Does the Seller of a firearm, who is present to do the PPT...

[Dean]

Does the SELLER of a firearm, who will be physically present for the PPT here in CA, have to be a resident of CA to sell his/her firearm via the PPT process, here in CA?

I could not find any reference to the Seller having to be a CA State resident if they are to be present for the sale at a licensed FFL Dealer, for the PPT......

[taperxz]

Yes

[9Cal_OC]

I could not find any reference to the Seller having to be a CA State resident if they are to be present for the sale at a licensed FFL Dealer, for the PPT.....

You won’t find it cause there isn’t one.

A FTF sales if the seller were to be an OOS resident, it would be treated as an out-of-state transfer since they have an OOS DL. At this point, the roster applies and the FFL can charge whatever fees they want (some FFLs would want it shipped in).

A PPT can only be done between two CA residents.

[Chewy65]

Originally Posted by 9Cal_OC

You won?t find it cause there isn?t one.

A FTF sales if the seller were to be an OOS resident, it would be treated as an out-of-state transfer since they have an OOS DL. At this point, the roster applies and the FFL can charge whatever fees they want (some FFLs would want it shipped in).

A PPT can only be done between two CA residents.

Correct - sort of - maybe

Originally Posted by Librarian

The words 'private', 'party' and 'transaction' all have common meanings.

But in California, the phrase "private party transaction (PPT)" has a specific meaning.

A California PPT occurs when

a California resident

goes to a CA FFL

to sell any gun - used or new is not relevant -

to another CA resident.

Use of a CA FFL is required by law, as noted in this thread, and the CA-resident part is implemented in the DROS software.

Since a resident of a state other than California is unlikely to have CA ID, a gun from out of state is unlikely to be eligible for a CA PPT.

That means the transfer would be treated as an interstate transfer, and the FFL is able to charge whatever fee is reasonable to the business, and the Roster would apply to handgun transactions.

That info from Librarian is from 2013. If it has changed or not I don't know. I suppose that if you are one of the few who never had their CDL cancelled after moving out of state, you might be able to do a PPT. I believe you will find that your CDL was cancelled if you applied for a DL or ID card in another state.

Be cautious and get an opinion from an attorney before trying anything like this. Does a seller sweat under penalty of perjury that they are a CA res when doing a PPT? If you are simply asked for a CDL that may be one thing, but another if you are asked if you are a CA resident or what state you are a resident of.

[igs]

Originally Posted by Chewy65

If you are simply asked for a CDL that may be one thing, but another if you are asked if you are a CA resident or what state you are a resident of.

Where in the penal code does it say the seller has to be CA resident?

[CSACANNONEER]

Originally Posted by igs

Where in the penal code does it say the seller has to be CA resident?

There isn't one but, the DROS system will only allow it to be transferred as a dealer transfer instead of as a PPT.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by CSACANNONEER

There isn't one but, the DROS system will only allow it to be transferred as a dealer transfer instead of as a PPT.

As Chewy quoted above "Use of a CA FFL is required by law, as noted in this thread, and the CA-resident part is implemented in the DROS software."

There has been prior discussion whether a process enforced by software without Penal Code support might be something like an 'underground regulation'.

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by igs

Where in the penal code does it say the seller has to be CA resident?

It's not in the Penal Code. It's in the United States Code.

Please note that there is a sh*tload of laws governing firearms and many of them are located in places other than the Penal Code. You've got to concern yourself with the entire body of law, and not just the Penal Code.

In order for the transfer of firearms between private parties to be lawful, 18USC922(a)(5) requires that both parties be residents of the same state (with exceptions made for inherited firearms, and rental firearms).

[Dean]

A big THANK YOU to all who replied to my initial questions. I always learn a lot here on CalGuns... Thanks again...

[igs]

Originally Posted by RickD427

In order for the transfer of firearms between private parties to be lawful, 18USC922(a)(5) requires that both parties be residents of the same state (with exceptions made for inherited firearms, and rental firearms).

Federal law just says it needs to go through an FFL. A PPT is already going through an FFL.

[RickD427]

Originally Posted by igs

Federal law just says it needs to go through an FFL. A PPT is already going through an FFL.

Negative.

The federal law provides that the FFL holder must be the person who transfers the firearm to the recipient. That's a little bit different than "going through" an FFL. It's admittedly a minor difference, but a legally significant one.

In a FFL "Dealer Transfer", it's necessary for the seller to transfer the firearm to the FFL, then there is a separate transaction in which the FFL transfers the firearm to the recipient. There's TWO transactions involved. This permits the FFL to accomplish the transfer of a firearm between residents of different states.

In "Private Party Transfer", the private party transfers the firearm directly to the recipient, which is facilitated by the California Licensed Dealer (who completes the administrative details of the transaction and who holds the firearm for the waiting period). In a PPT there is only ONE transaction. Since the transaction occurs between the two private parties, they must be residents of the same state.

But your original question was to learn the source of the law that required both parties to a California PPT to be residents of California and the answer is 18USC922(a)(5).