Q. re Shipping Handgun to Out of State C&R

[Liberty Rules]

A friend of mine is a C&R licensee in another state. He is buying several C&R pistols from a California resident. The L.A. bureau of BATF said that federal law permits, but CA law prohibits, the owner from shipping the pistols directly to the C&R holder out of state. They said that CA law requires the pistols to be shipped FROM a CA FFL holder. The CA FFL is charging the owner a $75 fee plus $30 shipping.

The state where the pistols are being sent permits C&R holders to buy and sell C&R pistols directly, without going through an 03 FFL.

Does this sound right to you?

[Dump1567]

News to me. Why believe what the ATF has to say about CA gun laws? Why doesn't your friend just call the CA BOF and ask them.

From what I understand. Ship it through the appropriate carrier. Log it out of his book (if C&R). And fill out no longer in poss. form (optional, but recommended).

From the BOF FAQ:

Am I required to inform the DOJ if I have disposed of a firearm?

If you have disposed of a firearm, you may (but are not required to) submit a Notice of No Longer in Possession [PDF 101 kb / 1 pg] form to have the firearm removed from your name.

And from 12078 (if I understand it correctly):

(f) Subdivision (d) of Section 12072 and subdivision (b) of Section 12801 shall not apply to the sale, delivery, or transfer of firearms by persons who reside in this state to persons who reside outside this state who are licensed pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto, if the sale, delivery, or transfer is in accordance with Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto.

((d) of 12072 deals with in state PPTs)

12072
(d) Where neither party to the transaction holds a dealer's license issued pursuant to Section 12071, the parties to the transaction shall complete the sale, loan, or transfer of that firearm through a licensed firearms dealer pursuant to Section 12082.

So in summary, I don't believe he needs to go through a dealer.

[-hanko]

A friend of mine is a C&R licensee in another state. He is buying several C&R pistols from a California resident. The L.A. bureau of BATF said that federal law permits, but CA law prohibits, the owner from shipping the pistols directly to the C&R holder out of state. They said that CA law requires the pistols to be shipped FROM a CA FFL holder. The CA FFL is charging the owner a $75 fee plus $30 shipping.

The state where the pistols are being sent permits C&R holders to buy and sell C&R pistols directly, without going through an 03 FFL.

Does this sound right to you?

The CA FFL is a jerk

No prk probibitions unless the weapons shipped are currently classified as 'assault' weapons by the doj/bof.

An -01 ffl can mail the pistols via usps, the owner cannot. Owners shipping choices are fed-ex or ups, both will probably require next-day-air service, but fed-ex has done more than a few shipments for me by 3-day-air; I've got a great counter guy at fed-ex

The buyer's ffl is confused as hell, but some ffl's don't accept (legal) shipments from non-licensees or only from other -01 ffl's at their discretion.
Buyers ffl is also a jerk.

I'm assuming buyer is does not have a C&R.?

Owner received a listing of state laws relating to transfers when he got is C&R, he may want to check out the laws of the buyer's state.

-hanko

[Liberty Rules]

News to me. Why believe what the ATF has to say about CA gun laws? Why doesn't your friend just call the CA BOF and ask them. * * *So in summary, I don't believe he needs to go through a dealer.

Thanks for the response. My out of state friend has been a C&R for some time and believed strongly that the CA seller could ship the C&R pistols directly to him. My friend is no expert on CA law so he did some checking. I couldn't think of any CA law which would prohibit it and told him so. After seeing your post, I feel the same way.

The CA seller spoke with his local CA FFL dealer, who told him that they had to be shipped BY an FFL. Ugh.

I guess my friend figured that ATF would be a better source to contact than CA DOJ (he must have heard too many horror stories from me about DOJ's incompetence and political shenanigans). That's when ATF in Los Angeles told him that CA law prohibited the shipment of C&R pistols to an out of state C&R licensee.

[Liberty Rules]

No prk probibitions unless the weapons shipped are currently classified as 'assault' weapons by the doj/bof.

Nope, no AW's. Ordinary, 60 year old pistols.

The buyer's ffl is confused as hell, but some ffl's don't accept (legal) shipments from non-licensees or only from other -01 ffl's at their discretion. Buyers ffl is also a jerk. I'm assuming buyer is does not have a C&R.?

Hanko, looks like you got some of this mixed up. Buyer is a C&R holder out of state. He wants Seller/Owner to ship the pistols directly to him (no other FFL involved on Buyer's side). Seller/Owner, is a private individual in CA. Based on bum advice from his CA FFL dealer, Seller believes that the only legal way to ship them is to deliver them to that CA FFL Dealer and have that dealer ship them to Buyer, of course with a $75 fee tacked on for his trouble--on top of $30 shipping.

It's a crappy situation but things could be worse. At least he found a few nice pistols.

[-hanko]

Nope, no AW's. Ordinary, 60 year old pistols.



Hanko, looks like you got some of this mixed up. Buyer is a C&R holder out of state. He wants Seller/Owner to ship the pistols directly to him (no other FFL involved on Buyer's side). Seller/Owner, is a private individual in CA. Based on bum advice from his CA FFL dealer, Seller believes that the only legal way to ship them is to deliver them to that CA FFL Dealer and have that dealer ship them to Buyer, of course with a $75 fee tacked on for his trouble--on top of $30 shipping.

It's a crappy situation but things could be worse. At least he found a few nice pistols.

Sometimes my brain works backwards, often on the weekends. Duh.

I'd let seller do what he wants, just make sure seller knows ffl fees are his responsibility. Typically / traditionally, buyer usually covers the shipping charges. Clearly, prk law allows the shipment, batfe in LA is misinformed. A call to the doj/bof may help...operative word here is 'may'.

-hanko