PPT Situations...

[morrcarr67]

Aren't NAA Black Widow mini revolvers single action revolvers, which would make it exempt from the safe handgun roster?

They are single action but they don't meet the dimension requirement.

[IVC]

So your friend doesn't "buy the gun to sell to you" he "buys the gun then decides to sell to you"... Get it?

There is clearly a story that makes it legit, but you are entering a potential mine field. No different than the discussion about what to say to police when they stop you or after a shooting. Play it right and you are in the clear. Play it wrong and you win a stupid prize.

The recent sniffing around by the ATF agents in the bay area was related exactly to the issue of whether a purchase is "on behalf of" someone else. Whatever you do, proceed with care.

[halifax]

They aren't Black Widows but maybe you could be happy enough with one of these and get the factory to outfit it the way you want:

Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale
NAA-22LR / Stainless Steel Revolver 1.125" .22 LR 1/24/2013
NAA-22MS / Stainless Steel Revolver 1.125" .22 Magnum 1/24/2013

Sorry

[victoraguilar82]

Hehe I can just suggested to someone to buy the same pistol I like. Then when they dont like it I can just buy it from them. All legal

[bigcalidave]

Again, you aren't purchasing it "On Behalf Of" if you are going to do a legal transfer to the person.

[Black Majik]

Aren't NAA Black Widow mini revolvers single action revolvers, which would make it exempt from the safe handgun roster?

They are single action but they don't meet the dimension requirement.

Thanks for the clarification

[IVC]

Again, you aren't purchasing it "On Behalf Of" if you are going to do a legal transfer to the person.

The OP states:

Situation 1:
So if I know someone who has never owned a gun and is moving to CA soon can they buy it in Nevada, where they live now, and PPT to me when they move to CA.

If the OP gets questioned and tells this story "on the record", the person who purchased the gun is implicated in committing a felony by lying on 4473. If there is a paper trail of communication, there might be consequences. Obviously, if they all use 5A chances are all will be good.

So, yes, the intent is there. It would be hard to prove, but it is there. Any time there is an intent, the DA can "go creative". After all, Martha Stuart didn't go down for insider training, but for obstruction of justice - she did it to herself while treading in the gray area. Very similar mine field situation...

[Huntnfooltwo]

California DOJ just today told me intrafamilar Transfer from father to son legal even if father lives out of California. Fill out the appropriate intrafamilar for and mail it in with your $19.00 fee and it's yours. (assuming you are leafless to own a gun) no mention of going thru a ffl dealer.


You can never have to much horsepower or ammo

[halifax]

California DOJ just today told me intrafamilar Transfer from father to son legal even if father lives out of California. Fill out the appropriate intrafamilar for and mail it in with your $19.00 fee and it's yours. (assuming you are leafless to own a gun) no mention of going thru a ffl dealer.


You can never have to much horsepower or ammo

And will they represent you in court for breaking Federal law?

[E Pluribus Unum]

California DOJ just today told me intrafamilar Transfer from father to son legal even if father lives out of California. Fill out the appropriate intrafamilar for and mail it in with your $19.00 fee and it's yours. (assuming you are leafless to own a gun) no mention of going thru a ffl dealer.

And will they represent you in court for breaking Federal law?

Awesome... priceless... and true...

Feds require all inter-state transfer of firearms by normal, non-ffl, commoners like you and I to go through an FFL... Period...

P.S.
Asking the DOJ what is legal is like asking Rosie O'Donnell how to diet.

[bigcalidave]

The OP states:



If the OP gets questioned and tells this story "on the record", the person who purchased the gun is implicated in committing a felony by lying on 4473. If there is a paper trail of communication, there might be consequences. Obviously, if they all use 5A chances are all will be good.

So, yes, the intent is there. It would be hard to prove, but it is there. Any time there is an intent, the DA can "go creative". After all, Martha Stuart didn't go down for insider training, but for obstruction of justice - she did it to herself while treading in the gray area. Very similar mine field situation...

I know you are really intent on being correct here, but nobody is breaking any laws in the situation. The purchaser in another state is buying the gun legally for themselves. Then they are going to CA and selling it legally to the OP. The only issue would be if they wanted to say the person was acting as a handgun importer, which wouldn't happen unless they made a big habit of it, doing it multiple times. They are NOT lying on the 4473, NOT committing a felony.

[bigcalidave]

California DOJ just today told me intrafamilar Transfer from father to son legal even if father lives out of California. Fill out the appropriate intrafamilar for and mail it in with your $19.00 fee and it's yours. (assuming you are leafless to own a gun) no mention of going thru a ffl dealer.


You can never have to much horsepower or ammo

That's horrific. You need to record phone calls like that, and STILL don't ever do it.

[Icypu]

I know you are really intent on being correct here, but nobody is breaking any laws in the situation. The purchaser in another state is buying the gun legally for themselves. Then they are going to CA and selling it legally to the OP. The only issue would be if they wanted to say the person was acting as a handgun importer, which wouldn't happen unless they made a big habit of it, doing it multiple times. They are NOT lying on the 4473, NOT committing a felony.

Yes you are right. Even the 4473 has a field (are you purchasing this gun as a gift). Just say yes!

The person is purchasing the gun for himself, to use as a gift for someone else. Totally legal, and not a straw purchase. Straw purchases only apply if someone is buying a gun for a prohibited person, and will transfer it illegally to them.

[E Pluribus Unum]

That's horrific. You need to record phone calls like that, and STILL don't ever do it.

Advising he not break the law.... and that he break the law... in the same sentence..

[IVC]

I know you are really intent on being correct here, but nobody is breaking any laws in the situation.

Agree - I am just trying to provide an alternative angle and make sure OP is aware of the potential pitfalls. The more issues raised and answered, the more useful the thread.