"Real ID" Update

[kemasa]

Do whatever your lawyers tell you. I'm small and tell folks up front we can't take them yet until DOJ tells us they are good to go.

The ATF can say all they want, but the last bulletin I have from CA DOJ last year says they are no good.

I talked to my CA DOJ inspector and it was clear that it was not acceptable. I have not heard of any change.

I would think it's easy enough for them to publish a bulletin if they agreed with the ATF.

Yes, if they wanted accurate information. They should say one way or another since it is a known issue. It could be acceptable and they would rather harass people.

BTW: Anecdotally --- I remember at a gun show a few years ago I heard someone telling their friend when they were filling out the 4473 -- "Just mark US citizen, they don't check..."

That is a bit of a gamble due to the background check. In that case the risk is on the buyer, which is not as much of a target. The powers that be are more likely to go after a FFL than one buyer.

I would hazard to guess that if a DL is valid (say pre AB60) and no other criminal record DOJ has no idea person is not a citizen. And my guess is if you take an AB60 license DOJ still doesn't know it's an AB60 license. There is a corner case chance an illegal will obtain a firearm if you accept it and they lie on the 4473. That's the risk in my opinion that would likely impact retail stores more.

If the card reader doesn't work, then you need to retain a copy. Then again, I don't think that they know if the reader didn't work. I am not sure if there is a DMV record of the types of licenses, but I sure would not bet that they don't.

It is not a matter of what you can get away with, but what it legal or at least what you have been told what the limits are in this case.

[taperxz]

So as I understand it Turner's IS taking the "Federal Limits Apply" licenses for firearms transactions. An employee called two different locations and they both said they are taking them. Are they in for a world of hurt in their next audit, or do they know something we all don't and are reaping the benefits? We recently received a 1-star Yelp review because we wouldn't perform a PPT with an AB60 license, but Turner's welcomed him with open arms and received a very nice 5-star review in return.

[kemasa]

I do know that at least some people at the CA DOJ and other organizations do read this forum and others.

They will only get on Turner's if they really feel it is unacceptable. They can give the wrong impression to try to convince dealers not to do something, but that does not mean they will go after them.

[taperxz]

I do know that at least some people at the CA DOJ and other organizations do read this forum and others.

They will only get on Turner's if they really feel it is unacceptable. They can give the wrong impression to try to convince dealers not to do something, but that does not mean they will go after them.

You’re probably right. Didn’t DOJ already post a bulletin that we can’t accept the license though?

[kemasa]

Yes, in regards to the AB60 licenses. While the renewal licenses appear to be the same as the AB60 licenses, it is unknown if it really is and whether there is something which marks it as different. It appears to be the same and there is no indication that the answer is different, even with speaking to the CA DOJ.

[shark92651]

Yelp is overrated. Seriously!

That's the truth.

[Nardo1895]

One of the bigger FFLs (and shooting range) in my area has taken the following position on firearms sales to customers with non-Real IDs:

Beginning October 1, 2020, federally compliant identification will be required to board any airplane or enter military bases and other federal facilities. CA citizens and lawful residents may continue to use their non-REAL IDs when purchasing firearms.

As a result, citizens and lawful residents may use non-REAL IDs issued by the DMV when purchasing or transferring firearms. But California firearm dealers must ensure that the provided ID is not an AB 60 license by looking on the back of the license to confirm the AB 60 language is not there.

The language they are referring to on the back of the non-Real ID says:

"This card is not acceptable for official Federal purposes. This license is issued as a license to drive a motor vehicle; it does not establish eligibility for employment. voter registration, or public benefits"

My Real ID has the exact same language on the back minus the first sentence.

The source of this policy is CPRA.

This make perfect sense as a policy, but I have not received any update from DOJ's position of "no Real-ID - no firearm purchase". Have any of you heard from DOJ if this is acceptable to them? Have any of you implemented a similar policy?

[kemasa]

They have not said that a real id is required, just that a license which says "federal limits apply" is not acceptable.

The question is whether a renewed non-real id is different that an ab60 license.

[BONECUTTER]

One of the bigger FFLs (and shooting range) in my area has taken the following position on firearms sales to customers with non-Real IDs:

Beginning October 1, 2020, federally compliant identification will be required to board any airplane or enter military bases and other federal facilities. CA citizens and lawful residents may continue to use their non-REAL IDs when purchasing firearms.

As a result, citizens and lawful residents may use non-REAL IDs issued by the DMV when purchasing or transferring firearms. But California firearm dealers must ensure that the provided ID is not an AB 60 license by looking on the back of the license to confirm the AB 60 language is not there.

The language they are referring to on the back of the non-Real ID says:

"This card is not acceptable for official Federal purposes. This license is issued as a license to drive a motor vehicle; it does not establish eligibility for employment. voter registration, or public benefits"

My Real ID has the exact same language on the back minus the first sentence.

The source of this policy is CPRA.

This make perfect sense as a policy, but I have not received any update from DOJ's position of "no Real-ID - no firearm purchase". Have any of you heard from DOJ if this is acceptable to them? Have any of you implemented a similar policy?

The problem is the DMV told the ATF that there will be 3 ID's
#1 Real ID
#2 Non Real ID that says "Federal Limits Apply" on the front.
#3 AB-60 ID that says "Federal Limits Apply" on the front and "This card is not acceptable for official Federal purposes"on the back"

This is not true all non real ID's AB-60 and normal say "Federal Limits Apply" on the front and "This card is not acceptable for official Federal purposes"on the back"

ATF has decided to accept these ID's due to CA's error but CADOJ still does not.

[BONECUTTER]

The question is whether a renewed non-real id is different that an ab60 license.

They are identical. No way to tell the difference.

[kemasa]

They are identical. No way to tell the difference.

Which makes them unacceptable.

[superdave50]

If you renew without the added docs for real-id, you will receive a dl with the same markings as ab60.

If you have a currently valid dl (issued before Jan 2018) it carries neither marking, and firearms purchases shouldn't be an issue until you renew.

The powers that be are trying to figure out how to unscrew the pooch for legal citizens using new ab60 marked ids to purchase firearms.

[broadside]

Which makes them unacceptable.

Only by DOJ fiat, not by the letter of the law.

[kemasa]

Only by DOJ fiat, not by the letter of the law.

They don't consider them to be a valid id, which is separate than a drivers license.

[BONECUTTER]

Only by DOJ fiat, not by the letter of the law.

DOJ has bulletins that CA FFL's must acknowledge they read.
Including the one that said do not accept AB-60 licenses.

FFL's not following those bulletins are putting their shop at risk.

Same bulletin system that make dealers stop running 1 in 30 exemptions for modern handguns to those who have a C&R and COE.

We know they are over stepping but staying in business is the priority.