Intrafamily Iterstate Exemption for Sales

[Chewy65]

Is the intra familiar exception to the roster limited to gifts from defined family members or does it include any transaction, (gifts, trades, and even sales). I believe the later. In other words, it is perfectly legal for a son in Los Angeles to buy an off roster handgun from his Father in Oregon as long as it is delivered by the Father to a CA FFL who will DROS the gun and deliver it to the Son.

Assume that Father had bought the gun for himself and later decided to sell it to his Son.

[Paul_R]

....

[LeadFarmer74]

It’s limited to gifts.

[P5Ret]

27875 specifically states the word GIFT. Since very little in Ca law deals with interstate, I believe this is the exemption that is being used for Intrafamily interstate transfer's. I may not be looking in the exact spot it's listed in the penal code, and a text search is turning up zero results for interstate transfers.

[Chewy65]

Is this not the current version of PC 27875?

Section 27545 does not apply to the transfer of a handgun, and commencing January 1, 2014, any firearm, by gift, bequest, intestate succession, or other means from one individual to another, if all of the following requirements are met:

(a) The transfer is infrequent, as defined in Section 16730.

(b) The transfer is between members of the same immediate family.

(c) Within 30 days of taking possession of the firearm, the person to whom it is transferred shall forward by prepaid mail, or deliver in person to the Department of Justice, a report that includes information concerning the individual taking possession of the firearm, how title was obtained and from whom, and a description of the firearm in question. The report forms that individuals complete pursuant to this section shall be provided to them by the Department of Justice.

(d) The person taking title to the firearm shall first obtain a handgun safety certificate, if the firearm is a handgun.

(e) The person receiving the firearm is 18 years of age or older.

If it is current law, I would think "other means" includes a transfer pursuant to a sales transaction.

[mej16489]

Is this not the current version of PC 27875?



If it is current law, I would think "other means" includes a transfer pursuant to a sales transaction.

That's the exemption for not using an FFL for intrastate family transfers.

I'm not positive, but I think the exemption needs to be somewhere in here:
32110.


Article 4 (commencing with Section 31900) and Article 5 (commencing with Section 32000) shall not apply to any of the following:

(a) The sale, loan, or transfer of any firearm pursuant to Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 28050) of Division 6 in order to comply with Section 27545.

(b) The sale, loan, or transfer of any firearm that is exempt from the provisions of Section 27545 pursuant to any applicable exemption contained in Article 2 (commencing with Section 27600) or Article 6 (commencing with Section 27850) of Chapter 4 of Division 6, if the sale, loan, or transfer complies with the requirements of that applicable exemption to Section 27545.

(c) The sale, loan, or transfer of any firearm as described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 32000.

(d) The delivery of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person to a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, for the purposes of the service or repair of that firearm.

(e) The return of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person by a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, to its owner where that firearm was initially delivered in the circumstances set forth in subdivision (a), (d), (f), or (i).

(f) The delivery of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person to a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, for the purpose of a consignment sale or as collateral for a pawnbroker loan.

(g) The sale, loan, or transfer of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person listed as a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

(h) The sale, loan, or transfer of any semiautomatic pistol that is to be used solely as a prop during the course of a motion picture, television, or video production by an authorized participant therein in the course of making that production or event or by an authorized employee or agent of the entity producing that production or event.

(i) The delivery of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person to a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, where the firearm is being loaned by the licensee to a consultant-evaluator.

(j) The delivery of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person by a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, where the firearm is being loaned by the licensee to a consultant-evaluator.

(k) The return of a pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person to a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, where it was initially delivered pursuant to subdivision (j).

[Chewy65]

That's the exemption for not using an FFL for intrastate family transfers.

I'm not positive, but I think the exemption needs to be somewhere in here:
32110.


Article 4 (commencing with Section 31900) and Article 5 (commencing with Section 32000) shall not apply to any of the following:

/ / /

(b) The sale, loan, or transfer of any firearm that is exempt from the provisions of Section 27545 pursuant to any applicable exemption contained in Article 2 (commencing with Section 27600) or Article 6 (commencing with Section 27850) of Chapter 4 of Division 6, if the sale, loan, or transfer complies with the requirements of that applicable exemption to Section 27545.

(

Exactly. Section 27875 is an applicable exemption from the provisions of Section 27545 contained in Article 6 (commencing with Section 27850) of Chapter 4 of Division 6 and doesn't the sale from the out of state father to the son comply with those requirements?

[Librarian]

Not on my laptop, so can’t cut and paste code, but the usual benefit to interstate intrafamilial is off-Roster handguns — and sale is prohibited.

It’s messy because PC seems written for only in-California transfer.

[Chewy65]

That is because our CA Legislators think this isn't a state but their own fiefdom.

[BAJ475]

Looking forward to your followup on sale being prohibited.

[Chewy65]

I am also looking forward to Librarian's reasoning, since he is almost always right on.

[BAJ475]

I am also looking forward to Librarian's reasoning, since he is almost always right on.

Which is quite remarkable since he disclaims being an attorney. So my question is did he miss his calling or was it that he simply did not want to join a group of generally despised and loathed persons?

[Chewy65]

Whatever it is, Librarian is one sharp tack. I wouldn't bet against him, but here I think he has it wrong. But I only wish I had his track record.

[Librarian]

So I was thinking of PC 32000, in relevant part

32000.


(a) A person in this state who

manufactures or causes to be manufactured,

imports into the state for sale, keeps for sale, offers or exposes for sale,

gives, or

lends

an unsafe handgun shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year.

and the part that stuck was 'imports for sale' - arguably what

t is perfectly legal for a son in Los Angeles to buy an off roster handgun from his Father in Oregon

turns out to mean.

However, 32000 also covers 'gives', which would apply to the interstate intrafamilial gifts.

So now I don't know under what authority DOJ appears to be suggesting 'gifts', nor where 'our side' got it; I seem to recall something years ago from Bill Wiese, who may have said that was legal advice he had received, or maybe I'm misremembering.

'Gift' has been working through DOJ audits, but now I'm not so sure that's a requirement.

[Chewy65]

Librarian, That was a good answer. I was also under the impression, but why I cannot say, that it had to be a gift. Then I started trying to track down a few things and in doing so I questioned that it had to be a gift. From what I have been able to find, it may be by gift, bequest, intestate succession, or other means and other means under the plain language doctrine would indisputably include a sale/purchase.

My SWAG is that because the purchase of a firearm as a gift for another is treated as an exception to the strawman doctrine we collectively came to wrongly believe that interstate inrafamilliar transfers of off roster firearms were limited to gifts.