"off roster" question...

[LBDamned]

Okay, it's illegal and you'll all go to jail, but there is nothing in the system that checks how you came into possession of that handgun.

would it not be registered to the person that gave it to you? If so, would there be no chance of that coming up when you try to sell it?

If what you are saying is true - then stolen guns would be sold through PPT all the time... maybe that happens? I wouldn't think so, but I could be wrong.

[rromeo]

Not all guns are registered. If it was reported stolen, then there would be a problem, but we're going off what ap had said, with a gun that was not reported stolen.
A better scenario probably would have been the uncle in Oregon dies, leaves handguns to nephew in California, nephew drives to Oregon, picks up guns. He can immediately sell those guns back in California without them registered in his name.

[RileyBean]

Okay, it's illegal and you'll all go to jail, but there is nothing in the system that checks how you came into possession of that handgun.

I'm going with this. (but it's funny to watch people here say "you're wrong, no you're wrong..." when they both might be 1/2 right. Why not say "my understanding is...." especially when dealing with difficult areas of law? - LOL).

[Quiet]

A better scenario probably would have been the uncle in Oregon dies, leaves handguns to nephew in California, nephew drives to Oregon, picks up guns. He can immediately sell those guns back in California without them registered in his name.

This scenario does not violate any Federal laws and complies with CA laws.

Per CA laws, the nephew has a 30 day time period to either sell them or register them.

[LBDamned]

do you not have to own a handgun in order to sell it? Is it legal to own a handgun in CA without it being registered?

If the answer to either is no, then I guess nephew is fine... if the answers are yes, then how can it be done?

I'm referring to the entire concept (that was initially given many posts back) - not necessarily on any post thereafter... but it's all encompassing I guess...

[rromeo]

You have to own a handgun to sell it. It is legal to own an unregistered handgun in California. It is legal to sell handguns that are not registered.

[LBDamned]

You have to own a handgun to sell it. It is legal to own an unregistered handgun in California. It is legal to sell handguns that are not registered.

so anyone may obtain a handgun from any other person (in any location) and be perfectly legal owning it and/or selling it? without doing anything further?

[rromeo]

Acquisition and disposition are generally unrelated.

[LBDamned]

^^^ that didn't answer the question.

[Quiet]

do you not have to own a handgun in order to sell it?

No.

Seller's info does get recorded. So, if any legal issues arise, the seller can be contacted.

Is it legal to own a handgun in CA without it being registered?

Yes.

[LBDamned]

No.

Seller's info does get recorded. So, if any legal issues arise, the seller can be contacted.


Yes.

thank you, but we've been over that... so this is my question

so anyone may obtain a handgun from any other person (in any location) and be perfectly legal owning it and/or selling it? without doing anything further?

[Quiet]

so anyone may obtain a handgun from any other person (in any location) and be perfectly legal owning it and/or selling it? without doing anything further?

Depending on how it is acquired, determines if they are perfectly legal in owning it.

However, how they acquire it does not affect the fact that they can sell it.

If the legality of the firearm ever comes into question, the seller can be contacted due to their info being recorded when they sell/transfer it through a FFL.

[LBDamned]

Depending on how it is acquired, determines if they are perfectly legal in owning it.

However, how they acquire it does not affect the fact that they can sell it.

If the legality of the firearm ever comes into question, the seller can be contacted due to their info being recorded when they sell/transfer it through a FFL.

seems as though since it doesn't need to be registered and doesn't require an FFL, then it really isn't going to matter how it was acquired.... according to what I'm reading in this thread, once you have it, you own it.

Of course, I'm not including the illegal act of stealing it.

[Librarian]

Originally Posted by LBDamned View Post
so anyone may obtain a handgun from any other person (in any location) and be perfectly legal owning it and/or selling it? without doing anything further?

No.

It's illegal, by Federal law, to acquire a firearm outside your own state of residence, and bring that firearm back to your own state, unless through an FFL. (It's also illegal for non-FFLs to sell to non-FFLs not residents of their own state.

So, that disposes of the 'any location' part.

It's illegal, by California law, to transfer firearms without using an FFL; that's been true since 1991. There are exceptions for intrafamilial transfer, inheritance, and until Jan 1 2014, for long guns 50+ years old.

It is possible, procedurally, to sell guns that you do not own at all, or guns you do not own via legal transfer, because the seller's ownership of guns is not checked - it can't be, because not all guns are registered.

[LBDamned]

No.

It's illegal, by Federal law, to acquire a firearm outside your own state of residence, and bring that firearm back to your own state, unless through an FFL. (It's also illegal for non-FFLs to sell to non-FFLs not residents of their own state.

So, that disposes of the 'any location' part.

It's illegal, by California law, to transfer firearms without using an FFL; that's been true since 1991. There are exceptions for intrafamilial transfer, inheritance, and until Jan 1 2014, for long guns 50+ years old.

It is possible, procedurally, to sell guns that you do not own at all, or guns you do not own via legal transfer, because the seller's ownership of guns is not checked - it can't be, because not all guns are registered.

this is basically why I'm trying to determine the legality of the suggestions being given (in the last several posts).

It's not legal in most of the examples recently posted - and certainly not in the first example that started the conversation.