DOJ monkeys

[Tonymin]

My Springfield 1903 made in 1918 transfer was denied by DOJ...
I used the proper form, Collector In-State Acquisition of Curio or Relic Long Gun Report.
I included all the info, 03 license, COE etc
Letter says all private party transfers of firearms need to be completed by a firearms dealer.
Do I just send it back quoting the appropriate laws?

[meaty-btz]

Sounds like some BS there. Don't know how far you will get with them. At this point they are trying to make trouble on purpose. It is all part of Kamala's plan.

Maybe talk to Cal-Guns? Might need to get some action on this if it is happening to more than you.

[stevied]

Call calguns. Have a lawyer send a letter.

[surplus-addict]

Call calguns. Have a lawyer send a letter.

Bingo.

[Tonymin]

The only Springfield I see on the Federal list is the M1, is the 1903 not on the list and not C&R any more?

[zinfull]

Over 50 years old not needed to be listed.

[The Gleam]

My Springfield 1903 made in 1918 transfer was denied by DOJ...

On a slim-and-none possibility, I'll pitch one potential issue, though I have no idea how the DOJ/BOF would ever know from looking at a model description only; was the rifle a sporterized/modernized version of a 1903 that changed it's configuration or changed/re-barreled/re-chambered to a more modern cartridge, and somehow by a remote possibility the DOJ/BOF knows this?

I have seen some FFLs not procure such sporterized rifles as C&R holders for those same above reasons. It may be bunk and FUD, but I've seen more than one FFL deny treating a sporterized rifle as C&R based on the receiver alone.

[Tonymin]

Not sporterized. Rebarreled in 1942 by the armory. I am confused about the 50 year thing. I think they are just wrong but can't back it up yet.

[The Gleam]

Not sporterized. Rebarreled in 1942 by the armory. I am confused about the 50 year thing. I think they are just wrong but can't back it up yet.

They're wrong... WAY wrong. They are simply ignorant of firearms and even more ignorant on the firearms laws they are supposedly commissioned to enforce; so they are overreaching on how C&R is being used for lack of understanding any aspect of it. They likely have no idea that the gun described is C&R at all; they probably think it's a current production "Springfield Armory" rifle.

Keep in mind, this is an agency whereby their first reaction to OLL/OLR and Bullet Buttons some 8 years ago was a knee-jerk reaction of "it's illegal" along with all of the corrupt politically motivated and spiteful childish behavior that Kamala Harris is vexing on gun enthusiasts, target-shooters, collectors, hunters, and the People of California alike.

[ElvenSoul]

It's CA you should sue somebody!

[Bobby Ricigliano]

Seems odd. I have bought and registered 10+ C&R long guns this year, including relatively newer Yugo SKS that are much newer than your 1903. Sounds like an error on their end.

[Father Ted]

It's CA you should sue somebody!

THIS⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️
Good luck. I'm sure in the end you will be fine, just a lot of time wasted though.
Cheers

[DesertWalker]

I think you just got somebody who does not know what he is doing,yet. Call DOJ and then maybe re-submit the form.

[littlejake]

If this passes without consequences to DOJ, then it will neuter everyone's 03+COE. Their ignorance must be answered by legal action. Perhaps the CGF will take it on.

[Pofoo]

[QUOTE=DesertWalker;14577322] Call DOJ and

Yea, good luck with that.

When I tried a few months ago, they weren't accepting calls from non dealers. They do accept emails.