Unconfigured Ad Widget
Collapse
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glock G17 got delayed today
Collapse
X
-
7/20/22 paper app dropped to station
11/30/22 inputted into system
2/15/24 email requesting docs/livescan
2/17/24 email confirmation of docs received
2/22/24 livescan completed
3/15/24 phone interview completed
7/31/24 proceed to training email
8/11/24 ccw training 16 hours completed
10/3/24 call to pickup ccw permit
10/17/24 ccw permit picked up -
I think I figured out the problem
3/23 i renewed my dmv registration
My old dmv reg had “unit #” in the address line
My new dmv reg standardized with “apt” in the address line
When i filled out the dros form i put unit # instead of apt #. I believe this caused an error in the system.
I didn’t notice this until i bought 2 guns on consignment yesterday
Will call the shop today to see what i can do
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You don't fill out a DROS form. The dealer does that.
You fill out a 4473 form, which has no bearing on the DROS. You could write down Fred Flintstone, Rubble Lane and it will make no difference to what happens with the DROS.
The dealer usually enters your DROS info by scanning your DL using a mag swipe card reader, although some will enter the info manually. But they use the info on your DL, not what you write on the 4473.
The info on your vehicle registration (or any other proof of residency you might use) never gets sent with the DROS. It is just kept as a dealer paper record as secondary proof of residency.
So I don't think this small detail is causing your delay trouble.Last edited by SkyHawk; 04-21-2022, 10:19 AM.Comment
-
You don't fill out a DROS form. The dealer does that.
You fill out a 4473 form, which has no bearing on the DROS. You could write down Fred Flintstone, Rubble Lane and it will make no difference to what happens with the DROS.
The dealer usually enters your DROS info by scanning your DL using a mag swipe card reader, although some will enter the info manually. But they use the info on your DL, not what you write on the 4473.
The info on your vehicle registration (or any other proof of residency you might use) never gets sent with the DROS. It is just kept as a dealer paper record as secondary proof of residency.
So I don't think this small detail is causing your delay trouble.
My mistake yes 4473 form
From the FFL:
Good morning [emoji16]. That's possible but not probable.... those usually come back quickly as a DMV Reject. It's most likely the DOJ is backed up and bought themselves more time by hitting the delay button. Which is happening more now than ever. Delays used to be rare, currently we have a handful.
The wait continues
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk7/20/22 paper app dropped to station
11/30/22 inputted into system
2/15/24 email requesting docs/livescan
2/17/24 email confirmation of docs received
2/22/24 livescan completed
3/15/24 phone interview completed
7/31/24 proceed to training email
8/11/24 ccw training 16 hours completed
10/3/24 call to pickup ccw permit
10/17/24 ccw permit picked upComment
-
Today is day 27 of 30.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk7/20/22 paper app dropped to station
11/30/22 inputted into system
2/15/24 email requesting docs/livescan
2/17/24 email confirmation of docs received
2/22/24 livescan completed
3/15/24 phone interview completed
7/31/24 proceed to training email
8/11/24 ccw training 16 hours completed
10/3/24 call to pickup ccw permit
10/17/24 ccw permit picked upComment
-
7/20/22 paper app dropped to station
11/30/22 inputted into system
2/15/24 email requesting docs/livescan
2/17/24 email confirmation of docs received
2/22/24 livescan completed
3/15/24 phone interview completed
7/31/24 proceed to training email
8/11/24 ccw training 16 hours completed
10/3/24 call to pickup ccw permit
10/17/24 ccw permit picked upComment
-
Well, if Big Chucks Firing Pin will release on the DOJ's erroneous use of "undetermined" as a spite tactic against private gun ownership, you'll be fine.
--------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by LibrarianWhat compelling interest has any level of government in knowing what guns are owned by civilians? (Those owned by government should be inventoried and tracked, for exactly the same reasons computers and desks and chairs are tracked: responsible care of public property.)
If some level of government had that information, what would they do with it? How would having that info benefit public safety? How would it benefit law enforcement?Comment
-
7/20/22 paper app dropped to station
11/30/22 inputted into system
2/15/24 email requesting docs/livescan
2/17/24 email confirmation of docs received
2/22/24 livescan completed
3/15/24 phone interview completed
7/31/24 proceed to training email
8/11/24 ccw training 16 hours completed
10/3/24 call to pickup ccw permit
10/17/24 ccw permit picked upComment
-
Give this a try.I did speak with Chuck the owner about releasing on undetermined. He was instructed by his insurance carrier not to release due to liability purposes.
To be honest i was hoping he would release but at the same time i totally understand because i have been in the insurance industry for the last 14 years. Last thing any business owner wants is a huge liability claim or a possible denied insurance claim. Have to protect yourself at all times.
Can’t believe there are a total of 5 people dealing with this at the same time same FFL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ask him if you are able to buy ammunition from him than CADOJ is saying you are not a prohibited person.
This is a extra legal way to show that CADOJ is giving the deliver on undetermined a go.
Have him pass this on to his insurance and see if they agree.
Will not work if first firearm, since you already own think you have passed before.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/f...r=1.&article=4.
30370.
(a) Commencing July 1, 2019, the department shall electronically approve the purchase or transfer of ammunition through a vendor, as defined in Section 16151, except as otherwise specified. This approval shall occur at the time of purchase or transfer, prior to the purchaser or transferee taking possession of the ammunition. Pursuant to the authorization specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 30352, the following persons are authorized to purchase ammunition:
(1) A purchaser or transferee whose information matches an entry in the Automated Firearms System (AFS) and who is eligible to possess ammunition as specified in subdivision (b).
(2) A purchaser or transferee who has a current certificate of eligibility issued by the department pursuant to Section 26710.
(3) A purchaser or transferee who is not prohibited from purchasing or possessing ammunition in a single ammunition transaction or purchase made pursuant to the procedure developed pursuant to subdivision (c).
(b) To determine if the purchaser or transferee is eligible to purchase or possess ammunition pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the department shall cross-reference the ammunition purchaser’s or transferee’s name, date of birth, current address, and driver’s license or other government identification number, as described in Section 28180, with the information maintained in the AFS. If the purchaser’s or transferee’s information does not match an AFS entry, the transaction shall be denied. If the purchaser’s or transferee’s information matches an AFS entry, the department shall determine if the purchaser or transferee falls within a class of persons who are prohibited from owning or possessing ammunition by cross-referencing with the Prohibited Armed Persons File. If the purchaser or transferee is prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm, the transaction shall be denied.
(c) The department shall develop a procedure in which a person who is not prohibited from purchasing or possessing ammunition may be approved for a single ammunition transaction or purchase. The department shall recover the cost of processing and regulatory and enforcement activities related to this section by charging the ammunition transaction or purchase applicant a fee not to exceed the fee charged for the department’s Dealers’ Record of Sale (DROS) process, as described in Section 28225 and not to exceed the department’s reasonable costs.
(d) A vendor is prohibited from providing a purchaser or transferee ammunition without department approval. If a vendor cannot electronically verify a person’s eligibility to purchase or possess ammunition via an Internet connection, the department shall provide a telephone line to verify eligibility. This option is available to ammunition vendors who can demonstrate legitimate geographical and telecommunications limitations in submitting the information electronically and who are approved by the department to use the telephone line verification.
(e) The department shall recover the reasonable cost of regulatory and enforcement activities related to this article by charging ammunition purchasers and transferees a per transaction fee not to exceed one dollar ($1), provided, however, that the fee may be increased at a rate not to exceed any increases in the California Consumer Price Index as compiled and reported by the Department of Industrial Relations, not to exceed the reasonable regulatory and enforcement costs.
(f) A fund to be known as the “Ammunition Safety and Enforcement Special Fund” is hereby created within the State Treasury. All fees received pursuant to this section shall be deposited into the Ammunition Safety and Enforcement Special Fund and, notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, are continuously appropriated for purposes of implementing, operating, and enforcing the ammunition authorization program provided for in this section and Section 30352 and for repaying the start-up loan provided for in Section 30371.
(g) The Department of Justice is authorized to adopt regulations to implement this section.
(Added by Stats. 2016, Ch. 55, Sec. 15. (SB 1235) Effective January 1, 2017. Note: Stats. 2016, Ch. 55, Sec. 16, repealed the prior version of Section 30370, which was added November 8, 2016, by Proposition 63.)Last edited by foothillman; 05-07-2022, 7:46 AM.Comment
-
Then their insurance broker or agent doesn't have a clue about their own insurance policy or the law by which allows him to release on undetermined, which I don't believe to be the case at all - I suspect this is merely them succumbing to FUD and assumptions because the idea sounds right when phobia and ignorance of the law are applied.I did speak with Chuck the owner about releasing on undetermined. He was instructed by his insurance carrier not to release due to liability purposes.
To be honest i was hoping he would release but at the same time i totally understand because i have been in the insurance industry for the last 14 years. Last thing any business owner wants is a huge liability claim or a possible denied insurance claim. Have to protect yourself at all times.
CanÂ’t believe there are a total of 5 people dealing with this at the same time same FFL.
They actually have much more likelihood in being sued for common slip-and-fall injuries, or negligent discharge within their store, than the remote possibility for a vicarious liability relationship in the scenario proposed.
For that matter, the policy has a duty to defend, and the exposure as described, even though very unlikely, is an exposure considered and acknowledged as a part of the risk of insuring gun dealers by underwriters for any firearm transaction - even though it rarely ever arises except in large, high profile cases where the dealer knowingly broke the law - and then insurance will not respond to losses arising out of willful illegal actions.
And releasing on undetermined is the law as established in so many other discussions of the topic.
Nor would doing so negate his ability to renew his insurance or cause an increase in premiums: the very nature of this issue, CA maze of laws, and legality of releasing on undetermined has already been hashed out and accepted by underwriters; and many gun dealers have their coverage with those same markets/paper, because so few companies are willing to provide insurance to gun stores in the first place.
The issue of releasing on undetermined has not been a concern with the insurance companies in the slightest, and if it were, because the law allows it, they would vacate the market in CA as a whole - not just for individual insured on a case by case qualifier over this issue.
It's not even an underwriting question, whether placing a renewal or new coverage for dealers in CA. No concern at all, and if it were, it would be a material variable requiring confirmation as a subjectivity to maintain coverage - which it's not.
Someone in the mix is interjecting with personal bias, misunderstanding, ignorance, or fear - and that's a shame. They should get a new agent or broker if that is where this nonsense is originating.
Someone is coming to their own conclusions without any justification or merit, but surely making it up because it 'sounds good' when nurturing FUD.
And that's fine, their choice and protocol, but when anyone starts citing insurance as the issue as to why they can't release on undetermined, that's when it becomes bunk, a lie, a diversionary tactic, nonsensical deduction without any actual support - but merely an excuse to use on customers as to defer the blame for their fears using childish fairytales of making insurance the monster under the bed to explain their own fear of the dark.
What a great way to take the heat off and appeal to customers "Hey, we agree with you, we're on your side, but the big, bad insurance company under the bed said no - it's their fault!!"
And that's a complete ruse.
----Last edited by The Gleam; 05-07-2022, 9:50 AM.-----------------------------------------------
Originally posted by LibrarianWhat compelling interest has any level of government in knowing what guns are owned by civilians? (Those owned by government should be inventoried and tracked, for exactly the same reasons computers and desks and chairs are tracked: responsible care of public property.)
If some level of government had that information, what would they do with it? How would having that info benefit public safety? How would it benefit law enforcement?Comment
-
I've never heard of any liability issue for an FFL releasing on an Undetermined DROS.
ETA -
WOW! Nicely put Gleam, very nice!Last edited by Redeyedrider; 05-07-2022, 1:49 PM.We have too much to lose and so we'll lose it all - sd_shooterI try to frame my response to be useful to those observing, with little regard to convince the opponent of my awesomeness - EM2TRUMP/NUNESIt's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's impossible to win an argument with a stupid person - WhitefangComment
-
got a delay on a glock 17 on consignment a couple days ago myself. i know at our turners they have been happening alot lately.not concerned unless it become undetermined.Comment
-
My glock 17 and stag receiver are now undetermined status FFL told me come in tomorrow to submit dros again
Hopefully it clears in 10 days!
The saga continues
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk7/20/22 paper app dropped to station
11/30/22 inputted into system
2/15/24 email requesting docs/livescan
2/17/24 email confirmation of docs received
2/22/24 livescan completed
3/15/24 phone interview completed
7/31/24 proceed to training email
8/11/24 ccw training 16 hours completed
10/3/24 call to pickup ccw permit
10/17/24 ccw permit picked upComment
-
Comment
-
7/20/22 paper app dropped to station
11/30/22 inputted into system
2/15/24 email requesting docs/livescan
2/17/24 email confirmation of docs received
2/22/24 livescan completed
3/15/24 phone interview completed
7/31/24 proceed to training email
8/11/24 ccw training 16 hours completed
10/3/24 call to pickup ccw permit
10/17/24 ccw permit picked upComment
Calguns.net Statistics
Collapse
Topics: 1,868,269
Posts: 25,146,118
Members: 358,387
Active Members: 5,513
Welcome to our newest member, LakeLife.
What's Going On
Collapse
There are currently 29111 users online. 77 members and 29034 guests.
Most users ever online was 239,041 at 10:39 PM on 02-14-2026.



Comment