stolen gun

[CharlesV]

Notwithstanding 2A rights, Im not sure CA is wrong on this. Well hold on. The old reason to stop instant buying was, if I remember this, a case in which a husband bought a gun and shot his wife in a moment of rage. So they proposed a cooling off period of 3 days to also take care of people who simply changed their mind about buying. Ok, the 3 days, i get it, its OK with me. The fact it got increased to 10 was simply to slow down buying and to me thats really violating 2A. Now they expand it again with "one in 30 days" and to me thats war.

[five.five-six]

As a matter of contract law it actually IS your gun; All the required elements for a binding contract/sale have been met when you pay the seller. You simply are not permitted to take possession until the DROS is finished.

[pohorsky]

I would figure it would be the same as if you had a gun at a shop for work and it got stolen. Your gun; but they are responsible for keeping it safe.

Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk

[DEPUTYBILL]

OP
Maybe you should repost this question in the FFL section,and see what
the response is?
My non FFL opinion is that the shop operates under California law which requires a 10 day or more wait.
California law requires they hold the firearm until the state releases it, so I would think it makes the FFL
responsible for the safekeeping of the item until released to the buyer.

[heidad01]

As a matter of contract law it actually IS your gun; All the required elements for a binding contract/sale have been met when you pay the seller. You simply are not permitted to take possession until the DROS is finished.

I'm not sure about that.

There is a matter of bailment.

While the gun is in custody of the shop waiting to finish Dros and to be picked up, the shop is responsible for it and has to pay the customer for it if lost, stolen, damaged, etc.

LAW

an act of delivering goods to a bailee for a particular purpose, without transfer of ownership.
"a contract of hire is a species of bailment"