Mfg. Replaced handgun subject to the 1 in 30 day wait?

[MultiMustacheMan]

Hello all,

So I just got back from my FFL dealer without my gun. Long story short, I sent an off roster handgun back to the manufacture to be repaired under warranty and they deemed the gun non repairable. The manufacture told me that they would send me a replacement firearm (same make and model) to my FFL and it would have to be DROS'd again along with the 10 day wait. Okay, no big deal. A few weeks later the manufacture called me and told me that they cannot send me an off roster gun to my FFL dealer and that I would have to choose a firearm that is on the roster for replacement. I checked out the list, and looked at it for several hours and decided. I started the DROS process when the gun arrived, and the 10 day wait began. Today is the 10th day, so I went out and tried to pick up my gun and was told by my FFL dealer that the DOJ sent them a letter to not release the firearm to me due to a 30-day wait rejection. Does this sound right? Does anyone know if a replacement firearm by the manufacture is subject to the 1 gun per 30 day rule? I thought it was exempt. Sorry for the long story...tried to keep it short

[ke6guj]

here's the 1-in-30 law,

27535. (a) No person shall make an application to purchase more
than one handgun within any 30-day period.
(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to any of the following:
(1) Any law enforcement agency.
(2) Any agency duly authorized to perform law enforcement duties.
(3) Any state or local correctional facility.
(4) Any private security company licensed to do business in
California.
(5) Any person who is properly identified as a full-time paid
peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
830) of Title 3 of Part 2, and who is authorized to, and does carry a
firearm during the course and scope of employment as a peace
officer.
(6) Any motion picture, television, or video production company or
entertainment or theatrical company whose production by its nature
involves the use of a firearm.
(7) Any person who may, pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with
Section 27600), Article 3 (commencing with Section 27650), or Article
4 (commencing with Section 27700), claim an exemption from the
waiting period set forth in Section 27540.
(8) Any transaction conducted through a licensed firearms dealer
pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 28050).
(9) Any person who is licensed as a collector pursuant to Chapter
44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States
Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, and has a current
certificate of eligibility issued by the Department of Justice
pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 26700) of Chapter 2.
(10) The exchange of a handgun where the dealer purchased that
firearm from the person seeking the exchange within the 30-day period
immediately preceding the date of exchange or replacement.
(11) The replacement of a handgun when the person's handgun was
lost or stolen, and the person reported that firearm lost or stolen
prior to the completion of the application to purchase to any local
law enforcement agency of the city, county, or city and county in
which the person resides.
(12) The return of any handgun to its owner.
(13) A community college that is certified by the Commission on
Peace Officer Standards and Training to present the law enforcement
academy basic course or other commission-certified law enforcement
training.


doesn't look like your situation falls under any of the exemptions.

[MultiMustacheMan]

doesn't look like your situation falls under any of the exemptions.

You're right, I don't see any exemptions there. This thread has a similar story to mine http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/a.../t-537215.html and a few members there are saying there is an exemption. I realize the thread is dated 2 years back . Is it possible that the penal code was dropped?

[JDay]

You should sue the state since the roster has deprived you of a firearm you legally owned.

[Untamed1972]

You should sue the state since the roster has deprived you of a firearm you legally owned.

Not to mention having to re-DROS and wait 10 days for a gun that is a replacement for a gun you already owned.

But know....that's not an infringement at all.

If the 10 day wait for a 2nd gun was struck down....how in the hell can a 1-in-30 rule ever stand?

[Ronin2]

You should sue the state since the roster has deprived you of a firearm you legally owned.

No, the manufacturers quality control deprived you of a gun you legally owned. They have to give you a "new gun" with a different serial number that you must also go thru the process to "legally own".

If you want to blame the roster... go ahead but you would still have to go thru the process to get the new/different gun if it was on or off roster.

Blame all the 7 million gun owners in California that vote to send Democrats to Sacramento and the gun owners who vote for third party/libertarian candidates to send Democrats to Sacramento.

Quit whining.

[MultiMustacheMan]

You should sue the state since the roster has deprived you of a firearm you legally owned.

I would lose, and I'd probably end up in a ditch somewhere....Might as well join in on the face palm parade

[Delfuego]

Blame all the 7 million gun owners in California that vote to send Democrats to Sacramento and the gun owners who vote for third party/libertarian candidates to send Democrats to Sacramento.

Quit whining.

There is some truth to this. I really don't see eye to eye with Republicans on many different issues, except for gun control. Actually, I don't see eye to eye with any of the current political establishments that exist right now. They are all corrupt.

[strongpoint]

Mfg. Replaced handgun subject to the 1 in 30 day wait?

27535. (a) No person shall make an application to purchase more than one handgun within any 30-day period. ...

doesn't look like your situation falls under any of the exemptions.

You're right, I don't see any exemptions there.

Maybe there's no specific exemption, but I'm not sure how this transaction qualifies as a "purchase," which would seem to moot PC 27535 immediately. Can anyone cite a controlling definition of "purchase" that would apply here?

If the 10 day wait for a 2nd gun was struck down....how in the hell can a 1-in-30 rule ever stand?

All in good time.

[ke6guj]

Maybe there's no specific exemption, but I'm not sure how this transaction qualifies as a "purchase," which would seem to moot PC 27535 immediately. Can anyone cite a controlling definition of "purchase" that would apply here?
.

unfortunately "application to purchase" has a controlling definition that includes transfers that aren't purchases.

16190. As used in Article 2 (commencing with Section 26800) of
Chapter 2 of Division 6 of Title 4, and in Article 1 (commencing with
Section 27500) of Chapter 4 of Division 6 of Title 4, "application
to purchase" means either of the following:
(a) The initial completion of the register by the purchaser,
transferee, or person being loaned a firearm, as required by Section
28210.
(b) The initial completion and transmission to the Department of
Justice of the record of electronic or telephonic transfer by the
dealer on the purchaser, transferee, or person being loaned a
firearm, as required by Section 28215.

[MultiMustacheMan]

Maybe there's no specific exemption, but I'm not sure how this transaction qualifies as a "purchase," which would seem to moot PC 27535 immediately. Can anyone cite a controlling definition of "purchase" that would apply here?

That is what I originally thought as well. I did not purchase another firearm, I was given a replacement for one that I already owned. Can anyone find info on
PC section 12072 (a)(9)(xi) cited from the other thread? I'm having difficulty finding it, I'm starting to believe that it does not exist anymore.

[ke6guj]

That is what I originally thought as well. I did not purchase another firearm, I was given a replacement for one that I already owned. Can anyone find info on
PC section 12072 (a)(9)(xi) cited from the other thread? I'm having difficulty finding it, I'm starting to believe that it does not exist anymore.

correct, that is the "old code" that has been superceded by the new PC that is available here, http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/ca...ebody=&hits=20


edit: here is that old section:

(xi)
The replacement of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed
upon the person when the person's pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of
being concealed upon the person was lost or stolen, and the person reported
that firearm lost or stolen prior to the completion of the application to purchase
to any local law enforcement agency of the city, county, or city and county in
which he or she resides.


which has been carried over to the new code as
27535(b)(11) The replacement of a handgun when the person's handgun was
lost or stolen, and the person reported that firearm lost or stolen
prior to the completion of the application to purchase to any local
law enforcement agency of the city, county, or city and county in
which the person resides.

[madoka]

Hello all,

So I just got back from my FFL dealer without my gun. Long story short, I sent an off roster handgun back to the manufacture to be repaired under warranty and they deemed the gun non repairable. The manufacture told me that they would send me a replacement firearm (same make and model) to my FFL and it would have to be DROS'd again along with the 10 day wait. Okay, no big deal. A few weeks later the manufacture called me and told me that they cannot send me an off roster gun to my FFL dealer and that I would have to choose a firearm that is on the roster for replacement.

What manufacturer was this?

I'm about to send off a off roster to S&W for rust and you're making me concerned.

[colossians323]

here's the 1-in-30 law,

27535. (a) No person shall make an application to purchase more
than one handgun within any 30-day period.
(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to any of the following:
(1) Any law enforcement agency.
(2) Any agency duly authorized to perform law enforcement duties.
(3) Any state or local correctional facility.
(4) Any private security company licensed to do business in
California.
(5) Any person who is properly identified as a full-time paid
peace officer, as defined in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section
830) of Title 3 of Part 2, and who is authorized to, and does carry a
firearm during the course and scope of employment as a peace
officer.
(6) Any motion picture, television, or video production company or
entertainment or theatrical company whose production by its nature
involves the use of a firearm.
(7) Any person who may, pursuant to Article 2 (commencing with
Section 27600), Article 3 (commencing with Section 27650), or Article
4 (commencing with Section 27700), claim an exemption from the
waiting period set forth in Section 27540.
(8) Any transaction conducted through a licensed firearms dealer
pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 28050).
(9) Any person who is licensed as a collector pursuant to Chapter
44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States
Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, and has a current
certificate of eligibility issued by the Department of Justice
pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 26700) of Chapter 2.
(10) The exchange of a handgun where the dealer purchased that
firearm from the person seeking the exchange within the 30-day period
immediately preceding the date of exchange or replacement.
(11) The replacement of a handgun when the person's handgun was
lost or stolen, and the person reported that firearm lost or stolen
prior to the completion of the application to purchase to any local
law enforcement agency of the city, county, or city and county in
which the person resides.
(12) The return of any handgun to its owner.
(13) A community college that is certified by the Commission on
Peace Officer Standards and Training to present the law enforcement
academy basic course or other commission-certified law enforcement
training.


doesn't look like your situation falls under any of the exemptions.

CA laws are so darn twisted

[BKinzey]

The Manufacturer could have also chosen to put the same serial number on your replacement gun and avoided this problem. Evidently this can be a hassle for the manufacturer and I don't know of any of the majors that will do that. They'd rather pull a new one off the shelf and send it.