Rhode v. Becerra (Challenge to CA Ammo Sales) - ORAL ARGS at 9th 11-9-2020

[BAJ475]

I ... still pay[ed] $1.

That is taxation of a constitutional right! IMHO, the same applies to DROS fees. While I do not have a problem of requiring FFLs to check that buyers are not prohibited persons, what other right requires the payment of a fee to exercise it? NONE!

[ar15barrels]

What good is the certificate if you have to do a background check to verify it. It would seem that eligibility in this circumstance is a misnomer.

Certificates can easily be faked.
Running the COE number will return if its valid for the person who is presenting it.

[ar15barrels]

If you have a COE, some out of state vendors will ship direct to you, No? In that case is either fee paid?

No fees to check a COE/03FFL from out of state because out-of-state seller are not CA-licensed.
The only sellers that have to check a COE are CA-licensed ammo-vendors/FFLs.

For this reason, CA-licensed ammo vendors and FFL's can not ship ammo to buyers within the state because the check has to be run in person.

[ar15barrels]

I used my COE recently at sportsman to purchase ammunition, they still asked the same set of questions (place of birth, race, etc.) as if no COE and still pay $1.

The counter monkey may not have ever even had someone give them a COE before so they just ran it like a standard background check.
I had that experience at Bass Pro and Big5 but I educated the counter monkey into how much easier the COE check was.
Those big retailers have their own internal process that they use which usually includes their own forms they hand to a customer to fill out and then the counter monkey reads off the form when he is entering the ammo transfer in DES.

[ARFrog]

If you have a COE, some out of state vendors will ship direct to you, No? In that case is either fee paid?

Yes, if you provide some out of state ammo vendors a copy of your Ffl03 and COE they will ship to you and no $1.00 is charged. The $1.00 background fee is only charged in California - the State that issued you a certificate of eligibility then needs a separate fee(s) to verify its existence.

I have been to some vendors (cough, cough...Big Cinco) that won't even run a COE based check.

Again, my complaint is if I have paid a fee to determine that I am eligible for certain things, why do I need to pay additional fees to either determine that I am eligible or that the certificate is still valid?

I realize that this is not what the current law states but it should be that you have to show the certificate and perhaps a form of ID to verify that you are the named person on the certificate and you are done. The only thing else to be considered is how the State gets a breakdown of what you are buying.

[ar15barrels]

Again, my complaint is if I have paid a fee to determine that I am eligible for certain things, why do I need to pay additional fees to either determine that I am eligible or that the certificate is still valid?

Because the certificate is so easy to fake.
My local big5 manager likes me because the COE check is easier than an actual background check.

[Dvrjon]

Yes, if you provide some out of state ammo vendors a copy of your Ffl03 and COE they will ship to you and no $1.00 is charged. The $1.00 background fee is only charged in California - the State that issued you a certificate of eligibility then needs a separate fee(s) to verify its existence.

I have been to some vendors (cough, cough...Big Cinco) that won't even run a COE based check.

Again, my complaint is if I have paid a fee to determine that I am eligible for certain things, why do I need to pay additional fees to either determine that I am eligible or that the certificate is still valid?

I realize that this is not what the current law states but it should be that you have to show the certificate and perhaps a form of ID to verify that you are the named person on the certificate and you are done. The only thing else to be considered is how the State gets a breakdown of what you are buying.

What good is the certificate if you have to do a background check to verify it. It would seem that eligibility in this circumstance is a misnomer.

When a cop pulls you over they run your DL to see if it?s still valid or suspended. Second, they?ll run you through the data bases for wants/warrants. But, you paid a fee to get that license, so you think the cop doesn?t have a requirement to see if it is still valid?

[Dvrjon]

FIFY

Have you tried? DOJ personnel give you gave me a hard stop and ask for a business needing a COE or your my FFL.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

The point is not whether they eventually issue, it took about half a dozen iterations back and forth for me last time (3 rejected applications and 2-3 emails). They point is they're making the process needlessly difficult as punishment.

Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk

They are trying to backfill a mistake they made when they issued the regs. They forgot to legally authorize their collection of the FFL-03 info.

[ARFrog]

Because the certificate is so easy to fake.
My local big5 manager likes me because the COE check is easier than an actual background check.

So, instead of the State providing a document that is less likely to "fake", I assume responsibility to pay to time and again for my "eligibility" through a verification scheme.

I have never had to do this same continual verification with the DMV, Department of Real Estate, Department of Real Estate Appraisers, Insurance Commissioner, ATF, Social Security, CCW IA....well, you get the picture.

If the State's concern were fraudulent certificates, I am sure we would have heard about it and not be left to make up an excuse for them.

[Dvrjon]

I used my COE recently at sportsman to purchase ammunition, they still asked the same set of questions (place of birth, race, etc.) as if no COE and still pay $1.

The have to collect that info to record the purchase with the AG.

[Dvrjon]

I hate to admit my part in this thread drift, but we have run far afield.

May I suggest we drop this part of the discussion and move on?

[ARFrog]

When a cop pulls you over they run your DL to see if it?s still valid or suspended. Second, they?ll run you through the data bases for wants/warrants. But, you paid a fee to get that license, so you think the cop doesn?t have a requirement to see if it is still valid?

Not the same thing. Does the cop charge each person they stop a $1.00 to see if they are the same person on the card before handing the license back?

There is nothing stopping the DOJ from issuing an eligibility license like the DMV that can be run through a scanner for no additional cost beyond the annual COE renewal.

Please stop making excuses for the State's ineptitude.


OK, I have said my piece on this topic and will stop my participation in thread drift before the Librarian gets involved

[AlmostHeaven]

I think we can all agree that the ultimate goal is to win Rhode v. Bonta and render moot this entire discussion about COEs, $1 fees, and the ineptitude of store clerks.

Let this post mark the resumption of the main thread topic.

[rplaw]

No it's not.
They are literally just checking if the COE is current or not.
This is to make sure that a presented COE is not fraudulent.
When the COE comes back as current, approval to deliver the ammo is the result.
No background check is run because an active COE is proof that a background check would be passed if it were actually run.
If a COE is not current, then it either is expired or revoked.
In the case of COE revocation, that would generally mean that firearms rights have been revoked as well and even a standard background check would find that.
If a COE is simply expired, then a standard background check would likely pass and a standard background check would still be required before ammo delivery could commence.

How do you not understand that merely checking, regardless of what database is being checked, is still a background check of some type? Calling it by a different name changes none of the actions which are performed.

Semi auto is semi auto even if you call it partly full auto. Checking to verify that the customer buying ammo isn't a prohibited person is a background check even if you only check to verify that the COE they present is still valid.

[ar15barrels]

How do you not understand that merely checking, regardless of what database is being checked, is still a background check of some type?

Because they are checking the status of a COE number, not a person.
They are not running a person through a list of prohibited person's lists like an actual background check.
They are running a COE number through a list of acceptable COE numbers to be sure it's acceptable.

They are not checking for guilty.
They are checking for innocence.