What specs on safe are required to avoid purchasing a gun lock

[scotthmt]

I have a safe but i always forget what they ask for in order to avoid buying the gun lock so i usually just buy the stupid lock, but i'd like to avoid it if so. What do i need to do so? just the make and model?

[baih777]

I have a pic of the mfgrs label on my cell phone.

[ldivinag]

make sure it says somewhere that the CA DOJ has approved this device as a equivalent as a gun lock...

[Yemff]

iirc the safe affidavit does not apply to handguns

[Librarian]

iirc the safe affidavit does not apply to handguns

Sadly true - blame BATFE and see the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...es.2C_and_Laws for the details.

[CHS]

make sure it says somewhere that the CA DOJ has approved this device as a equivalent as a gun lock...

Not true or needed for filling out the safe affidavit.

The safe affidavit requires that you sign affirming that the container is a DOJ approved container OR that it meets a set of criteria which basically any standard gun store safe meets. The whole point of the affidavit is that you can use it to AVOID needing to have a specifically DOJ-approved locking container.

You can download it here:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/gsaff.pdf

And it looks like this:

[wjc]

You just need make and model. I've done the form twice in the last year.

Handguns require the lock.

[bsg]

iirc the safe affidavit does not apply to handguns

if an alien dropped down from the sky... he'd be shaking both heads on this one. it would probably prompt him to look for another planet. "no form of higher intelligence here" would be included in his report.

[CHS]

if an alien dropped down from the sky... he'd be shaking both heads on this one. it would probably prompt him to look for another planet. "no form of higher intelligence here" would be included in his report.

To be fair, the gunsafe affidavit IS suitable for California DOJ.

It's the Federal handgun lock requirements that it's not approved for (thank you BATFE).

[bsg]

To be fair, the gunsafe affidavit IS suitable for California DOJ.

It's the Federal handgun lock requirements that it's not approved for (thank you BATFE).

the feds did complicate things.

[Flintlock Tom]

Sadly true - blame BATFE and see the wiki -- http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/in...es.2C_and_Laws for the details.

I have a different take on this...
According to the referenced wiki, CA DoJ will accept the safe affidavit as proof of safe ownership, for delivery of a handgun.
BATFE accepts safe ownership as an acceptable "safety device" for delivery of a handgun, but does not require proof of possession.
So, why can't we provide the affidavit to the CA DoJ and, for the feds, simply claim exemption to the requirement for a lock. What difference does it make, to the feds, what documents we provide to the state, as long as we comply with federal requirements?

[CHS]

I have a different take on this...
According to the referenced wiki, CA DoJ will accept the safe affidavit as proof of safe ownership, for delivery of a handgun.
BATFE accepts safe ownership as an acceptable "safety device" for delivery of a handgun, but does not require proof of possession.
So, why can't we provide the affidavit to the CA DoJ and, for the feds, simply claim exemption to the requirement for a lock. What difference does it make, to the feds, what documents we provide to the state, as long as we comply with federal requirements?

BATFE does not accept safe ownership as acceptable unless it's being transferred to the buyer at the same time as the firearm:

unless the transferee is provided with a
secure gun storage or safety device

Note "Provided with" and not "is known to have".

[Librarian]

BATFE accepts safe ownership as an acceptable "safety device" for delivery of a handgun, but does not require proof of possession.

The problem is that the LAW specifies that a safe qualifies, but BATFE does not accept any kind of proof - a bit of 'not invented here' and, IMO, a complete failure of their duty.

In theory, one could haul one's safe to the FFL and say "See? Got one!"

I'm sure BATFE wants us to believe 'provided with' means 'sold to the receiver at the same time', but I've always countered with usage in prior law -

...
That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, ...

- Militia Act of 1792

The BATFE default behavior leaves us with 21 cubic foot safes that we would have to buy multiple copies of, one for each handgun, if we choose 'gun safe' as our 'secure gun storage or safety device' -- which we are free to do since 18 USC 924 (a)(34) says that satisfies the requirement. While the BATFE is not known for tender appreciation of the feelings of FFLs or gun owners, they're usually not quite so far off base as their failure to write regulations in this case has left them.