Purchasing firearms in Arizona

[NastyNate26]

I have an AZ ID since I own a home over there, so I can hypothetically legally purchase firearms there according to AZ laws since I have proper identification. The problem is I primarily live in CA... Does anybody know how to legally bring a firearm back to CA that was purchased over there?

[RickD427]

I have an AZ ID since I own a home over there, so I can hypothetically legally purchase firearms there according to AZ laws since I have proper identification. The problem is I primarily live in CA... Does anybody know how to legally bring a firearm back to CA that was purchased over there?

As to your question about purchasing firearms in Arizona, please refer to 27CFR478.11 for the federal definition of "State of Residence" and four its inclusion of four examples describing the regulation's applicability to folks such as yourself. Additionally please refer to Arizona state statutes and regulations on the subject.

As to your question regarding bringing any such firearms into California, please refer to Penal Code sections 27585 and 27590. Please note that you can be committing a felony if you go about it wrong.

[smittty]

I have an AZ ID since I own a home over there, so I can hypothetically legally purchase firearms there according to AZ laws since I have proper identification. The problem is I primarily live in CA... Does anybody know how to legally bring a firearm back to CA that was purchased over there?

If you live here CA doesn't allow you to buy a gun out of state and if you move here with guns they want you to register them.

I don't know your living and working situation but my first thought was your primary residence would be better if AZ. Your vehicles should be registered there and all you guns should be there and you can temporarily drive the cars here and temporarily bring the guns here (w/10 rd mags), while you're here "temporarily".

[9Cal_OC]

While you can legally buy in AZ, you must keep them out in AZ. As Rick said, it would be a felony per handgun otherwise.

[Ca2AZ]

Any firearms you own in AZ would first need to be registered with CA DOJ using form BOF 4542A, which you can complete on CFARS at https://cfars.doj.ca.gov/login.

Once processed, (last time I did it took about 10 months), you will receive a letter from CA DOJ letting you know that your firearm is now registered in CA and that you may bring it into the state.

Now, the people at DOJ told me I could bring it in as soon as I submitted the form, but I opted to wait until it was registered with the state.

The approval letter looks like this.

Redacted-DOJ-Firearms-Ownership-Report.jpg

[RickD427]

Any firearms you own in AZ would first need to be registered with CA DOJ using form BOF 4542A, which you can complete on CFARS at https://cfars.doj.ca.gov/login.

Once processed, (last time I did it took about 10 months), you will receive a letter from CA DOJ letting you know that your firearm is now registered in CA and that you may bring it into the state.

Now, the people at DOJ told me I could bring it in as soon as I submitted the form, but I opted to wait until it was registered with the state.

The approval letter looks like this.

Redacted-DOJ-Firearms-Ownership-Report.jpg

NEGATIVE

All this form does, and all that the DOJ letter posted above does, it to create a record that you have registered the firearm in the DOJ's Automated Firearms System.

The above letter DOES NOT permit you to import the firearm into California, and should you do so, you would be in violation of Penal Code section 27585. Penal Code section 27590 makes that a felony if the firearm is a handgun and a misdemeanor for other firearms. Folks can get themselves in serious trouble following the advice given in the above post.

If you are a California resident seeking to import firearms that you have acquired while out of state, you need to deliver them to a California FFL who then transfers them to you in the state. You can lawfully accomplish the same by use of the Voluntary Registration process.

Please read the text of the statute to see where you made your mistake. Please closely read the text of the DOJ letter that you posted and not the absence of any text indicating an approval to import the firearm.

[9Cal_OC]

^^ what he said.

Form is for new residents moving to CA and registering their firearms.

It cannot be used for current residents bringing firearms from out of state. All it does is create a paper trail for improper importation.

[Ca2AZ]

^^ what he said.

Form is for new residents moving to CA and registering their firearms.

It cannot be used for current residents bringing firearms from out of state. All it does is create a paper trail for improper importation.

No, the form you are talking about is BOF 4010A, New Resident Report of Firearm Ownership. The form I mentioned is BOF 4542A, Firearms Ownership Report.

Once the firearm is registered to you, you are free to travel with it in and out of the state. For example, if you drove out of state with a firearm registered to you, would you then need to ship it home via FFL, or could you drive back into California with it?

Let's say you get pulled over driving into California and the officer does a records check on the firearm, it comes back registered to you in California.

It was not my intent to give advice, I was just relating my experience after numerous conversations with DOJ both via phone and email, and having successfully registered a few of my out of state firearms, including some that are now on my CCW. Everything I relayed here was done in consultation with CA DOJ and my personal attorney.

[Ca2AZ]

NEGATIVE

All this form does, and all that the DOJ letter posted above does, it to create a record that you have registered the firearm in the DOJ's Automated Firearms System.

The above letter DOES NOT permit you to import the firearm into California, and should you do so, you would be in violation of Penal Code section 27585. Penal Code section 27590 makes that a felony if the firearm is a handgun and a misdemeanor for other firearms. Folks can get themselves in serious trouble following the advice given in the above post.

If you are a California resident seeking to import firearms that you have acquired while out of state, you need to deliver them to a California FFL who then transfers them to you in the state. You can lawfully accomplish the same by use of the Voluntary Registration process.

Please read the text of the statute to see where you made your mistake. Please closely read the text of the DOJ letter that you posted and not the absence of any text indicating an approval to import the firearm.

I would direct you to Penal Code section 27585(b) (14) (A) & (B)
(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to or affect any of the following:
(14) The importation, transportation, or bringing of a firearm into the state by a person who meets any of the following criteria:
(A) The person is listed in the registry set forth in Section 11106 as the owner of the firearm.
(B) The person has been issued documentation by the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 11106 that indicates the person is listed in the centralized registry as owning that firearm.

[RickD427]

I would direct you to Penal Code section 27585(b) (14) (A) & (B)
(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to or affect any of the following:
(14) The importation, transportation, or bringing of a firearm into the state by a person who meets any of the following criteria:
(A) The person is listed in the registry set forth in Section 11106 as the owner of the firearm.
(B) The person has been issued documentation by the Department of Justice pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 11106 that indicates the person is listed in the centralized registry as owning that firearm.

STILL NEGATIVE

Penal Code sections 27585(b)(14((A)&(B) that you have quoted are directed toward new residents of the state, although I have to acknowledge that the poor wording of the statute does allow a construction that incorporates all residents. But to so construe section 27585(b)(14) you have to violate two principles of statutory construction: 1) That the intent of the legislature drafting the statute is considered, and 2) That a construction that renders a statute as a nullity is disfavored.

This issue has been discussed a few times before in this forum and the answer has not changed.

PC Section 27560 was enacted in 2011. It created the "Personal Firearms Importer" and created a requirement for them to register their firearms upon moving to California as a new resident and created the self-reporting form to accomplish that requirement.

PC Section 27585 was enacted in 2015. It created a requirement for existing residents to utilize the services of a California FFL to import firearms from out of state. The legislative history is quite clear that they intended a more burdensome importation process for existing residents.

If an existing resident could satisfy the registration requirements by utilizing the new resident process, then no purpose would be served by the FFL Transfer process mandated by section 27585. That point alone defeats your construction.

About the only thing supporting your theory is the "Rule of Lenity." That holds where a statute is ambiguous, the ambiguity is resolved in favor of a criminal defendant. But where the application of this rule is sought by a criminal defendant, you'll often see the courts respond with an application of the rules of statutory construction to hold that there is no ambiguity.

You gotta read the statutes as a whole, understand how they relate to each other, and understand the history of their development.

Nice try, you deserve credit for your research and citation to statute, but no cigar.

[Ca2AZ]

STILL NEGATIVE

Penal Code sections 27585(b)(14((A)&(B) that you have quoted are directed toward new residents of the state, although I have to acknowledge that the poor wording of the statute does allow a construction that incorporates all residents. But to so construe section 27585(b)(14) you have to violate two principles of statutory construction: 1) That the intent of the legislature drafting the statute is considered, and 2) That a construction that renders a statute as a nullity is disfavored.

This issue has been discussed a few times before in this forum and the answer has not changed.

PC Section 27560 was enacted in 2011. It created the "Personal Firearms Importer" and created a requirement for them to register their firearms upon moving to California as a new resident and created the self-reporting form to accomplish that requirement.

PC Section 27585 was enacted in 2015. It created a requirement for existing residents to utilize the services of a California FFL to import firearms from out of state. The legislative history is quite clear that they intended a more burdensome importation process for existing residents.

If an existing resident could satisfy the registration requirements by utilizing the new resident process, then no purpose would be served by the FFL Transfer process mandated by section 27585. That point alone defeats your construction.

About the only thing supporting your theory is the "Rule of Lenity." That holds where a statute is ambiguous, the ambiguity is resolved in favor of a criminal defendant. But where the application of this rule is sought by a criminal defendant, you'll often see the courts respond with an application of the rules of statutory construction to hold that there is no ambiguity.

You gotta read the statutes as a whole, understand how they relate to each other, and understand the history of their development.

Nice try, you deserve credit for your research and citation to statute, but no cigar.

[Quiet]

FWIW...
One of the parts of the CA legislative intent with PC 27585(a) was to require all "dual residents of CA" to utilize a CA FFL dealer to import firearms they acquired in their other State of residence into CA, as a means to close the "off-Roster loophole" being used by "dual-residents of CA". This is why the CA legislature made the penalty for failing to utilize a CA FFL dealer for the importation of a handgun a felony, instead of a misdemeanor. The CA DROS system will not allow a non-exempt CA resident to import off-Roster handguns into CA.

The Firearm Ownership Report (BOF 4542A) is only legal when used for PC 28000.
^Per CA DOJ BOF, the submission and processing of this report is not considered legal proof that the firearm is CA legal or the method it was acquired was legal. It is simply a means for a person to voluntarily report the status of a firearm to CA DOJ.


Penal Code 28000

[Capybara]

When the original Ruger SR22 came to market, I was a resident of California but working in Scottsdale part time. I recall there were long wait times at my Ca. dealer to obtain one but while browsing at a gun shop in Arizona, the Arizona shop had many in stock and at a good price. After checking with my California dealer that they would accept it from the Az dealer and verifying that the model number was exactly the same model on the roster on the Ruger label on the box, I bought the pistol in Arizona and the dealer shipped it to my Ca. dealer, where I picked it up. As far as I know, as long as the exact model number with 10 round or lower magazines is on the Ca. roster, you can purchase it out of state, you just can't take delivery of it out of state, you must take delivery of it in California.

Am I correct Quiet and Rick? Unusual situation and I normally would have no reason to purchase a gun out of state but in this case it was available out of state and not available in California and both dealers were fine with it.

[Djantlive]

As a non CA resident, can one drive into CA with off roster handgun with mags blocked for 1 month without paperwork?

[RickD427]

When the original Ruger SR22 came to market, I was a resident of California but working in Scottsdale part time. I recall there were long wait times at my Ca. dealer to obtain one but while browsing at a gun shop in Arizona, the Arizona shop had many in stock and at a good price. After checking with my California dealer that they would accept it from the Az dealer and verifying that the model number was exactly the same model on the roster on the Ruger label on the box, I bought the pistol in Arizona and the dealer shipped it to my Ca. dealer, where I picked it up. As far as I know, as long as the exact model number with 10 round or lower magazines is on the Ca. roster, you can purchase it out of state, you just can't take delivery of it out of state, you must take delivery of it in California.

Am I correct Quiet and Rick? Unusual situation and I normally would have no reason to purchase a gun out of state but in this case it was available out of state and not available in California and both dealers were fine with it.

I think what you described was a textbook correct manner of completing the transaction.

A lot of folks confuse the meaning of "purchase" and "transfer" as those terms are used in both the state and federal statutes. They are not synonymous.