transfer from FLA

[mike kays]

My brother has a CZ 75B stainless 9mm that he wants to give to me..is there any way he can transfer that gun to me in CA?

[Ziggy91]

The CZ 75B (not sure about stainless model) is on the handgun roster so he could probably just ship it from his FFL dealer to yours, without a magazine, or with a 10 rounder. It would take a few days and the dealer will probably charge you +/- $100 for an out-of-state transfer and DROS fees.

[mike kays]

the stainless model 01108 is not on CA DOJ list of approved handguns..If it was I'd buy one online directly..my question is if it is between family members (brother to brother) are there exceptions to transfer interstate.

[Ziggy91]

No exceptions that I know of.

Check this out if you feel like spending a little extra coin:

http://www.directactionsolutions.net/single-shot-exemption-explanation/

[fiddletown]

the stainless model 01108 is not on CA DOJ list of approved handguns..If it was I'd buy one online directly..my question is if it is between family members (brother to brother) are there exceptions to transfer interstate.

The interstate transfer laws are federal, and there are no exceptions for transfers between living persons. The only exceptions are by bequest under a will or by intestate succession.

Your brother could buy it, leave it to you in his will, and then die. That's a tough way to get a gun.

[Oldmandan]

Wait a minute, there is a way although it will be a pain.

Your brother can transfer it to your mother or father, they in turn, could give it to you. Still have to go through an FFL to ship it, and receive it

[Quiet]

Wait a minute, there is a way although it will be a pain.

Your brother can transfer it to your mother or father, they in turn, could give it to you. Still have to go through an FFL to ship it, and receive it

If the intent was for you to get the firearm, doing this would be illegal under current CA laws. [PC 27515 & 27520]

[Quiet]

Brother can make it into a dimensionally compliant single-shot pistol and ships it to a CA FFL dealer, who transfers it to you.

[fiddletown]

Wait a minute, there is a way although it will be a pain.

Your brother can transfer it to your mother or father, they in turn, could give it to you....

And by doing that you can violate California law at the same time. So it's a very bad idea.

If the intent was for you to get the firearm, doing this would be illegal under current CA laws. [PC 27515 & 27520]

And that's correct.

1. There is legal authority for looking at the substance rather than the form of a transaction.
   
   
   1. In the transaction described (brother to parent to other brother), while the form of the transaction appears to be two successive intrafamilial transfers, the actual intent when the hokum is stripped away is to get the gun from one brother to another.
      
      
   2. Thus the substance and intent of the transaction is to transfer the gun from one brother to another. Under Penal Code 27545, such transfer must generally go through an FFL with the usual formalities (DROS, etc.).
      
      
   3. The use of the parent as intermediate transferee is a mere subterfuge to attempt to invoke the exemption of Penal Code 27870.
      
      
   4. However, it is entirely possible that a court will look beyond the sham form of the transaction and see the underlying transaction as one outside the 27870 exemption.
      
      
   5. The true nature of the transaction is a question of intent. But prosecutors in various situations can convince juries of intent, often from circumstantial evidence. A slip of the tongue, posting something on the Internet, tracks left by money transfers have all, in one way or another, and in various contexts, helped convince a jury of intent.
   
   
   
2. So the sham transaction as described by Oldmandan, above, specifically and directly violates Penal Code 27515 and 27520.
   
   
   1. Penal Code 27515 provides, in pertinent part, as follows (emphasis added):

      27515. No person, ...shall ... transfer a firearm to anyone whom the person, ... knows or has cause to believe is not the actual purchaser or transferee of the firearm, ..., if the person, ... has either of the following:
      

      (a) Knowledge that the firearm is to be subsequently ...transferred to avoid the provisions of Section 27540 or 27545.
      
      (b) ...

      
      
   2. Penal Code 27520 provides, in pertinent part, as follows (emphasis added):

      27520. No person, ... shall acquire a firearm for the purpose ... transferring the firearm, if the person, ...has either of the following:
      

      (a) ...
      
      (b) In any other case, intent to avoid either of the following:
      

      (1) The provisions of Section 27545.
      
      (2) ...

      
      
   3. In the transaction described (brother to parent to other brother) ---
      
      
      1. The intent of the first brother is to ultimately see the gun transferred to the second brother, a transfer which, under 27545, must go through an FFL.
         
         
      2. But instead he transfers the gun to a parent for the purpose of the parent transferring the gun to the second brother, a transfer which would be under the exception to 27545 described in Penal Code 27870.
         
         
         • Thus the parent is not the actually transferee of the gun. The parent is merely an intermediary receiving the gun as the agent or proxy of the second brother and for the purpose of transferring it to the second brother without going through an FFL.
           
           
         • All the parties know and understand that to be the nature of the transaction and the purpose of the transfer to the parent.
           
           
         • The first brother therefore has transferred a gun to another person knowing that person is not the actual transferee and knowing that person will transfer the gun to the second brother for the purposes of avoiding going through an FFL. And thus the first brother had violated 27515
           
           
         • Furthermore, the parent has acquired the gun with for the purpose of transferring it to the second brother and with the intent of thereby effecting the transfer of the gun from the first brother to the second outside the requirements of 27545. The parent thus violates 27520.

[morrcarr67]

The SSE is there for a reason people.

Work with in the law and you will be fine.

OP check with SBR I here that they do some SSE's and could be able to help you with this one.

[TheWoodCrafter]

If FL doesn't have registration, who is to say that it did not below to his father?
I thought we were to very few states to require registration.

Also, I thought transfer from family or if you owned it before registration was required all you had to do was fill out paper work and mail off $19 to the DOJ.

Wrong?

[SMR510]

If FL doesn't have registration, who is to say that it did not below to his father?
I thought we were to very few states to require registration.

Also, I thought transfer from family or if you owned it before registration was required all you had to do was fill out paper work and mail off $19 to the DOJ.

Wrong?

Wrong...

Federal law mandates that if a firearms changes ownership between two people who live in different states that the transfer must take place through a FFL in the buyer's home state.

You are thinking of if his father lived in CA and gifted him the firearms, then he would have to fill out a oplaw form and send in $19. It is complicated by federal law not CA law.

[TheWoodCrafter]

I see. (said the blind man)

Thanks.
Didn't know that.