03FFL and COE

[weaselfire]

So 60-90 days for a COE. What would be the time frame for an 03 FFL?

Wonder what would happen if they noticed monthly orders of ammo in the 1-3k rd range. Like the idea of getting an 03 to purchase ammo but also don't need to open myself for possible trouble by ordering a lot.

Oh crap. Now that it's out there, some legislator from San Francisco will introduce a bill...

Jeff

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[userformerlyknownasfitty]

Oh crap. Now that it's out there, some legislator from San Francisco will introduce a bill...

Jeff

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I'm not sure, but doesn't SF ban online ammo orders outright?

[userformerlyknownasfitty]

I really need to get off my a$s and get this paperwork going

[jeremiah12]

You might want to check into the laws since firearms can not be shipped directly to you, although some disagree (and refuse to explain how they are exempt from the CA PC), but it does allow you to be exempt from the waiting period for C&R firearms.

See CA PC 27585 and 27565

Several months ago I explained how the exemption worked for having C&R long guns shipped to the home of people with a FFL03 and COE was in the CA PC and you told me I was wrong.

I will do it again.

27585.
(a) Commencing January 1, 2015, a resident of this state shall not import into this state, bring into this state, or transport into this state, any firearm that he or she purchased or otherwise obtained on or after January 1, 2015, from outside of this state unless he or she first has that firearm delivered to a dealer in this state for delivery to that resident pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 27540 and Article 1 (commencing with Section 26700) and Article 2 (commencing with Section 26800) of Chapter 2.
(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to or affect any of the following:
(1) A licensed collector who is subject to and complies with Section 27565.

I bolded the key point, the wording is a licensed collector who is subject to and complies with section 27565. This is where everybody then looks at section 27565. There is another PC though that exempts some FFL03 from the provisions of section 27565.

ARTICLE 6. Exceptions to the Requirement of Using a Dealer for a Private Party Firearms Transaction [27850 - 27966]

27966.
Commencing January 1, 2014, if all of the following requirements are satisfied, Section 27545 shall not apply to the sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm:
(a) The sale, loan, or transfer is infrequent, as defined in Section 16730.
(b) The firearm is not a handgun.
(c) The firearm is a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations, or its successor.
(d) The person receiving the firearm has a current certificate of eligibility issued pursuant to Section 26710.
(e) The person receiving the firearm is licensed as a collector pursuant to Chapter 44 of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued thereto.
(f) 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.

Read the part I bolded for emphasis and I will repeat it here: Commencing January 1, 2014, if all of the following requirements are satisfied, Section 27545 shall not apply to the sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm

So section 27966 provides the legal exemptions from section 27565. That is why in section 27585 their is the peculiar wording of "A licensed collector who is subject to and complies with Section 27565." Not all licensed collectors are subject to section 27565.

I will let you read 27966 yourself for the full details.

The summary is the sale has to be infrequent, not a handgun, the firearm is a C&R, the person receiving it has a COE and FFL03, and within 30 days of receipt, the firearm shall file a report with the DOJ.

So if all this applies, section 27565 does not apply.

This is what exempts people with a FFL03 and COE who are receiving C&R long guns whether from an in-state or out of state source from having to use a FFL01 for the transfer. Notice, section 27966 has no wording about the source of the gun being from either in-state or out-of-state.

So read section 27966 and explain to me how this does not permit one with a FFL03 and COE from buying a C&R long gun and having it legally shipped to the address on the FFL03 without having it to be first delivered to a FFL01. Remember, section 27565 does not apply so does not count in your explanation.

BTW, I got this from a gun attorney because I thought it was not legal and I wanted conformation I was correct. He pointed out section 27966. When I told you that, months ago, you told me I needed a better attorney or you were calling BS. I never responded back because I am confident after my attorney consult and reading the PC myself.

[kemasa]

27565, 27545, all the same, right?

I pointed out why you are wrong. You refused to answer questions.

27966 exempts 27545, but where does it exempt 27565?

You keep ignoring things.

You seem to confuse in state DROS with out of state and the requirement that the collector actually be out of state.

[weaselfire]

San Francisco has some strange laws on lots of stuff, quite possible ammo shipments are already banned.

Unless you're illegal, then you get sanctuary and a college degree with your ammo order.

Okay, bad taste for an out of stater... I apologize.

Jeff

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[Spankyttt]

Applied for both my COE and C&R (FFL03) licenses in April and received the COE after 2 months and still waiting on C&R (going on 3 months). Called the ATF and all they would say was "it shows as being processed. If you haven't received it within two weeks call us back"........

[familyfarm]

27565, 27545, all the same, right?

I pointed out why you are wrong. You refused to answer questions.

27966 exempts 27545, but where does it exempt 27565?

You keep ignoring things.

You seem to confuse in state DROS with out of state and the requirement that the collector actually be out of state.

Here is why professional sellers like the CMP and others beleieve that 27565 does not apply to the scenario we are talking about- which is a CnR long gun being purchased out of state (not in person) and mailed to a CA FFL03/COE holder.

27565 is very clear about what situation it applies to and it is not this one. It applies only when the collector "takes actual possession" and "transports it" into CA. So if we drive to Reno and buy a Mosin then 27565 is applicable. If not bringing it back yourself then 27545 applies. These sections artived in the PC together in 2014 so i doubt that 27565 completely supercedes 27545. If you beleive it does, then please exolain what situation is governed by 27545? Is it a zombie law? Just sits there without meaning?

Its an amportant topic for all of us so deserves discussion and education. I am open to learning more and just sharing what i beleive at present as i try to comply with the arcane laws.

[K001]

No notification to or sign off from LE to get a COE. Turnaround 30 - 90 days.

ATF can not come unannounced to your home for inspection just because you have 03FFL, can only request to see your book and that can be done offsite.

Fairly certain it was a requirement to notify my local LE/Sheriff, within a certain time frame, when originally obtaining my 03/COE.

[ugimports]

Fairly certain it was a requirement to notify my local LE/Sheriff, within a certain time frame, when originally obtaining my 03/COE.

Notification yes (copy of app I believe), but sign off not required.

[kemasa]

Here is why professional sellers like the CMP and others beleieve that 27565 does not apply to the scenario we are talking about- which is a CnR long gun being purchased out of state (not in person) and mailed to a CA FFL03/COE holder.

27565 is very clear about what situation it applies to and it is not this one. It applies only when the collector "takes actual possession" and "transports it" into CA. So if we drive to Reno and buy a Mosin then 27565 is applicable. If not bringing it back yourself then 27545 applies. These sections artived in the PC together in 2014 so i doubt that 27565 completely supercedes 27545. If you beleive it does, then please exolain what situation is governed by 27545? Is it a zombie law? Just sits there without meaning?

Its an amportant topic for all of us so deserves discussion and education. I am open to learning more and just sharing what i beleive at present as i try to comply with the arcane laws.

27565 is how you can be exempt from 27585. Shipped firearms don't apply since the person has to take actual possession out of state. So you have to find an exemption for 27585. It is quoted above.

You should agree that handguns have to go through a FFL, well, the change was made to apply to all.

So explain how you get around 27585.

The other applies to in-state.

[kemasa]

ARTICLE 6. Exceptions to the Requirement of Using a Dealer for a Private Party Firearms Transaction [27850 - 27966]

27966.
Commencing January 1, 2014, if all of the following requirements are satisfied, Section 27545 shall not apply to the sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm:

This is the funny part. Article 6, 27966 is an exception to the requirement of using a dealer for a PPT. Quite clearly an interstate sale is not a PPT, yet some try to use that. Plus it mentions 27545, not 27565 or 27585. 27565 does not matter because that is the exemption for 27585 where possession is actually acquired from out of state, so you need to find a real exemption to 27585 when the firearm is being shipped into CA, not other laws when it is being transfered intrastate.

[SkyHawk]

Fairly certain it was a requirement to notify my local LE/Sheriff, within a certain time frame, when originally obtaining my 03/COE.

Yes, you have to notify by sending a copy of your 03 FFL app to the CLEO, but you do not need CLEO sign off or approval. OP was asking about sign off and approval.

[familyfarm]

This is the funny part. Article 6, 27966 is an exception to the requirement of using a dealer for a PPT. Quite clearly an interstate sale is not a PPT, yet some try to use that. Plus it mentions 27545, not 27565 or 27585. 27565 does not matter because that is the exemption for 27585 where possession is actually acquired from out of state, so you need to find a real exemption to 27585 when the firearm is being shipped into CA, not other laws when it is being transferred intrastate.

Actually a number of the other sections of Section 6 do cover interstate transfers and non-private parties so why would 27966 not cover them? The title of Section 6 is NOT "Private Party Transfers (PPT)" but rather " Exceptions to the Requirement of Using a Dealer for a Private Party Firearms Transactions."

This (to someone like me of common intelligence) says it is a list of exceptions to the need to use a dealer to transfer firearms from an out of state private party (Gunbroker seller for instance) and me here in CA. Here are a few of the interstate transactions contemplated under Section 6. I think we can agree that many of these are not at all PPT...

27855: " Section 27545 does not apply to the sale, delivery, loan, or transfer of a firearm made by an authorized law enforcement representative of a city, county, city and county, or state, or of the federal government, to any public or private nonprofit historical society..."

27930: "(d) Subdivision (a) of Section 27585 does not apply to a person who imports a firearm into this state, brings a firearm into this state, or transports a firearm into this state if all of the following requirements are met:..."

I will add that I am not entrenched in this position and appreciate all the contributions Kemesa makes to our community. I am NOT trying to turn this into the usual CalGuns mud-wrestle. But I am trying to learn what our laws really say and why there is such variation in practice by seemingly sophisticated sellers like the CMP (which is a private party, not an FFL). As my new favorite quote reads:

"The California matrix of gun control laws is among the harshest in the nation and are filled with criminal law traps for people of common intelligence who desire to obey the law." - U.S. District Judge Roger T. Benitez

[SkyHawk]

The assembly version of the bill (AB-1609) that created PC27585 had a specific exemption for PC27966 imports. It was removed in the Senate and then passed without that exemption, which would have been PC27585(b)(6).

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB1609

Here is the Assembly version:





And the Senate version where it was struck out:




Worth pondering. They had an exemption in there for C&R imports that did not involve taking possession physically out of state (27966), then they removed it and left only the exemption that requires C&R to be brought in physically by the licensee (27565).

So did they remove it because they thought it was superfluous/duplicitous, or did they remove it because they did not want to allow it? It would take something like meeting minutes, transcripts or similar for us to know...