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 09-18-2019, 11:40 AM
bee-kay bee-kay is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default DOJ Record keeping process?

I have bought and sold a few guns since becoming a CA resident in about 1976.
The guns I bought have all been legally purchased and, unfortunately, in the case of two revolvers, I sold them without going through the proper transfer process.
These were guns that I owned and I assume are still registered to me, but I have no idea where they are now.
One of them I sold to a neighbor in '77 and the other I traded for a dog in '90
So this was a while ago.
There have been a couple of occasions when I inquired about how to handle this so that 'on the record' these 2 revolvers are no longer connected with me.
I tried phoning the DOJ and the person I spoke to simply told me that he couldn't help me with that.
Yet it seems like there must be some record in existence that connects me with these 2 guns.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to deal with this issue?

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-18-2019, 11:54 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,251
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bee-kay View Post
I have bought and sold a few guns since becoming a CA resident in about 1976.
The guns I bought have all been legally purchased and, unfortunately, in the case of two revolvers, I sold them without going through the proper transfer process.
These were guns that I owned and I assume are still registered to me, but I have no idea where they are now.
One of them I sold to a neighbor in '77 and the other I traded for a dog in '90
So this was a while ago.
There have been a couple of occasions when I inquired about how to handle this so that 'on the record' these 2 revolvers are no longer connected with me.
I tried phoning the DOJ and the person I spoke to simply told me that he couldn't help me with that.
Yet it seems like there must be some record in existence that connects me with these 2 guns.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to deal with this issue?

Thanks
Sir, You don't understand the way the AFS (Automated Firearms System) works. All the AFS does is record that a particular transaction occurred on a particular date. That's it. The AFS does not purport to indicate who "owns" a particular firearm, or who currently possesses that firearm.

There is no provision by which you can remove the "Report of Sale" record that was created in the AFS when you purchased the weapons. The fact that you purchased the weapons on a particular date remains a historical fact regardless of what later may have happened with those weapons. In other words, the fact that you later disposed of the weapons does not create a need to change anything in the AFS.

You do have the option to submit a "No Longer in Possession" report to the DOJ. That will not change, or remove, any existing AFS records, but will create a new record indicating that you reported that you no longer possess the involved weapon(s).
__________________
If you build a man a fire, you'll keep him warm for the evening. If you set a man on fire, you'll keep him warm for the rest of his life.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-18-2019, 12:22 PM
P5Ret P5Ret is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SF Ebay
Posts: 5,116
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Filling out the no longer in possession form might be a futile venture. As Rick pointed out it will not remove your name from the history of the firearm. I have heard rumor's that DOJ will not process incomplete forms, so if you don't have name's addresses and anything else required on the form it may be a waste of time.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-18-2019, 12:26 PM
edgerly779 edgerly779 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: canoga park, ca
Posts: 13,114
iTrader: 90 / 100%
Default

You can search which firearms are registered to you thru atf. Also thru state.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-18-2019, 1:55 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 39,076
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bee-kay View Post
I have bought and sold a few guns since becoming a CA resident in about 1976.

The guns I bought have all been legally purchased and, unfortunately, in the case of two revolvers, I sold them without going through the proper transfer process.

These were guns that I owned and I assume are still registered to me, but I have no idea where they are now.

One of them I sold to a neighbor in '77 and the other I traded for a dog in '90

So this was a while ago.

There have been a couple of occasions when I inquired about how to handle this so that 'on the record' these 2 revolvers are no longer connected with me.

I tried phoning the DOJ and the person I spoke to simply told me that he couldn't help me with that.
Yet it seems like there must be some record in existence that connects me with these 2 guns.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to deal with this issue?

Thanks
The 'use an FFL' requirement was not imposed until 1991, so assuming no other 'color', your 1977 and 1990 sales were legal at the time, and remain so.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

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.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-18-2019, 2:16 PM
Dirk Tungsten's Avatar
Dirk Tungsten Dirk Tungsten is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: the basement
Posts: 1,342
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edgerly779 View Post
You can search which firearms are registered to you thru atf. Also thru state.
I was under the impression the ATF did not keep a registry of who owns what.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-18-2019, 2:21 PM
morrcarr67's Avatar
morrcarr67 morrcarr67 is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario, CA
Posts: 10,624
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edgerly779 View Post
You can search which firearms are registered to you thru atf. Also thru state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk Tungsten View Post
I was under the impression the ATF did not keep a registry of who owns what.
Tungsten, you are correct. ATF doesn't collect and store that information.

Sent from my Nokia 7.1 using Tapatalk
__________________
Yes you can have 2 C&R 03 FFL's; 1 in California and 1 in a different state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erion929 View Post

”Benitez 3:29 Thou shall not limit magazine capacity”
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-18-2019, 2:34 PM
bee-kay bee-kay is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

OK - That's interesting
Well there hasn't been any trouble for me, so far, as a result of selling these 2 revolvers with no transfer. But the thing I'm most concerned about is: Hypothetically - Should the USA see a mandatory buyback scenario, such as what was imposed in other nations... It seems like individuals would be accountable to show up with all the weapons that are registered to them, and then to surrender them, or face criminal charges.
It's difficult for me to imagine how something like that might be realistically enforceable.

The thing I am seeing is that the government (or some branch of the government) is attempting to create a registration system for firearms that is only marginally enforceable.
On the surface it appears to outsiders to have some sort of enforceability to it, but when someone checks into it... except for assault weapons, they could never disarm the public, using the existing system.

The more closely someone examines the record keeping system, the more it seems like something designed by the Democrats for the purpose of pacifying voters

Last edited by bee-kay; 09-18-2019 at 2:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-18-2019, 4:16 PM
Czechsix Czechsix is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Meadow Lakes, Alaska
Posts: 1,346
iTrader: 33 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edgerly779 View Post
You can search which firearms are registered to you thru atf. Also thru state.
What's the process for that?
__________________
Yeah.

I'm pissed.
WTB: Rhodesian A5 FN 12G Shotgun...any leads appreciated.
WTB: FN FS2000
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-19-2019, 8:48 AM
OlderThanDirt's Avatar
OlderThanDirt OlderThanDirt is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dumbfookistan
Posts: 3,571
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

The CA DOJ firearms database, especially for older firearms, is so bad that under the APPS programs the DOJ can’t usually get a warrant to seize firearms that the subject may or may not still own. If the ATF were to run a trace on the two revolvers the trail would stop with you, but having legally sold the firearms, the trail would go cold unless you could provide them with enough information to track the purchasers.

One of the major problems with a mandatory gun buyback program is that the government can’t reliably connect specific firearms with the current owner in most cases. The government also cannot determine the current configuration of a firearm. If they were to have a mandatory buyback (confiscation) of semiautomatic AR15s, they have no way of knowing if any specific AR15 is configured in a manner that qualifies for a buyback.

I wouldn’t get too concerned about a mandatory buyback for revolvers, since this would mean the second amendment has been nullified and you would be really low on the list of gun owners to be “contacted”.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-19-2019, 3:46 PM
bee-kay bee-kay is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OlderThanDirt View Post
The CA DOJ firearms database, especially for older firearms, is so bad that under the APPS programs the DOJ can’t usually get a warrant to seize firearms that the subject may or may not still own. If the ATF were to run a trace on the two revolvers the trail would stop with you, but having legally sold the firearms, the trail would go cold unless you could provide them with enough information to track the purchasers.

One of the major problems with a mandatory gun buyback program is that the government can’t reliably connect specific firearms with the current owner in most cases. The government also cannot determine the current configuration of a firearm. If they were to have a mandatory buyback (confiscation) of semiautomatic AR15s, they have no way of knowing if any specific AR15 is configured in a manner that qualifies for a buyback.

I wouldn’t get too concerned about a mandatory buyback for revolvers, since this would mean the second amendment has been nullified and you would be really low on the list of gun owners to be “contacted”.

Thank you - It has reached the point where what you said is what my assumption is, but it's good to hear a second opinion on that.
I asked at gun shops and called the ATF... The ATF/DOJ doesn't have a record keeping database that comes anywhere close to what the DMV has.
I get the impression that they want us to believe that they do, but I think that's only to give anti-gun voters satisfaction.
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 2:30 PM.




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.