Handgun Set

[condor]

I'm fairly certain where this will go, but just for conversations sake. Say someone has a matched pair of handguns, and were originally marketed and sold as a set, consecutive serial #'s etc, and wants to sell them in California.... Even though the value comes from them being a set would we still have to buy both of them and let the second one sit at the dealers for 40 days (10+30) before doing a DROS on it?? I know a PPT would work for the pair, but if buying from out of state, having to wait 40 days would be a PITA....

[taperxz]

I'm fairly certain where this will go, but just for conversations sake. Say someone has a matched pair of handguns, and were originally marketed and sold as a set, consecutive serial #'s etc, and wants to sell them in California.... Even though the value comes from them being a set would we still have to buy both of them and let the second one sit at the dealers for 40 days (10+30) before doing a DROS on it?? I know a PPT would work for the pair, but if buying from out of state, having to wait 40 days would be a PITA....

First of all, it’s not 40 days. It’s 30 days per DROS application and yes you would need to find a dealer willing to hold the second handgun for the extra 30 days. Most won’t mind

Roster still applies.

[condor]

My bad. I always thought it was when you took physical possession of the gun. So I just looked it up and you're right. Here's a copy of the section of AB202 that deals with the date start.

In computing the thirty day period, the date the DROS application is accepted for processing by DOJ shall count as the first day. As a reminder, a DROS application has been accepted for processing by DOJ when a DROS number has been assigned by either the DROS Entry System (DES) point-of-sale device (PSD) or when MCI issues a DROS number over the telephone for an application that has been processed through the DES telephone call center.

HOWEVER.... limiting the number to one every 30 days is still a PITA.... Especially when buying a set.. And a good reason to keep it at 10 like all the others. It's ironic that when doing a PPT the handgun is exempt from the 30 day wait, and the number of guns purchased.... IMHO

[kemasa]

It ends up being 40 days for a person to get both, best case. DROS the first, wait 10 days and pick it up, wait 20 more days and submit the DROS for the second one, wait 10 more days to pick up the second one.

Yes, it is a pain and stupid, but it is the liberal CA government.

[ugimports]

Yes got to wait. I sold a pair of bisleys and it was the situation you described. What's worse about the 1-30 is that I had a customer inherit his father's collection from out of state (father was still alive)...included 20 pistols... so I saw him for 20months..and during that time he couldn't purchase anything "new" from a dealer because he didn't want to disrupt the timeline with me. I didn't mind seeing him for 20 months, but that sure was a PITA for him...

[kemasa]

WOW! That's a worst case scenario... Depending on the travel distance of course, but couldn't his father have done a plain ol' PPT??

Only a CA PPT, which requires both be CA residents.

Or perhaps depending on the number that were not registered, had a local relative or friend do the PPT under their name??

Look what both parties sign on the DROS. It should be what is legal, not what you think you can get away with.

In a lot of cases used guns aren't registered yet, and I think California is more interested on getting them on the books.. Any ideas or limitations on doing a PPT with an out of state seller?? @Kemasa??

Yes, CA wants them listed, but you don't want to violate Federal law. Can't do a CA PPT with an out of state person.

Details deleted

Yes, you got away with violating the law, but you shouldn't post about it in public since you are admitting to a Federal crime, as well as a state crime.

[ugimports]

WOW! That's a worst case scenario... Depending on the travel distance of course...

He lived about 40 miles away, but worked about 3-5 miles away so it wasn't a huge travel issue, but still a chore for him for no good public safety reason...

[ugimports]

I posed the problem here on Calguns probably 4-5 years ago, and that was the advise that I was given at the time. I'm not going to dig thru a ton of posts to find it, but I guess I'm just going to have to be more careful about advise that's handed out in this forum...

I'd be curious if the FFL that provided that advice is still in business :|

ETA: Looks like the post is gone from your history. I was trying to find the thread. I checked everything from 2010-2014.. might have been lost in one of the server crashes I guess.

[ugimports]

Yep... But I'm not going to waste my time trying to find it. You can take it for what it's worth.... Either it's a fabrication, or a related experience. Your choice. One thing I don't appreciate is that in someone's warning that I might have done something wrong, it would have been more of a curtesy to drop me a PM rather than posting their ideas to this thread and perpetuate the problem.

BTW: I'm not writing that I know what did or did not happen. I was more curious to follow the discussion in the thread to see how that conclusion came about.

[kemasa]

One thing I don't appreciate is that in someone's warning that I might have done something wrong, it would have been more of a curtesy to drop me a PM rather than posting their ideas to this thread and perpetuate the problem.

You posted the details and suggested that others might also follow, which is a problem since what you said is illegal. You could have sent a PM and not made it public or you could have refrained from saying that you actually did it.

I removed the details in my response, which then allows you to delete the post to remove the details. I could have quoted your text, which then would mean it would remain unless I also deleted it.

I am not sure as to why you would think any of it was a good idea. It is illegal to transfer a firearm between residents of two different states without going through a FFL, after the fact does not eliminate the problem. Falsely claiming to own a firearm and selling it and stating that all statements are correct on a state form is also obviously a bad idea. It is just common sense, sorry, but that is just reality.

So please tell me why it is not important to correct extremely bad suggestions given should not be called out, especially since it is saying to do something illegal. I can not delete your post. I am sorry that you are upset, but hopefully no one else will do what you suggested. I will also note that you did not delete or edit the post.

[condor]

BTW: I'm not writing that I know what did or did not happen. I was more curious to follow the discussion in the thread to see how that conclusion came about.

I don't think there will ever be a conclusion. More of a comment..followed by a lot of other thoughts and ideas...and questions. That's the way most posts evolve.

[kemasa]

A simple PM suggesting a delete would have sufficed... Unfortunately that's not what you chose to do....

The problem is that others would have still read it and nothing would have been said to let them know that it was not a good idea. Also, even after my response you did not edit the post, but just complained about the response. I should not have to specifically say that it is not a good idea to post it nor to say that you should delete it.

[kemasa]

Post #6, third sentence?

[kemasa]

As said, if the firearms are in CA from a CA seller, then they can be sold together if it is done as a CA PPT. If it is from out of state, it has to be on the certified list or exempt from being on the list or the buyer has to be exempt from the certified list (LEO) and it will have to have the DROS submitted for each one 30 days apart unless the person is exempt from the 1 in 30 (LEO, CFD, etc.).

CA does not care that it was a set.

Please explain why "had a local relative or friend do the PPT under their name" would EVER be a good idea if you want to follow the law? Reading more into a post than is really there? It is really there.

[taperxz]

????? You really have a bad habit of reading more into a post than there really is, don't you?? For your edification this thread is a discussion and not looking for a definitive answer.

Post #1 first line.

I'm fairly certain where this will go, but just for conversations sake. Say someone has a matched pair of handguns, and were originally marketed and sold as a set, consecutive serial #'s etc, and wants to sell them in California....

Its fair to say that Kemasa and i don't always agree. However, he was right in this entire thread.