buying out of state

[-hanko]

Almost all longarms got to the PRK from another state, since few are made here. It doesn't matter how it got to you, and if not stolen, you are not required disclose that information. DOJ would like us all to pay the fee and reg all our guns with them. Well, the reality is, that ain't gonna happen.

(This post should get things going!)

I'm fortunate to have lived in TX for a long time, and part time in ID for the last 7-8 years.

Your post will get things going

Calguns, as always, encourages you to stay legal.

-hanko

[68kaiser]

11Z50 Thank you for the insite.

[outersquare]

does the DOJ retain records of DROS sales on long guns?

[Librarian]

The hunt was a great success, and the relative, from a free state gave my friend a shotgun in appreciation for the great time.

No laws violated, since no registration is required, and once the firearm was legally in the PRK, an inter-familial gifting is authorized.

No laws violated?

The Feds would differ, regardless of whether it makes sense or is likely to be discovered.

18 USC 922

other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph
(A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State,
(B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and
(C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;

(5) for any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the transferor resides; except that this paragraph shall not apply to
(A) the transfer, transportation, or delivery of a firearm made to carry out a bequest of a firearm to, or an acquisition by intestate succession of a firearm by, a person who is permitted to acquire or possess a firearm under the laws of the State of his residence, and
(B) the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes;

Relative from out of state has probably violated 18 USC 922 (a)(5).

[11Z50]

I can give all the guns I want to my son. My dead uncle (RIP) gave me all of his guns just before he died. If it's not an AW it does not have to be registered in the PRK.

If asked where I obtained any particular weapon, that is not otherwise unlawful, it's officially nobody's business. Weapons are still property, unless otherwise unlawful, and it's nobody's business where I obtained a crescent wrench, a piano, a bottle of wine, a 3-piece suit, or a shotgun.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

I can give all the guns I want to my son. My dead uncle (RIP) gave me all of his guns just before he died. If it's not an AW it does not have to be registered in the PRK.

If asked where I obtained any particular weapon, that is not otherwise unlawful, it's officially nobody's business. Weapons are still property, unless otherwise unlawful, and it's nobody's business where I obtained a crescent wrench, a piano, a bottle of wine, a 3-piece suit, or a shotgun.

What if the transfer is unlawful? Is it anybody's business where you obtained the weapon then?

The transfer you described earlier between two family members who are residents of two different States was an illegal transfer. It needed to go through an FFL to comply with Federal law.

And acquiring guns from your uncle without going through an FFL is also a violation of the law, unless your uncle is from California and all of the firearms were long guns over 50 years old.

Or are you pushing the old "It's not illegal if they don't catch you!" theory that Calguns management just loves for us to talk about here?

[11Z50]

What if the transfer is unlawful? Is it anybody's business where you obtained the weapon then?

The transfer you described earlier between two family members who are residents of two different States was an illegal transfer. It needed to go through an FFL to comply with Federal law.

And acquiring guns from your uncle without going through an FFL is also a violation of the law, unless your uncle is from California and all of the firearms were long guns over 50 years old.

Or are you pushing the old "It's not illegal if they don't catch you!" theory that Calguns management just loves for us to talk about here?

I AM NOT ADVOCATING ANY ILLEGAL ACTS HERE! Having said that, the facts are it's simply nobody's business how you acquired your longarms. There is no legal obligation for a citizen to register any gun, other than an AW in the PRK. Simple possession does not prove an illegal transfer. If that were the case, any weapon that is not registered to you with DOJ would be an illegal to possess. That is not the case, and at least for now, registration with CA DoJ is not mandatory. It is not at the Federal level either. LE can ask how you got your guns, but it is still none of their business, and you are not required to tell them. (unless one is stupid enough to admit an illegal transfer to LE, there is no evidence)

For an illegal transfer to be prosecutable, it must be observed by a LEO or reported by a witness. Absent that, mere possession of a gun not registered to a citizen is not a crime. Mere possession does not prove an illegal transfer. Of course, one would suspect that if a citizen possesses a gun not reg'd to him, and there is no proof of legal transfer (DROS, etc) an illegal transfer had taken place, but that's not how the laws is written. It's very similar to the CA mag ban. The way the statute is written, it's nearly impossible to enforce. In addition, LE will have to prove the alleged illegal transaction took place less than 3 years and 1 day ago, the statute of limitations.

If a weapon is not an AW, or otherwise illegal, such as a full-auto, or is not stolen, it is not illegal to possess. A citizen has no burden to prove legal transfer once he/she has possession. I agree that a citizen is required by law to use an FFL in most cases to transfer firearms, but still there is no requirement for guns in possession to be registered.

If you can cite a statute that requires registration for simple possession, I'd like to see it.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

For an illegal transfer to be prosecutable, it must be observed by a LEO or reported by a witness.

Or confessed on a public internet forum.

My dead uncle (RIP) gave me all of his guns just before he died.

The hunt was a great success, and the relative, from a free state gave my friend a shotgun in appreciation for the great time.

You are violating your own rule of "keep quiet about it!" And when you tell the original poster that no laws are violated with these kinds of transfers you are not doing a service to him or Calguns.

No laws violated, since no registration is required, and once the firearm was legally in the PRK, an inter-familial gifting is authorized.

[11Z50]

Just for the record, I was speaking in a figurative sense, and of course, any resemblance or reference to any person living or dead, is purely coincidental, and for the purpose of conversation only. The characters portrayed are fictional, created for the sole purpose of discussing the applicable statutes......

[68kaiser]

This is some good reading I must say.

Like I said in my first post I don't want to do anything illegal and after reading all of the posts i see a FFL is required for the legal transfer of a firearm in a private party transfer.

Thanks for the information everyone..

[packnrat]

It's FEDERAL law that requires handguns to be transferred by FFL within the state of your residence. So with the exception of the CA 10 day wait, HSC, and second proof of residency, you would need to get a local FFL transfer out of state purchases in any of the 50 states.

For example, if a resident of Oregon wants to buy a handgun from a resident of Washington, the Washington resident must ship the handgun to a FFL in the Oregon. The FFL in Oregon is responsible for "transferring" the handgun to the Oregon resident. It's a FEDERAL law.

It's the same in CA but you have to do the 10 day wait, second form of residency, and HSC for handguns AND long guns.

i do belive you have one point wrong.
the hand gun permit card (aka safety card) (hsc card) is not for long guns.

any here with a ffl deler and willing to state he's store and real name willing to chime in on the ca law here.

just trying to keep the internet clear of the junk talk of laws.
.

[Librarian]

i do belive you have one point wrong.
the hand gun permit card (aka safety card) (hsc card) is not for long guns.

any here with a ffl deler and willing to state he's store and real name willing to chime in on the ca law here.

just trying to keep the internet clear of the junk talk of laws.
.

It's a HANDGUN Safety Certificate...

[-hanko]

What if the transfer is unlawful? Is it anybody's business where you obtained the weapon then?

Or are you pushing the old "It's not illegal if they don't catch you!" theory that Calguns management just loves for us to talk about here?

It's no one's business where I obtained my weapons, other than law enforcement's; and then if and only if they want to prosecute me.

I'm not detecting any suggestion of skirting/circumventing/avoiding/or violating the law on this post.

This may be a case of knowing how we obtained our own weapons, and leaving others' business to them. OP has received the info he asked for, and acknowledged the info.

-hanko

[bwiese]

Just for the record, I was speaking in a figurative sense, and of course, any resemblance or reference to any person living or dead, is purely coincidental, and for the purpose of conversation only. The characters portrayed are fictional, created for the sole purpose of discussing the applicable statutes......

What you said here/before is valid in the sense of 'proof' and lack of records, etc.

The problem for some folks is they'll open their mouths at the wrong time and could walk into a perjury trap.

Think BALCO, steroids, baseball - and Martha Stewart situation as well.