Adding Shotgun to DROS

[ugimports]

So I have a customer that just DROS'd yesterday for his single shot exempt AR pistol. He just ordered a shotgun from me today. Do I have to put this on a separate DROS?

And am I correct in the assumption that I can add this to his form 4473 since he will be picking up both at the same time?

Thanks,

[kapache]

Multiple Drossing . Handgun drossing is different from Rifles.

[ugimports]

But I am correct in being able to re-use the same 4473, right?

[CHS]

Correct, same 4473.

[Mike's Custom]

As long as the 2nd longgun is added before the first is picked up. Then you can just write in the change to the Firearm Quantity area. There might also be something about it being in stock. Give the DOJ a call tomorrow and get it from them. Always best to get it from the horses mouth...

[tenpercentfirearms]

I believe you can sell long guns with handguns. I go over my reasoning here.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=230841

The question is it worth the $25 to be wrong? It depends on if you want to possibly take the time to fight that the law is poorly worded and no matter what the intent might have been, adding that long gun to that handgun DROS is not prohibited.

[kemasa]

It is a bad idea to give bad advice and you can not add a long gun to a handgun DROS, especially the next day. I have asked 10% to give be the 4473 transaction number to settle this, but so far that request has been ignored. With that info, the CA DOJ could have a nice chat and prove which way it really is.

There is an example of not being able to read when it is claimed that a handgun is not a firearm transaction due to the statement that multiple long guns can be a single firearm transaction (with restrictions).

[CHS]

It is a bad idea to give bad advice and you can not add a long gun to a handgun DROS, especially the next day. I have asked 10% to give be the 4473 transaction number to settle this, but so far that request has been ignored. With that info, the CA DOJ could have a nice chat and prove which way it really is.

There is an example of not being able to read when it is claimed that a handgun is not a firearm transaction due to the statement that multiple long guns can be a single firearm transaction (with restrictions).

Kemasa, I find it very hard to believe that you're actually an FFL with how ignorant you have shown yourself to be after reading the thread that Wes has linked to.

The DOJ knows nothing about 4473 transaction numbers. Those are kept at the FFL's premises and have nothing to do with the DROS submission.

But you're an FFL, you should know that.... Right?

[kemasa]

Wes claims that a handgun is not a firearm transaction, how much more do you need to say about that?

Your statements about the 4473 shows that you don't know how things work. The CA DOJ knows about 4473s and they do have something to do with the DROS submission or lack thereof. It is easier for a CA DOJ inspection to be looking for a specific 4473 rather than a DROS submission. The 4473 has all the information about the transaction, whereas the DROS only have is for a specific firearm or for multiple longguns. If you look at just the DROS submission for a handgun, you will not see that a long gun was added to it, but if you look at the 4473, you will see that a long gun was transferred, but that there was no additional DROS for it.

Do you really think that the CA DOJ never looks at the 4473s when they do an inspection?

So, I am waiting for the apology, which I am sure I will not get.

[Mike's Custom]

the 4473 is a Federal document and I have never had a CADOJ inspection that asked for a 4473. In fact, I have never had a BATFE agent ask for a DROS. A 4473 can contain both long guns and hand guns. I find it easier to do seperate 4473s for longuns and handguns so the DROS goes with each 4473 form. The state has no jurisdiction over a 4473 or the feds over a DROS. If the state DOJ does find something wrong that could be a federal violation they will report it to the BATFE but they can do nothing about it and same goes for the feds.

Way back when the state started using the computes for registration/background checks the DOJ had some seminars. We, dealers present, were told that you could ADD long guns to the DROS after the DROS was submitted by crossing out the number of longguns and entering the new number. This could be done as long as the original longgun/s had not been picked up. This time continued to the end of the 30 day period as long as they had NOT been picked up. Back when we had to use the books we could send in an amended form with added longguns as long as the original longgun had not been picked up by the purchaser. So this allowed for adding longguns to the DROS. We were told that since the longgun DROS was a background check the number of longguns didn't really matter as long as they were all picked up at the same time and before the end of the 30 days.

[halifax]

...Way back when the state started using the computes for registration/background checks the DOJ had some seminars. We, dealers present, were told that you could ADD long guns to the DROS after the DROS was submitted by crossing out the number of longguns and entering the new number. This could be done as long as the original longgun/s had not been picked up. This time continued to the end of the 30 day period as long as they had NOT been picked up. Back when we had to use the books we could send in an amended form with added longguns as long as the original longgun had not been picked up by the purchaser. So this allowed for adding longguns to the DROS. We were told that since the longgun DROS was a background check the number of longguns didn't really matter as long as they were all picked up at the same time and before the end of the 30 days.

And that is the way it should be. The original DROS code has no verbage as to the correct number of longguns being mandatory information. It's about the buyer's background not keeping statistics for the state.

[tenpercentfirearms]

It is a bad idea to give bad advice and you can not add a long gun to a handgun DROS, especially the next day. I have asked 10% to give be the 4473 transaction number to settle this, but so far that request has been ignored. With that info, the CA DOJ could have a nice chat and prove which way it really is.

There is an example of not being able to read when it is claimed that a handgun is not a firearm transaction due to the statement that multiple long guns can be a single firearm transaction (with restrictions).

Kemasa, your reasoning is clearly flawed. I could make up a 4473 number and that would squash your argument. I could give a legit 4473 number and that too would squash your argument. In both cases, it has nothing to do with the reasoning behind your argument.

When you are out of ammunition to use, you go off on tangents. A 4473 number has nothing to do with this debate. Get back on track.

You are clearly scared of your DOJ masters. We know they must surely read this forum. Why haven't they called me yet? I have talked to one of their field agents about this, why didn't that send up some red flags?

The reason is they don't care! They can clearly see my case here and they know I have a defense. In the grand scheme of things are we skipping back ground checks? Are we giving guns to prohibited persons? Are we doing anything illegal? No we are not. They know it, we know it, you don't.

Wes claims that a handgun is not a firearm transaction, how much more do you need to say about that?

Ah the classic one liner. Actually the Penal Code states that for the purposes of Section 12077(d)(4) "One firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document. For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns." A single sale is a transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns. Therefore handguns are not a transaction. Those aren't my words, that is penal code. Obviously if I had written the penal code I would have been more clear. Sorry kemasa, you are still on the losing end and your little hatchet jobs don't work.

Way back when the state started using the computes for registration/background checks the DOJ had some seminars. We, dealers present, were told that you could ADD long guns to the DROS after the DROS was submitted by crossing out the number of longguns and entering the new number. This could be done as long as the original longgun/s had not been picked up. This time continued to the end of the 30 day period as long as they had NOT been picked up. Back when we had to use the books we could send in an amended form with added longguns as long as the original longgun had not been picked up by the purchaser. So this allowed for adding longguns to the DROS. We were told that since the longgun DROS was a background check the number of longguns didn't really matter as long as they were all picked up at the same time and before the end of the 30 days.

Liar! Show us your 4473 control numbers as proof you aren't just making this up in an effort to bait these new guys into doing something rash.

Again guys, it is only $25 and the customer pays it. If you want to make them start a new one, go for it. If you have read through the thread and you feel you have a defense if they ever question you on it, that is your choice. These types of situations occur so rarely it isn't worth the amount of worry kemasa loses sleep over.

I believe the OP still planned on running a new DROS anyway, he just wanted to attach both DROS to the same 4473. That is an interesting idea as you would have to write down two DROS numbers and dates in 21.A and 21.B.

Again the Feds don't care how many guns you add before the seller signs the 4473, they don't consider the transaction over until the seller signs.

[kemasa]

10%, you clearly don't get it and can't read. It is a joke that you say that handguns are not firearm transactions. As I said before, your quoted section does not say that the only transaction is non-handguns, just that multiple long guns can be considered a single transaction.

Give a valid 4473 transaction number so that can be given to the CA DOJ for your inspection. If you are doing nothing wrong, then you should not fear giving that information.

You claim that I am afraid of my DOJ masters is just stupid, but it shows that you don't really have anything valid to say. They are not my masters and I am not afraid of them either. I don't break the law, even when I think that it should be a different way.

Again, it is not about what the Feds consider, but you don't seem to understand that. You keep repeating that to justify your belief that CA views it the same way or something.

[Bobshouse]

I would not add it, at my shop you would pay the additional DROS fee...to many loose ends. First off, I would never do a "pen and ink" change on a government form. Secondly, the 10 day hold required by California would be compromised...and God help you if your log reflects that you received the added firearm 2 days after you DROSed the first.

[tenpercentfirearms]

...and God help you if your log reflects that you received the added firearm 2 days after you DROSed the first.

I have guns come in on the same day they leave. Numerous dealers start long gun DROS before the firearm arrives.