or federal law, including, but not limited to, Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm, the department shall immediately notify the dealer of that fact and the dealer may then immediately transfer the firearm to the purchaser, upon the dealer’s recording on the register or record of electronic transfer the date that the firearm is transferred, the dealer signing the register or record of electronic transfer indicating delivery of the firearm to that purchaser, and the purchaser signing the register or record of electronic transfer acknowledging the receipt of the firearm on the date that the firearm is delivered to him or her.
Somehow, Pacrat assumed that if the delayed person is approved during the 30 days, then the dealer has no discretion but must deliver the firearm. Based on that premise and the fact the dealer is also told the it may deliver to an undetermined, Pacrat must have concluded that a dealer has no discretion to deliver or not to an undetermined person. The problem with his little theory is that he assumes a false premise. Even if the delayed person is approved, the dealer still has discretion under 28220 to refuse delivery, though he may face civil damages if he does so without good cause. E.g. the purchaser is inebriated, the dealer developed reason to believe the buyer intended to use the gun in a crime, or it appeared that the transaction was a straw purchase, to name a few. In addition, what if the gun was only part paid for with the balance due at time of delivery and the buyer wasn't able to pay the balance? Yes, Pacrat, a dealer still may refuse to deliver to an approved person and, in fact, the dealer may lose his license should he deliver under some circumstances.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.

Last edited by Chewy65; 04-27-2019 at 3:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-27-2019, 4:43 PM
SkyHawk's Avatar
SkyHawk SkyHawk is offline
Front Toward Enemy 🔫
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nakatomi Plaza - 30th floor
Posts: 13,130
iTrader: 152 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
FFL who issued the FSC is lying to you. Does not matter which employee did the actual test at the store. The FFL holder is required by LAW, to keep all that info on file. If he doesn't, he will lose his license. Or at least get fined during his next audit.

Do they expect you to believe that the guy who "used to work there". Took all "THEIR" legal files with him when he left? Really?
Wow man, chill. It is true that the ONLY person who can reissue a lost or damaged FSC is the instructor who issued it. There is no conspiracy at the FFL. No one took their records. The FSC instructor is not the same as the FFL, even though they might work there at one time.

If the instructor leaves and goes somewhere else, you either track them down or you take a new test. Stupid CA laws are stupid, not sure why anyone would be surprised.

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/fscfaqs#a13

Quote:
If I lose my Firearm Safety Certificate can I get a replacement?
Yes. A replacement FSC is available only through the DOJ Certified Instructor who issued your FSC. The FSC replacement cost is $5. The replacement FSC will reflect the same expiration date as your original FSC.
The FSC instructor is required to maintain the FSC test documents for 5 years. Not the FFL. They *must* take them with them if they leave employment of the FFL.
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/fscfaqs#b19

Quote:
How long must I retain Firearm Safety Certificate Test Answer Sheets and Firearm Safety Certificate issuance records?
You must retain all completed test answer sheets for five (5) years from the test date. FSC issuance records will be available through the web-based application for five (5) years.
And the federal government could care less about a FSC certificate. There is no requirement that a FFL holder keep any records of them.

While there are several documents that the feds expect a FFL to obtain and retain during a transfer - a state issued FSC is not one of those documents.
__________________
.


Last edited by SkyHawk; 04-27-2019 at 5:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-27-2019, 6:49 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
What is the relevance of the use of "must" instead of "shall", when the statutes Pacrat quotes say "may"? "May . . .indicates discretion to act" per Pacrat's own authority. Pacrat's Supreme Court decision never found that "shall" always suggests that action is discretionary, but the particular statute before it was unclear in its use of the word and, by resorting to Congressional intent, the word was found to imply discretion as used in that statute. Due to the word "shall" so often requiring judicial review it has been recommended to avoid its use, but the statutes here did just that! They say, "may"; not "shall".

To argue that if "shall" can mean "may" means that "may" means "shall" is no different than arguing that because all squares are rectangles then all rectangles are squares. Why some can't see the ridiculousness of their argument is, to resort to the finest legal jargon, stupid, stupid, and stupider.

Really, Chewy, rectangles v squares. What next "balloons versus baseballs, because they are both spherical?

Sorry but geometry has nothing to do with legal statutes. And sadly you are again WRONG. And suck at geometry. A SQUARE has, 4 equal sides. A RECTANGLE has, 2 opposing sides that are longer than the other 2 opposing sides. So a square is never a rectangle, and a rectangle is never a square. The only similarity is that they both have 4 sides. But then again, so does a parallelogram.

That was an extremely lame attempted analogy.

Chewy again reverts to his typical, obsfucate & deflect tactic. Rather than acknowledging the simple truth that "SHALL & MAY" both have multiple meanings. Not all agreeing with his faulty reasoning, so he ignores them.

Those definitions vary as to the exact USAGE [sentence structure]& CONTEXT [intent]. Of how they are used in the sentence structure with other words.

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...................
Quote:
From text of PC-28220, describing "approved" status

(A) If the purchaser is not a person described in subdivision (a) of Section 27535, and is not prohibited by state or federal law, including, but not limited to, Section 8100 or 8103 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, from possessing, receiving, owning, or purchasing a firearm, the department shall immediately notify the dealer of that fact and the dealer may then immediately transfer the firearm to the purchaser,
upon the dealer’s recording on the register or record of electronic transfer the date that the firearm is transferred, the dealer signing the register or record of electronic transfer indicating delivery of the firearm to that purchaser, and the purchaser signing the register or record of electronic transfer acknowledging the receipt of the firearm on the date that the firearm is delivered to him or her.


From text of PC-28220, describing "undetermined" after 30 days.

(4) If the department is unable to ascertain the final disposition of the arrest or criminal charge, or the outcome of the mental health treatment or evaluation, or the purchaser’s eligibility to purchase a firearm, as described in paragraph (1), within 30 days of the dealer’s original submission of purchaser information to the department pursuant to this section, the department shall immediately notify the dealer and the dealer may then immediately transfer the firearm to the purchaser,
upon the dealer’s recording on the register or record of electronic transfer the date that the firearm is transferred, the dealer signing the register or record of electronic transfer indicating delivery of the firearm to that purchaser, and the purchaser signing the register or record of electronic transfer acknowledging the receipt of the firearm on the date that the firearm is delivered to him or her.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................

Here is a quote, of a question I asked Chewy in the link I provided. After disproving all his faulty reasoning as to USAGE and CONTEXT of how "MAY" is used in the statute.

Quote:
Since the text is exactly the same. Are you advocating that FFLs can also deny "approved" transfers arbitrarily?
Please note that Chewy conveniently neglected to answer that question. He instead, again, deflected and tried to change the subject.



.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ....................
My replies to jeremiah appear in BOLD

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremiah12 View Post
Pacrat has some serious reading comprehension. Straight from the PC (bolding is mine for emphasis):

"pacrat" has very astute reading comprehension, and reads hundreds of books every year. Among them are things called "dictionaries" and "thesaureses". Including the Legal Dictionaries printed by Merriam-Webster and Blacks Law. Maybe you should give them a read, before judging others proper "LEGAL" usage of definitions.



The "may" is also used in the PC for what to do for those who are approved. The firearm may be immediately transferred to the purchaser. This means the FFL still is not legally obligated to do so or mandated to do so. If it was a legal mandate then the term shall be transferred would be used.

Incorrect interpretation of the actual USAGE & CONTEXT "definitions" of the words MAY/SHALL. And expressly neglects to address liability for "breech of contract". Suggest you also read the earlier link I provided. And would have possibly prevented you from making the same incorrect assumptive reasoning that Chewy did.

Why the difference? The ATF still gives the opportunity to the FFL to deny the sale if the buyer, upon coming to pick up makes a statement such as I am going to kill my wife, kill myself, or smells like weed or alcohol, or appears to be high on drugs and talking gibberish, or giving some other clear indication they are a danger to themselves or others to not transfer the gun. The FFL might incur some liability if they do transfer the firearm in that situation and the purchaser then follows through on his threat or commits some other crime.

Another "strawman" deflective obsfucation, this time using drunken drugged out strawmen. Taken right of of Chewy's failed tactics playbook.
Which has NOTHING to do with "APPROVED/UNDETERMINED". And was also refuted as such in the link



If Pacrat is so sure of his own interpretation of the law he needs get his own FFL and open his own LGS and run it with the rules he he is so quick to preach about. After doing that for 3 years, then he can come back and tell us how it has worked out for him.

Is another BS, obsfucatory strawman deflection away from the "APPROVED/UNDETERMINED" topic. By that attempted faulty reasoning, anyone not a politician should not be allowed to disagree/contradict politicians.

I am old school, I do a lot of hanging out at my LGS. They know me. I have never been delayed. But my LGS knows me well enough they would release on day 30 for an undetermined while they would not do it for someone they do not know.
For those among us unfortunate enough to not own "book" dictionaries.

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/May

Quote:
may

v. a choice to act or not, or a promise of a possibility, as distinguished from "shall" which makes it imperative. 2) in statutes, and sometimes in contracts, the word "may" must be read in context to determine if it means an act is optional or mandatory, for it may be an imperative. The same careful analysis must be made of the word "shall."

Non-lawyers tend to see the word "may" and think they have a choice or are excused from complying with some statutory provision or regulation. (See: shall)
Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.

MAY. To be permitted; to be at liberty; to have the power.
2. Whenever a statute directs the doing of a thing for the sake of justice or the public good, the word "may is the same as shall. For example, the 23 H. VI. says, the sheriff may take bail, that is construed he shall, for he is compellable to do so. Carth. 293 Salk. 609; Skin. 370.
3. The words shall and may in general acts of the legislature or in private constitutions, are to be construed imperatively;
Obvious by anyone versed in structuring of statutes and structural usage and context of same.

As used in PC-28220, the exact same usage/context apply both for Approved and Undetermined after 30 days.

Quote:
the department shall immediately notify the dealer of that fact and the dealer may then immediately transfer the firearm to the purchaser,
Usage and context govern that "MAY", followed by "THEN IMMEDIATELY"

Make it an IMPERATIVE statement. Ergo a mandate. For both APPROVED & UNDETERMINED, AFTER 30 DAYS.

Making this earlier "statement" by myself. To be STILL, true and accurate. Supported by the "STATUTE AS WRITTEN"..........Merriam-Webster Legal Dictionary..........Blacks LAW..........and the supporting link from above.

Quote:
The controlling statute AS WRITTEN. NEITHER INFERS, IMPLIES, OR GRANTS, any discretion whatsoever for the FFL to not deliver on an "undetermined status" after 30 days.
If anyone has anything other than their own unsupported opinions, deflections, and obsfucations. Backed by K Harris's Big Lie on the DOJ FAQ.

Please present it. Other wise, kindly quit making up unsupported excuses for FFLs who deny citizens their 2A rights based on K Harris's LIE.

I have gone over this issue ad nauseam here on CG. With the K Harris Big Lie supporters. So when do the members of a Pro-2A forum.

Start supporting 2A, instead of blindly following the Anti 2A political liars?
.................................................. .................................................. ...........

https://oag.ca.gov/firearms Is where Kamala's BIG LIE [now Bercerra's] was hatched. Totally unsupported by Statute. And repeatedly disproven as untrue here on CG.

Here is the quote, with the BIG LIE bolded.

Quote:
Undetermined

The California Department of Justice (the Department) is authorized by Penal Code section 28220 to temporarily delay a firearm transaction for up to 30 days from the date of transaction when the Department is unable to immediately determine the purchaser's eligibility to own/possess firearms. If 30 days has passed since the transaction date and the Department is still unable to determine the purchaser’s eligibility to own/possess firearms or whether the firearm involved in the sale/transfer is stolen, the Department will notify the dealer. It will then be at the dealer’s sole discretion whether to release to you the firearm.
.................................................. .................................................. ...........................

Skyhawk said

Quote:
Wow man, chill.
OK, I'm chill, NOW!

Thank you for the correction.

I incorrectly "assumed", that the FFL had to keep copies of everything to do with a transfer included with the 4473s and DROS the FSC also.

And FFL acronym here in Ca general use also includes the CFDL required by state.

It is never my intent to misinform. And I apologize for casting undue aspersions.

Last edited by pacrat; 04-28-2019 at 12:45 AM.. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-27-2019, 7:27 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
Jeremiah. I think I got a glimpse of what is going on in Pacrat's mind and, as scary as it is, how he somehow concluded that PC 28220(f)(4) means that a dealer "must" deliver a firearm to an undetermined, though it neither uses "shall" nor "must" but says that "the dealer may then immediately transfer the firearm to the purchaser; . . . ." He reached his remarkable conclusion by virtue of the fact that the identical language is used in PC 28220 (f)(3)(A):



Somehow, Pacrat assumed that if the delayed person is approved during the 30 days, then the dealer has no discretion but must deliver the firearm. Based on that premise and the fact the dealer is also told the it may deliver to an undetermined, Pacrat must have concluded that a dealer has no discretion to deliver or not to an undetermined person. The problem with his little theory is that he assumes a false premise. Even if the delayed person is approved, the dealer still has discretion under 28220 to refuse delivery, though he may face civil damages if he does so without good cause. E.g. the purchaser is inebriated, the dealer developed reason to believe the buyer intended to use the gun in a crime, or it appeared that the transaction was a straw purchase, to name a few. In addition, what if the gun was only part paid for with the balance due at time of delivery and the buyer wasn't able to pay the balance?
Yes, Pacrat, a dealer still may refuse to deliver to an approved person and, in fact, the dealer may lose his license should he deliver under some circumstances.

Again with all that obsfucating and deflecting from the issue, in support of "Kamala's BIG LIE" regarding non existent discretion solely on UNDETERMINED status after 30 days.

Quote:
E.g. the purchaser is inebriated, the dealer developed reason to believe the buyer intended to use the gun in a crime, or it appeared that the transaction was a straw purchase, to name a few. In addition, what if the gun was only part paid for with the balance due at time of delivery and the buyer wasn't able to pay the balance?
Since you insist on deflecting and obsfucating, are you now implying or inferring that the OP who wants to know his options if his status goes "UNDETERMINED". Is a drunk, intent on crime, a strawman, or didn't pay for the firearm he bought???

If not, your nonsensical WHAT IFs. Which no one other than you and jeremiah insist on deflecting to. Is IRRELEVENT!

Quote:
Yes, Pacrat, a dealer still may refuse to deliver to an approved person and, in fact, the dealer may lose his license should he deliver under some circumstances.
When you make up unrelated crap and infer, imply, and suggest is is my crap that you speak of.

Shrinks call that "PROJECTION" and claim it is symptomatic of likely deeper issues.

Last edited by pacrat; 04-27-2019 at 11:40 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-27-2019, 11:55 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 5,876
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

SKYHAWK:

After a chill pill, and a re-read of the FSC quote you posted.


Quote:
How long must I retain Firearm Safety Certificate Test Answer Sheets and Firearm Safety Certificate issuance records?
You must retain all completed test answer sheets for five (5) years from the test date. FSC issuance records will be available through the web-based application for five (5) years.

Do you know who can access that web database?

Is it any FSC tester...........Only the tester of record for each individual.........or any CFLD/FFL holder in Ca?

Could OP's FFL/CFLD doing DROS, have looked it up to be sure they had correct FSC # on DROS ?


Inquiring minds for future reference kinda question.

While navigating the DOJ-FSC site. I learned why the OP's FSC tester redid his test for free.

He HAD TO.

According to [17] on the FAQ for FSC Instructors.

Quote:
What can I do if I make a mistake after entering the individual’s information in the FSC system for their Firearm Safety Certificate?

After you have entered the individual’s information into the web-based application, you will be allowed to preview the information entered before you formally submit the information that generates the FSC. Once you have submitted the information and the FSC is generated, you cannot edit the record. If a mistake is made after you have submitted the information, a replacement FSC would be required and the DOJ Certified Instructor would be subject to the $5 replacement fee.

Last edited by pacrat; 04-28-2019 at 12:41 AM.. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-28-2019, 1:20 AM
Endless's Avatar
Endless Endless is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ellsworth, ME
Posts: 1,474
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mlevans66 View Post
Ive had three guns be held longer as well at two suppressors due to my clearance in the military. Why someone with a certain clearance is withheld is total crap to me.
I had a clearance years ago and have bought guns in about 10 states with my military orders and California ID card. Never waited longer than 10 mins to take a rifle or pistol home.

I simply wont purchase if I have to wait more than 24 hours and never will. I literally don't have time for that ****.
__________________

US Military Veteran 1994-2015
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-28-2019, 9:18 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I see the light. It's neon. A gigantic, big, beautiful, multicolored, glowing neon light that says IGNORE PACRAT.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-28-2019, 9:29 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 6,359
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
I see the light. It's neon. A gigantic, big, beautiful, multicolored, glowing neon light that says IGNORE PACRAT.
And yet, as this post indicates, you're still not.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 04-28-2019, 9:40 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

I hear you, Mayor McRifle.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-28-2019, 9:45 AM
ugimports's Avatar
ugimports ugimports is offline
Vendor/Retailer
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 4,254
iTrader: 21 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
SKYHAWK:
...
Do you know who can access that web database?


Is it any FSC tester...........Only the tester of record for each individual.........or any CFLD/FFL holder in Ca?

Could OP's FFL/CFLD doing DROS, have looked it up to be sure they had correct FSC # on DROS ?
Other than CA DOJ the original FSC Instructor is the only one that has access to the records of people they tested.

This also means if you go back to the original shop you took FSC test at and the employee that tested you is no longer there then a duplicate cannot be made for you. I assume even if the employee is there but no longer an FSC Instructor they probably don't have access to the records either.
__________________
us on facebook
UG Imports - Fremont, CA FFL - Transfers, New Gun Sales
Closure Schedule: http://ugimports.com/closed
web: http://ugimports.com/calguns / email: sales@ugimports.com
twitter: http://twitter.com/ugimports / phone: (510) 371-GUNS (4867)
FB: http://facebook.com/ugimports
NorCal Range Maps: http://ugimports.com/rangemaps

I AM THE MAJORITY!!!
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-28-2019, 9:47 AM
Hjrshlmi Hjrshlmi is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 7
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor McRifle View Post
I got ahold of a very helpful person at the DOJ on Wednesday who found out what happened, ran the NICS, and changed my status from “delayed” to “approved” on the spot, while I waited on the phone.
How did you do this? I'm currently sitting on two delayed DROS that have no reason for being delayed.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-28-2019, 9:51 AM
SkyHawk's Avatar
SkyHawk SkyHawk is offline
Front Toward Enemy 🔫
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nakatomi Plaza - 30th floor
Posts: 13,130
iTrader: 152 / 100%
Default

If the original FSC instructor is not there when you need a duplicate, it will be quicker and easier and probably cheaper to just take the test again.

$5 and running all over town to find the guy, or having to come back when he is on shift, versus $25 to get a new one on the spot.

FSC exemption is just one more of many reasons that every avid CA gun guy /gal should have 03 FFL + COE. Because you can make all the copies of those that you need, anytime you need. I keep copies in my glove box, because you never know what you might come across ... Never mind - good for C&R firearms only. I would tell you all to get a CCW which is a good exemption, but I know that is impossible for some folks.

Last edited by SkyHawk; 04-28-2019 at 4:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-28-2019, 10:08 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 10,110
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
I don't believe know if that is what Pacrat is asking about. It may be, but you should clarify why you would need to do another DROS. If it is because you were never approved during the 30 days of your DROS, but your status went from delay to undetermined, you may have a problem. That suggests that the dealer will not deliver to an undetermined. Use the search function to see what your recourse may be. Some think you can sue, some say you can't sue if the sale depending on the terms of the sale, and some keep a hefty cancellation or restocking fee. If your dealer is refusing to deliver to an undetermined, you may want to get your money back and go to a dealer that will before you pay to do another DROS.
When the DROS goes to undetermined, the CA DOJ is supposed to run another background check and supply that number. Federal law requires a background check within 30 days (for that specific transfer, no another one). There is no need to submit another DROS though as long as it is being transferred through the original dealer.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-28-2019, 10:10 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 10,110
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyHawk View Post
...
FSC exemption is just one more of many reasons that every avid CA gun guy /gal should have 03 FFL + COE.
The FSC exemption for C&R FFL w/COE holders is only good for C&R firearms.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-28-2019, 10:16 AM
kemasa's Avatar
kemasa kemasa is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ventura County, CA
Posts: 10,110
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewy65 View Post
I see the light. It's neon. A gigantic, big, beautiful, multicolored, glowing neon light that says IGNORE PACRAT.
Quite true.

Not replying to comments is ignoring, commenting on ignoring isn't not ignoring.

The problem is in regards to false information, such as the FSC comments. As well, there is no law which requires to FFL to transfer a firearm and the BATF tells licensees that they can refuse to do the transfer for any reason. As said, if there is an issue with the customer, such as being angry, yelling, etc., that is good cause to stop the transfer. While civil action is possible, the courts still can't force the dealer to do the transfer. One could ask where the law states that the dealer is FORCED to complete the transfer, but then that would not be ignoring.
__________________
Kemasa.
FFL Transfer/Special Order Dealer since 1993.
Net-FFL list maintainer.

Never try to teach a pig to sing. You waste your time and you annoy the pig. - Robert A. Heinlein
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-28-2019, 10:47 AM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,744
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kemasa View Post
Quite true.

Not replying to comments is ignoring, commenting on ignoring isn't not ignoring.

The problem is in regards to false information, such as the FSC comments. As well, there is no law which requires to FFL to transfer a firearm and the BATF tells licensees that they can refuse to do the transfer for any reason. As said, if there is an issue with the customer, such as being angry, yelling, etc., that is good cause to stop the transfer. While civil action is possible, the courts still can't force the dealer to do the transfer. One could ask where the law states that the dealer is FORCED to complete the transfer, but then that would not be ignoring.
You won't find where you are forced (you are specifically ordered to perform as agreed) to do the transfer. Specific performance is not going to be ordered where damages will make a plaintiff whole. Even if it is a very rare find, damages can usually be assessed.
__________________
This is neither legal advice nor a legal opinion.
Being on “inactive status” with the State Bar of California I cannot practice law. Were I "active", you would not be entitled to rely on my posts because you are not my client.
Were I practicing, an attorney client relationship could only be created in a writing by both the client and myself. Not by a post, private message, or email.
I never practiced criminal nor firearms law.Do not rely on my post, but consult your own attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04-28-2019, 11:23 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 6,359
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hjrshlmi View Post
How did you do this? I'm currently sitting on two delayed DROS that have no reason for being delayed.
I called the main number available on the website and left a voicemail with some questions. Someone called me back, but I missed the call. They left a voicemail for me. I hit “call back” and someone answered. I guess they called me from a different number than the one they never answer. For the record, the person I spoke with was extremely helpful and professional.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh


Last edited by Mayor McRifle; 04-28-2019 at 11:26 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-28-2019, 11:54 AM
dvaz dvaz is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 75
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Man not only we gotta deal with the anxiety of waiting 10 days to get our firearm, now your telling me there we gotta deal with this random "delayed" bull**** where the only solution is to "wait 30 days" and pray.
There is also the risk of losing an hefty "restocking fee" from the FFL

Man **** this state.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:48 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.