Tweet
We have stumbled upon what we believe is a huge overstep of the DOJ. Here are the facts surrounding the transaction. Please let us know what you think, if we are right or wrong, if the customer should lawyer up or if this would be a case that Calguns would like to fight.
April 19, 2017
John Doe customer who is a 03FFL holder and COE holder purchased a C&R eligible pistol, the DROS was checked 1 in 30 exempt (automatically from the DES when you enter in that he is also waiting period exempt) Customer fills out the DROS checks the preview page and signs and thumbprints both the "pending" page and "delivered" page at the same time. NOTE: Approval pages will not be available until 10-24 hour periods after submission and we are required to print those again and keep with the DROS packet. John Doe takes possession of the firearm and goes about his way. (no 4473 required as he is a licensee)
April 21, 2017
Same customer John Doe comes into the store to DROS a modern pistol. We ask him 3 times if he has purchased any modern pistols within the last 30 days and he says no. He DOES NOT purchase firearms anywhere else, according to him, and we have no reason to doubt this. He's a frequent buyer of C&R stuff online and comes here to do the DROS. He completes the application to purchase, 4473, FSC card, ID and proof of residency. He leaves and goes about his way.
April 25, 2017
We received a 1 in 30 violation for the customer. We contacted the customer who verified in fact he has NOT purchased ANY modern pistols for some time now. We take it for what it is and figure he just made a mistake and forgot or possibly DROS'd a C&R elsewhere and that FFL did not run it as 1-30 exempt.
May 4, 2017
He contacts us again regarding the issue and to discuss the earliest possible time to come in and redo is DROS for his modern pistol, we tell him no earlier than May 25, 2017 - 31 days after the application to purchase was made. He reiterates that he should not have been rejected and that he had not purchased any modern pistols in the last 31+ days. Our records show that the last time this customer purchased a modern pistol was on September 9, 2016. And this correlates with his story about not purchasing any modern handguns in about 6 months.
We called the DES Hotline and asked for somebody who can let us know why he was rejected. Their first comment was "well you didn't check the 1 in 30 exemption on the modern pistol DROS. We tell them 'why would we? This transaction is NOT 1 in 30 exempt the previous transaction is exempt and was properly checked'
After being placed on hold for 5 minutes they come back on the phone and tell us that he was rejected because the law reads he cant make and application to purchase more than 1 handgun every 30 days and the previous transaction counts as an application to purchase. We disagree and end the conversation.
We now try calling compliance and try to speak with somebody different for clarification, and end up getting the same person. We are told that the law reads they're only allowed to make application to purchase 1 every 30 days and that's that.
What are we missing here? It's our opinion that C&R pistols that are purchased by an 03 License holder with a valid COE is exempt from the 1 in 30laws. How does the previous application of a 1 in 30 exempt transaction effect the eligibility of the application on April 21, 2017.
Furthermore, for example, by their reasoning would somebody who purchases a 1 in 30 exempt handgun on a PPT then purchased a handgun from a dealer be rejected on the 2nd purchase for a 1 in 30 violation? This is essentially what they told us today on the phone. How is the 03 holder with a COE any different? To us based on their reasoning ANY secondary application should be rejected because in their opinion the law states no more than 1 application every 30 days. Would not a PPT, Pawn Redemption or Consignment return be an application in the eyes of the law? Are these now considered by the DOJ to effect the eligibility of future handgun purchases?
We have contacted the customer and told them all this information and have advised them to speak about the matter with a reputable attorney here on Calguns. I will be happy to speak with any attorney who takes up the matter with permission from the applicant should there be a case here and we are in fact correct that this should not have been a 1 in 30 rejection.
April 19, 2017
John Doe customer who is a 03FFL holder and COE holder purchased a C&R eligible pistol, the DROS was checked 1 in 30 exempt (automatically from the DES when you enter in that he is also waiting period exempt) Customer fills out the DROS checks the preview page and signs and thumbprints both the "pending" page and "delivered" page at the same time. NOTE: Approval pages will not be available until 10-24 hour periods after submission and we are required to print those again and keep with the DROS packet. John Doe takes possession of the firearm and goes about his way. (no 4473 required as he is a licensee)
April 21, 2017
Same customer John Doe comes into the store to DROS a modern pistol. We ask him 3 times if he has purchased any modern pistols within the last 30 days and he says no. He DOES NOT purchase firearms anywhere else, according to him, and we have no reason to doubt this. He's a frequent buyer of C&R stuff online and comes here to do the DROS. He completes the application to purchase, 4473, FSC card, ID and proof of residency. He leaves and goes about his way.
April 25, 2017
We received a 1 in 30 violation for the customer. We contacted the customer who verified in fact he has NOT purchased ANY modern pistols for some time now. We take it for what it is and figure he just made a mistake and forgot or possibly DROS'd a C&R elsewhere and that FFL did not run it as 1-30 exempt.
May 4, 2017
He contacts us again regarding the issue and to discuss the earliest possible time to come in and redo is DROS for his modern pistol, we tell him no earlier than May 25, 2017 - 31 days after the application to purchase was made. He reiterates that he should not have been rejected and that he had not purchased any modern pistols in the last 31+ days. Our records show that the last time this customer purchased a modern pistol was on September 9, 2016. And this correlates with his story about not purchasing any modern handguns in about 6 months.
We called the DES Hotline and asked for somebody who can let us know why he was rejected. Their first comment was "well you didn't check the 1 in 30 exemption on the modern pistol DROS. We tell them 'why would we? This transaction is NOT 1 in 30 exempt the previous transaction is exempt and was properly checked'
After being placed on hold for 5 minutes they come back on the phone and tell us that he was rejected because the law reads he cant make and application to purchase more than 1 handgun every 30 days and the previous transaction counts as an application to purchase. We disagree and end the conversation.
We now try calling compliance and try to speak with somebody different for clarification, and end up getting the same person. We are told that the law reads they're only allowed to make application to purchase 1 every 30 days and that's that.
What are we missing here? It's our opinion that C&R pistols that are purchased by an 03 License holder with a valid COE is exempt from the 1 in 30laws. How does the previous application of a 1 in 30 exempt transaction effect the eligibility of the application on April 21, 2017.
Furthermore, for example, by their reasoning would somebody who purchases a 1 in 30 exempt handgun on a PPT then purchased a handgun from a dealer be rejected on the 2nd purchase for a 1 in 30 violation? This is essentially what they told us today on the phone. How is the 03 holder with a COE any different? To us based on their reasoning ANY secondary application should be rejected because in their opinion the law states no more than 1 application every 30 days. Would not a PPT, Pawn Redemption or Consignment return be an application in the eyes of the law? Are these now considered by the DOJ to effect the eligibility of future handgun purchases?
We have contacted the customer and told them all this information and have advised them to speak about the matter with a reputable attorney here on Calguns. I will be happy to speak with any attorney who takes up the matter with permission from the applicant should there be a case here and we are in fact correct that this should not have been a 1 in 30 rejection.
Comment