Visitor selling handgun to CA resident

[Chewy65]

Does anything prevent the resident of another state, say Ohio, who is visiting CA from selling a CA legal handgun to a CA resident via a PPT? Both would be present at the same time to initiate the transfer at the FFL's place of business.

I have head that the problem is that both the seller and the buyer have to had ID, whether it be a CDL, CID card, or military orders. If that is so, where is the law or regulation to that effect? Thanks.

P.S.: I have started a thread on the How CA Law Applies To/Affects Me forum if anyone cares to look at http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...1#post21891289

[hermosabeach]

Sorry- did not see this was FFL forum- not an FFL
Some dealers might process it the same as an out of state purchase from Gunbroker.

They just accept delivery from the seller in person vs from UPS / fed ex.

I think they still need to generate a # from DOJ to receive the firearm.

PPT is for residents of the same state and the same location

Gun would also need to be legal to buy in CA- roster, AW,etc.



— from ca DOJ—
The purchaser (and seller if the purchaser is denied), must meet the normal firearm purchase and delivery requirements.
The seller would need the same criteria as buyer- firearm safety card, California residency and proof of residency

[Chewy65]

I should clarify that I am aware of law requiring the purchaser/transferee to present acceptable proof of identity, but nothing concerning the seller/transferor. This seems to authorize the AG to promulgate regs:

28060.

The Attorney General shall adopt regulations under this chapter to do all of the following:
(a) Allow the seller or transferor or the person loaning the firearm, and the purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned the firearm, to complete a sale, loan, or transfer through a dealer, and to allow those persons and the dealer to preserve the confidentiality of those records and to comply with the requirements of this chapter and all of the following:
(1) Article 1 (commencing with Section 26700) and Article 2 (commencing with Section 26800) of Chapter 2.
(2) Article 1 (commencing with Section 27500) of Chapter 4.
(3) Article 2 (commencing with Section 28150) of Chapter 6.
(4) Article 3 (commencing with Section 28200) of Chapter 6.
(b) Record sufficient information for purposes of Section 11106 in the instance where a firearm is returned to a personal firearm importer because a sale or transfer of that firearm by the personal firearm importer could not be completed.
(c) Ensure that the register or record of electronic transfer shall state all of the following:
(1) The name and address of the seller or transferor of the firearm or the person loaning the firearm.
(2) Whether or not the person is a personal firearm importer.
(3) Any other information required by Article 2 (commencing with Section 28150) of Chapter 6.
(Amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 745, Sec. 47. (AB 809) Effective January 1, 2012.)

Nothing says that the address must be in California. Even then the enabling statute is not a regulation and the AG would have to follow laws for the adoption of regulations would he not?

[Chewy65]

Sorry- did not see this was FFL forum- not an FFL
Some dealers might process it the same as an out of state purchase from Gunbroker.

They just accept delivery from the seller in person vs from UPS / fed ex.

I think they still need to generate a # from DOJ to receive the firearm.

PPT is for residents of the same state and the same location

Gun would also need to be legal to buy in CA- roster, AW,etc.



— from ca DOJ—
The purchaser (and seller if the purchaser is denied), must meet the normal firearm purchase and delivery requirements.
The seller would need the same criteria as buyer- firearm safety card, California residency and proof of residency

I have considered that but note that the seller only needs to meet normal firearm purchase and delivery requirements IF the purchaser is denied. Assume that the everyone, including the FFL, are comfortable with the gun being turned over to the police if the seller is denied. Also "the normal firearm purchase and delivery requirements" for a resident of Ohio are what must be met; not criteria for a resident of CA. In order to insure that those Ohio laws are met the CA FFL may have to transfer the gun to an Ohio FFL to return it to the purchaser. This is likely most practical if the Ohio seller was only visiting CA at the time and may well be back in Ohio by the time DROS fails. Just thinking of the cuff and not saying this is correct.

As for the roster, if this is being processed as a PPT (if it can be where the seller is not a resident of CA) then the roster does not apply.

[caliguy93]

It is possible.

The FFL has to conduct it as if the firearm was shipped from a private party from out of state. (some ffls require out of state firearms to be shipped from FFL’s only) other FFLs accept it from private parties.

The ffl just needs a copy of the out of state sellers ID.

The ffl then conducts the dros as a dealer sale which in turn would not allow the transfer of an off roster handgun.

So depending on the type of firearm and the FFLs policies, yea it is possible

[ugimports]

I get where chewy is going with this (I read the other thread).. Nobody has been able to point out the Penal Code where it says the seller in a PPT transaction must be a CA resident. At least I haven't seen it yet.

Yes the DOJ system FORCES that.., but it could be an underground regulation much like with the AW regs force photos as a requirement, but that was NEVER required in the penal code and is now being challenged..

I don't think anyone has found the penal code yet which states the seller must be a CA resident in a face to face transaction.

Remember a Mil ID doesn't mean the seller is a CA resident.. You're supposed to get a copy of their station orders, but the reality is there is nothing stopping a NV resident with a MIL ID from doing a transaction other than the fact that CA DOJ might kick back a non CA address.

Come to think of it what about the few people that have a CA ID/DL but the address on it is in Nevada? I wonder what CA DOJ would do about those as for a seller..

I took about an hour searching for penal code and couldn't find it. Some of the more PC knowledgeable folks didn't have it handy either so it's possible it doesn't exist.. which means it may be open to challenge...

I'm all for getting this going as it would allow more off roster stuff into CA...

[Quiet]

IMO...
It is an underground regulations that is implemented via the CA DROS system.
^They programmed it so that the PPT exemption for off-Roster handguns only applies to a person with a valid CA DL or valid CA ID or Mil ID with orders for CA.


AFAIK...
CGF/FPC was looking at filing lawsuit to challenge this, but not sure what the status of that is.

[kemasa]

A military ID with duty orders means that the person is treated as a resident.

Since the DROS requires a CA ID/DL or military ID with duty orders, an out of state resident can't do a CA PPT.

As said, it would be the same as if the person shipped it. You don't need a copy of the ID, just need to see it in order the log the firearm in. If the buyer is denied, there are no requirements to turn it over to the police.

[ugimports]

A military ID with duty orders means that the person is treated as a resident.

Since the DROS requires a CA ID/DL or military ID with duty orders, an out of state resident can't do a CA PPT.

As said, it would be the same as if the person shipped it. You don't need a copy of the ID, just need to see it in order the log the firearm in. If the buyer is denied, there are no requirements to turn it over to the police.

Nobody has found anything in the PC that says the duty orders must be in CA for the seller.

All us FFLs have been forced to say a "CA PPT" means seller is from CA because of limitations in the DROS software. The PC doesn't seem to indicate that so far.

[lanzador49]

Doesn't the transaction have to fall in an exemption category if the firearm is not on the roster (intrafamiliar gift, no consideration)?

[kemasa]

Doesn't the transaction have to fall in an exemption category if the firearm is not on the roster (intrafamiliar gift, no consideration)?

Yes, that was stated in the OP that it was on roster firearm, although not in those words.

[RickD427]

A military ID with duty orders means that the person is treated as a resident.

Since the DROS requires a CA ID/DL or military ID with duty orders, an out of state resident can't do a CA PPT.

As said, it would be the same as if the person shipped it. You don't need a copy of the ID, just need to see it in order the log the firearm in. If the buyer is denied, there are no requirements to turn it over to the police.

Nobody has found anything in the PC that says the duty orders must be in CA for the seller.

All us FFLs have been forced to say a "CA PPT" means seller is from CA because of limitations in the DROS software. The PC doesn't seem to indicate that so far.

Gents,

There are many different forms of "Duty Orders" in the military. The orders must be PCS (Permanent Change of Station - The type of order assigning a person to a duty station) orders to make the person a resident of California for firearms purposes. Other forms of "Duty Orders" are not sufficient.

The requirement is not found in the Penal Code. It's contained in 18 USC 922(a)(5) which requires the seller to be a California resident and 18 USC 921(b) which makes him/her a California resident upon being assigned to a permanent duty station in California.

[kemasa]

Gents,

There are many different forms of "Duty Orders" in the military. The orders must be PCS (Permanent Change of Station - The type of order assigning a person to a duty station) orders to make the person a resident of California for firearms purposes. Other forms of "Duty Orders" are not sufficient.

The requirement is not found in the Penal Code. It's contained in 18 USC 922(a)(5) which requires the seller to be a California resident and 18 USC 921(b) which makes him/her a California resident upon being assigned to a permanent duty station in California.

Long guns have no residency requirements, so that it not in the Federal Code, it is CA which prevents it.

[RickD427]

Long guns have no residency requirements, so that it not in the Federal Code, it is CA which prevents it.

You're correct with regard to Long Guns, but the OP's question was specific to handguns, and that the context of my posting.

[ugimports]

I don't see where 18 USC 922(a)(5) requires the seller to be a CA resident. Out of state private sellers sell to CA residents all the time.

I see this:

Q: May an unlicensed person obtain a firearm from an out-of-State source if the person arranges to obtain the firearm through a licensed dealer in the purchaser’s own State?
A person not licensed under the GCA and not prohibited from acquiring firearms may purchase a firearm from an out-of-State source and obtain the firearm if an arrangement is made with a licensed dealer in the purchaser’s State of residence for the purchaser to obtain the firearm from the dealer.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and 922(b)(3)]

Which seems to indicate it's perfectly legal for a CA resident to purchase a firearm from a private party outside of California.

Other than the DROS software, there is no CA penal code anyone has dug up yet that says the seller must be a CA resident.

SO this goes back to why can't a Mil ID with permanent duty orders for Nevada do a PPT in a California FFL besides the DROS software kicking it back with:

Seller Information: The Zip Code must be a valid California Zip Code.

But where in the Penal code does it say that's required?