Gun Locks

[ugimports]

...
my point....you never know what someone's interpretation of the law is going to be so always be ready...

Including the DOJ

[kemasa]

Yes, and it is important to realize that even if you do not agree, the interpretation of those who enforce the law are important unless you have the time and money to contest it.

[kemasa]

If they bring a lock, instead of yours, then theirs should be documented and the receipt copied. If they use your lock, walk out of the door and then come back in with your lock, then it was delivered with your lock and that is what should be documented. You can trade locks, as some do.

It does state the requirements if the customer brings the lock, so that needs to be followed if that is what occurs.

As to the end of the sale/transfer, it is not when the date is recorded on the DROS, but when the 4473 is signed and completed, as least in my opinion.

[ugimports]

If they bring a lock, instead of yours, then theirs should be documented and the receipt copied. If they use your lock, walk out of the door and then come back in with your lock, then it was delivered with your lock and that is what should be documented. You can trade locks, as some do.

It does state the requirements if the customer brings the lock, so that needs to be followed if that is what occurs.

As I read it the requirements about the customer bringing the lock are listed in section (e).. my argument (right or wrong) is that I've satisfied section (a) and so section (e) doesn't even have to be considered.

As to the end of the sale/transfer, it is not when the date is recorded on the DROS, but when the 4473 is signed and completed, as least in my opinion.

Understood, but the same applies to my argument in that as long as I insure a lock accompanies the firearm before the completion of the sale/transfer (signage of 4473 in your case, time/dating DROS in my example) then section(a) would be satisfied.

In any case, it's a moot point right now. As you've stated it comes down to how the DOJ will read/enforce the law regardless of what I think since I have no inclination to fight them in court. However, I have inquired with the DOJ on clarification based on the example/argument I gave in this thread. I'm curious as to their response and will post it here along with my original email to them when I receive an answer. In all likeliness it'll be along the lines of what others think and not what I think.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I brought this up before. As ugimports states, the receipt in 30 days thing is so you can be exempt from having to provide a lock. Since I don't want to be exempt, I can just give the customer a lock. It honestly doesn't matter where the lock comes from as the only time it matters is if I want to be exempt. However that is splitting hairs.

My DOJ auditor told me it is best to have the lock you provide on a receipt so you can prove you sold them a lock. Well we all know that locks that come with the customer's firearm won't have a receipt. In that case, on locks that come with the firearm write OEM after the lock make and model number. Original Equipment Manufacture. So that is our new policy. He made no mention of having to type it into the DROS and was more concerned we write OEM.

I floated the lock trade in program and he said he wouldn't try it and he thinks the lawyers would have a field day. He also quoted PC 12077(b) that says I can't start a handgun DROS while the handgun isn't there.

I think the PC is clear. The trade in program would work as if you don't want to be exempt from 12088.1(a), then you don't have to follow 12088.1(d) which means the receipt with 30 days does not apply. All 12088.1(a) says is that it be provided or accompanied by an approved FSD. It does not make any requirements of where those locks are to come from. If you want to accept locks from a customer without a receipt, 12088.1(d) does not mandate the customer provide one for 12088.1(a). It only requires one if you do not want to provide or accompany a lock for 12088.1(a) by becoming exempt using section 12088.1(d).

[halifax]

...
I floated the lock trade in program and he said he wouldn't try it and he thinks the lawyers would have a field day...

Until they get slapped down by real lawyers.

[kemasa]

As I read it the requirements about the customer bringing the lock are listed in section (e).. my argument (right or wrong) is that I've satisfied section (a) and so section (e) doesn't even have to be considered.

You can not just ignore (e) as that applies. You can make it not apply, but you can not ignore it.

[tenpercentfirearms]

You can not just ignore (e) as that applies. You can make it not apply, but you can not ignore it.

You most certainly can ignore (e). If you comply with (a), then there is no need to be exempt in (e). As I stated before, (e) is not mandated nor is it what you must do for (a). (e) is the way to get around (a).

So if you comply with (a), then you can simply ignore (e) since (e) is only a means to ignore (a).

The legislature really wasn't too smart in writing a bunch of penal code. A real lawyer would destroy any attempted DOJ enforcement of (e) as long as the dealer never admitted to trying to get around (a) by complying with (e).

Me: I complied with (a) by making sure the firearm was accompanied by a lock.
DOJ: Did that customer give you that lock?
Me: Yes they did.
DOJ: Did you get a receipt showing the lock was purchased within the last 30 days?
Me: PC 12088.1(a) clearly states that the approved FSD shall be included or accompany the firearm. There is nothing in (a) that requires me to receive a receipt for that lock in order for that customer to use that lock. You are referring to the exemption for PC 12088.1(a) found in PC 12088.1(e), which I did not meet the requirements of because I was not required to because I met the requirements of PC 12088.1(a) and made sure an approved FSD accompanied or was included with the handgun purchase.
DOJ: Damn you! Well damn the legislature for making us waste time on this. I could actually be worried about dealers skipping background checks and selling guns to felons. Instead I get my butt handed to me over some stupid gun lock that no one cares about. FML.

[kemasa]

Cute fantasy, but you are asking for trouble. It is an issue in which they can cause you trouble and while you might win in the end, the cost could be huge in the mean time.

Ever hear back from your attorney? I also noticed that you did not comment on the PC which mentioned the same day for a transaction.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Cute fantasy, but you are asking for trouble. It is an issue in which they can cause you trouble and while you might win in the end, the cost could be huge in the mean time.

Ever hear back from your attorney? I also noticed that you did not comment on the PC which mentioned the same day for a transaction.

Yeah, the same justification you use for everything we bring up. It is better to not piss off your masters. We know.

The attorney still hasn't taken the time yet. I will let you know when he does.

[halifax]

So, the customer brings in a lock to trade with the dealer for another one and the dealer provides a fair trade; therefore, only (a) applies and (e) is irrelevant. That seems as straight forward as it gets to me.

[kemasa]

Halifax, that is the best way to do it without having to deal with a receipt.

10%, I doubt that your attorney will ever take the time. Same old stupid attack with the false claim of masters. You also ignored the transaction on the same day, no response for that?

[ugimports]

So, the customer brings in a lock to trade with the dealer for another one and the dealer provides a fair trade; therefore, only (a) applies and (e) is irrelevant. That seems as straight forward as it gets to me.

I'll probably just do the trade thing now moving forward. Makes things easier.

[tenpercentfirearms]

10%, I doubt that your attorney will ever take the time. Same old stupid attack with the false claim of masters. You also ignored the transaction on the same day, no response for that?

I didn't ignore it. I didn't understand it. Can you post a link to what you are referencing to? Saying "the PC" is kind of a little vague. The Penal Code is kind of big and I didn't see which section you were referring to and you rarely cite what you are referencing to. Not to mention, I honestly don't know what you are talking about. I thought this thread was about locks? Are you still talking about locks or have you bounced over to other sections of the penal code? Again, it is so hard to tell with you.

[JayBeeJay]

UGImports I'm waiting for a gun I ordered that's going to be DROS'd by you guys, but it's been about 10 years since I purchased a firearm and I'm not current with the policies when picking up. What do you I need to bring or do you recommend me to do to make the process go smoothly.