Out of state transfer

[socalrunner]

Hello, I have a question about a off roster possible transfer. My uncle has a Glock 43 that he purchased in Arizona. He has a house both in az and ca. Can he transfer the Glock to me? He does have a ca driver license. Thank you


Merry Christmas

[Librarian]

If he has CA DL, CA apparently thinks he is a CA resident.

Therefore, if you both go to a CA FFL, he may legally transfer that off-Roster to you in a Private Party Transfer.

[socalrunner]

Ok cool thank you for your time.

[Librarian]

One complication: if he bought the G43 in 2015, CA law now requires that he transfer the gun to himself at a CA FFL.

So far as I am aware, no one has yet done that at our member FFLs here at Calguns, so I don't know how that's supposed to be implemented.

And, there's no exemption from the Roster for guns acquired that way, so I don't know what is supposed to happen about that, either.

But if he bought the gun in 2014, you need not worry about all that.

[Quiet]

FYI.
The Glock 42 was released in January 2014.
The Glock 43 was released in March 2015.

[RickD427]

Gents,

It's still a little more complicated.

California and Federal government appear to define "Residency" differently.

The federal government does not appear to recognize the concept of "Dual Residency" with the exception of a military member living in one state and commuting daily to duty in a different state. The federal guidance on "residency" seems to allow a lot of fluidity so that a person can frequently change their state of residence (examples given include a person owning two homes in two states that California doesn't seem to share) but it doesn't allow one to be a "dual-resident" of two states.

Penal Code section 27585 assumes that a person can be a resident of California (otherwise the section would apply to no one) and also still be a resident of another state to purchase a firearm (please note that 18USC922(a)(3) effectively makes it impossible for a California-only resident to lawfully purchase a firearm out of state). If California applied the federal use of "Residency", then there would be no purpose served by the section.

We need to apply California's use of "Resident" to California law questions, and apply the federal use of "Resident" to federal actions.

In addition to the concerns of previous posters, there is also an application of 18USC922(a)(5) to the transaction. If the uncle transferred the handgun to the nephew during the time that the feds considered him an Arizona resident, then there is a felony violation of federal law.

[kemasa]

The Feds allow for dual or more residency, see the instructions for 4473, #13. The main thing is that for the 4473 you put the state of residency which applies, not all of them.

[RickD427]

The Feds allow for dual or more residency, see the instructions for 4473, #13. The main thing is that for the 4473 you put the state of residency which applies, not all of them.

Kemasa,

I see your point, and the reason for your conclusion, within the instructions accompanying Form 4473. But please understand that the narrative of a form instruction is not law. At the same time, the language of the Form 4473 Instructions are also consistent with my comments below.

Please refer to 27 CFR 478.11. That is law, and is the definitions of terms used in federal firearms regulations. Those regulations also include examples of the terms defined. Here is the definition of "State of Residence":

"The State in which an individual resides. An individual resides in a State if he or she is present in a State with the intention of making a home in that State. If an individual is on active duty as a member of the Armed Forces, the individual's State of residence is the State in which his or her permanent duty station is located, as stated in 18 U.S.C. 921(b). The following are examples that illustrate this definition:

Example 1.

A maintains a home in State X. A travels to State Y on a hunting, fishing, business, or other type of trip. A does not become a resident of State Y by reason of such trip.

Example 2.

A maintains a home in State X and a home in State Y. A resides in State X except for weekends or the summer months of the year and in State Y for the weekends or the summer months of the year. During the time that A actually resides in State X, A is a resident of State X, and during the time that A actually resides in State Y, A is a resident of State Y.

Example 3.

A, an alien, travels to the United States on a three-week vacation to State X. A does not have a state of residence in State X because A does not have the intention of making a home in State X while on vacation. This is true regardless of the length of the vacation.

Example 4.

A, an alien, travels to the United States to work for three years in State X. A rents a home in State X, moves his personal possessions into the home, and his family resides with him in the home. A intends to reside in State X during the 3-year period of his employment. A is a resident of State X."

Please note the requirement that "he or she be present in a state" in order to be a resident. That pretty much makes it impossible to be a "Dual Resident" of two states because a person cannot be in two different states at the same time. I have not located any similar provision in California's definition of "Resident" that requires one to be physically present in the state to be a resident. The context of PC 27585 assumes just the opposite, that a person can be outside of the state, and still be a resident. (Please refer to Page 8 of the ATF guidance for documentation of my earlier statement about the military "Dual Resident" exception - https://www.atf.gov/file/58676/download)

Additionally, please note the examples contained in 27 CFR 478.11, and the text of the Form 4473 that you previously cited, do not employ the term "Dual Resident." But they do provide that a person can frequently change their state of residence (as in moving between the weekend and weekday home in Example 2).

[smoothang21]

So does that include someone renting homes in 2 states for same reason because I work on railroad and I'm sometimes working in another state for temp but renting from someone for thay time is thay ok?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

[RickD427]

So does that include someone renting homes in 2 states for same reason because I work on railroad and I'm sometimes working in another state for temp but renting from someone for thay time is thay ok?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

I would think not, because of the requirement that you "intend to make a home" requirement in both places where you rent. Your use of "Temp" kinda knocks you out of the running.

OTOH, if you intended to have a permanent presence in both places where you rent then it may be a different story.

[kemasa]

...
Example 2.

A maintains a home in State X and a home in State Y. A resides in State X except for weekends or the summer months of the year and in State Y for the weekends or the summer months of the year. During the time that A actually resides in State X, A is a resident of State X, and during the time that A actually resides in State Y, A is a resident of State Y.
...
Please note the requirement that "he or she be present in a state" in order to be a resident. That pretty much makes it impossible to be a "Dual Resident" of two states because a person cannot be in two different states at the same time. I have not located any similar provision in California's definition of "Resident" that requires one to be physically present in the state to be a resident. The context of PC 27585 assumes just the opposite, that a person can be outside of the state, and still be a resident. (Please refer to Page 8 of the ATF guidance for documentation of my earlier statement about the military "Dual Resident" exception - https://www.atf.gov/file/58676/download)

Additionally, please note the examples contained in 27 CFR 478.11, and the text of the Form 4473 that you previously cited, do not employ the term "Dual Resident." But they do provide that a person can frequently change their state of residence (as in moving between the weekend and weekday home in Example 2).

I think that you are reading too much into it as example 2 shows.

If you stand on the border between CA and AZ and you have a home in both and you have a foot in each state, then you are in each state and are a resident of each of the two states, making you a dual resident right there.

Also, for long guns and free states, you can purchase a firearm in another state. Under your concept that you can only be a resident if you are in the state, then you would not be a resident of any state, which is clearly not the case.

I think that part of the confusion is that if you have multiple homes, say one in CA and one in NV, then when you fill out a 4473 for CA, you put your state of residence as CA and when you fill out a 4473 for NV, you put your state of residence as NV. The Feds don't care if you are a resident of multiple states as it does not matter.

[ke6guj]

Kemasa,

I see your point, and the reason for your conclusion, within the instructions accompanying Form 4473. But please understand that the narrative of a form instruction is not law. At the same time, the language of the Form 4473 Instructions are also consistent with my comments below.

Please refer to 27 CFR 478.11. That is law, and is the definitions of terms used in firearms regulations. Those regulations also include examples of the terms defined. Here is the definition of "State of Residence":

Example 2.

A maintains a home in State X and a home in State Y. A resides in State X except for weekends or the summer months of the year and in State Y for the weekends or the summer months of the year. During the time that A actually resides in State X, A is a resident of State X, and during the time that A actually resides in State Y, A is a resident of State Y.
"

Please note the requirement that "he or she be present in a state" in order to be a resident. That pretty much makes it impossible to be a "Dual Resident" of two states because a person cannot be in two different states at the same time. I have not located any similar provision in California's definition of "Resident" that requires one to be physically present in the state to be a resident. The context of PC 27585 assumes just the opposite, that a person can be outside of the state, and still be a resident. (Please refer to Page 8 of the ATF guidance for documentation of my earlier statement about the military "Dual Resident" exception - https://www.atf.gov/file/58676/download)

Additionally, please note the examples contained in 27 CFR 478.11, and the text of the Form 4473 that you previously cited, do not employ the term "Dual Resident." But they do provide that a person can frequently change their state of residence (as in moving between the weekend and weekday home in Example 2).

right, I think most people would consider that to be "dual resident" even though technically per ATF your residency is swapping out every 2-5 days.

[RickD427]

I think that you are reading too much into it as example 2 shows.

If you stand on the border between CA and AZ and you have a home in both and you have a foot in each state, then you are in each state and are a resident of each of the two states, making you a dual resident right there.

Also, for long guns and free states, you can purchase a firearm in another state. Under your concept that you can only be a resident if you are in the state, then you would not be a resident of any state, which is clearly not the case.

I think that part of the confusion is that if you have multiple homes, say one in CA and one in NV, then when you fill out a 4473 for CA, you put your state of residence as CA and when you fill out a 4473 for NV, you put your state of residence as NV. The Feds don't care if you are a resident of multiple states as it does not matter.

Kemasa,

OK, you've got an interesting "Brain Teaser" about a person with a foot in each state technically being a "Dual Resident" under the federal definition. But for that point to be meaningful, you'd also have to show me an FFL dealer also straddling the border so that a person could complete a transaction with a "foot in each state."

I have to think that the feds rally "do care" about a person being a dual resident otherwise, they would not have expended the effort to author the CFR provisions, or the FFL Guide.

You are correct that (some) folks can purchase long guns in states other than their state of residence, but that doesn't work for California residents. One of the federal conditions is that transaction must comply with the laws of the buyer's state of residence. For Californians, that includes the DROS. To my best knowledge, there are no out-of-state FFL dealers enrolled in the DROS program.

Ke6guj actually gave a very concise summary in his post. Feds don't recognize "Dual Resident", but they do seem to recognize that a person's "State of Residence" can be "Swapped out every 2-3 days."

[kemasa]

Kemasa,

OK, you've got an interesting "Brain Teaser" about a person with a foot in each state technically being a "Dual Resident" under the federal definition. But for that point to be meaningful, you'd also have to show me an FFL dealer also straddling the border so that a person could complete a transaction with a "foot in each state."

No, you said a person can't be a dual resident.

A FFL does not need to straddle the border since the FFL can do the transaction without that requirement. There are free state issues, but the bottom line is that you seem to be reading far more into it than is really there.

I have to think that the feds rally "do care" about a person being a dual resident otherwise, they would not have expended the effort to author the CFR provisions, or the FFL Guide.

No, they don't care. If you are a resident in the state that you are in, that is fine. If you are a resident in another state and you live in a free state and are in a free state, then you can do the transaction.

You are correct that (some) folks can purchase long guns in states other than their state of residence, but that doesn't work for California residents. One of the federal conditions is that transaction must comply with the laws of the buyer's state of residence. For Californians, that includes the DROS. To my best knowledge, there are no out-of-state FFL dealers enrolled in the DROS program.

It does not work for CA residents, who are only CA residents, or for residents of states other than CA because under Federal law you have to follow the laws of both states, which can not be done due to CA laws.

An out of state FFL can not be a CA FFL.

Ke6guj actually gave a very concise summary in his post. Feds don't recognize "Dual Resident", but they do seem to recognize that a person's "State of Residence" can be "Swapped out every 2-3 days."

Under that view, if you left your state of residence, then you don't have a state of residence and that is simply not true. Dual residency just does not matter when it comes to Federal law since you can choose the state that you want.

If you were a NV resident and you went to MT, could you buy a long gun?

If you are a CA resident and and NV resident and went to MT, could you buy a long gun?

Do you think that having a residence in CA would make it not possible to use your other residence? Where in Federal law does it say that? Where in Federal law does it say that once you live your state of residence that you are no longer a resident there? If that does not exist, then you are still a resident of both states.

Those are just example free states, so if there is an issue with NV or MT, change the states to something else.