Transfer from deceased person question

[TBX]

Hey Calgunners,

I'm not sure where to ask this question so I thought I'd ask in here. My friend's brother passed away recently. He wants to legally obtain the long guns that his brother owned. He's not sure how to go about this. We were thinking about just filling out the OP LAW form on the DOJ website after my friend gets his FSC.https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/a...orms/oplaw.pdf. However, we thought it was only for interfamilial transfer. Not sure if this will work for a deceased sibling?

Can anyone shine some light on this? Is this something that needs to go through a FFL? I forgot to mention that the little brother doesn't have any kids and there isn't a will left behind.

Thanks!

[kemasa]

The lack of a will could be a problem. The OP law form or another form allows for inheritances, but I think that typically that is if it is listed to go to the person.

[RoundEye]

Technically, the DOJ doesn't care who they registered to, only that they are registered and that they're not stolen.

To my best recollection the OpLaw for interfamilial transfers have to go up down, so two brothers wont work, living or not. There is a thing for inheritance, so that might be your best bet. Where it says firearm origin, just write death or deceased.

If the parents or there are children and OpLaw could be used for either of those, and then if the parents were involved, they could OpLaw to the other child. Another option is whomever is the brother heir could just take possession and PPT to them.

[shootsocal_dave]

OpLaw is the form that should be used in this situation in my opinion. It is used for when the personal who owned the guns is not longer around to do the transfer for lack of better words. Wheather you're the legal executor or just the poor sap taking care of business after someones gone, the guns just get reported that you have them now. They dont get stuck in limbo because the family tree didnt line up right.

[Librarian]

Oplaw does not work for inheritance outside immediate family - brothers don't count. Same law as gifts:

27875.

(a) Section 27545 does not apply to the transfer of a firearm by
gift, bequest, intestate succession, or other means

from one individual to another, if all of the following requirements are met:

(1) The transfer is infrequent, as defined in Section 16730.

(2) The transfer is between members of the same immediate family.
....

After the estate is settled, the estate should PPT the guns to the brother.

[medicdubs96]

Just a side note, not that I disagree with any of the above posts.

A individual and his brother.

Both came from the same sperm donor and vagina/Uterus.

Under any and all definitions= immediate family.

According to CA DOJ Firearms division= Not immediate family

Oh, Ok. WTF.

Treason.

[acespawnshop]

Just a side note, not that I disagree with any of the above posts.

A individual and his brother.

Both came from the same sperm donor and vagina/Uterus.

Under any and all definitions= immediate family.

According to CA DOJ Firearms division= Not immediate family

Oh, Ok. WTF.

Treason.

Going back to the old sang that its the law and it doesn't have to make sense. But Librarian was right exactly how he put it. We should all adhere to his good advice.

[Librarian]

Under any and all definitions= immediate family.

According to CA DOJ Firearms division= Not immediate family

Please assign the blame to the correct object - the California Legislature, which added this definition to the Penal Code: "This part" is "PART 6. CONTROL OF DEADLY WEAPONS [16000 - 34370]"

[medicdubs96]

Please assign the blame to the correct object - the California Legislature, which added this definition to the Penal Code:
"This part" is "PART 6. CONTROL OF DEADLY WEAPONS [16000 - 34370]"

I agree and adhere too. I was just pointing out the nonsense/ idioticy.