Question?

[tenpercentfirearms]

Yeah Wes, keep to that concept and use that as an excuse to not submit a DROS for a handgun. You know that a handgun IS a firearm transaction.

I am not sure why you argue with PC. I am not making this up. The PC clearly says a transaction is any number of firearms that are not handguns.

It is no different than leaving buy or purchase out of the magazine ban. These people don't know how to write laws or better yet screw themselves up when they write such complicated laws. It is what it is.

[kemasa]

It is how you are reading it, not the CA PC. It is stating that multiple non-handguns are considered a single transaction, not that handguns are NOT a transaction.

You are correct about the magazine ban, or lack thereof. For others, read CA PC 12020 (a)(2), (b) and (b)(21).

[tenpercentfirearms]

It is how you are reading it, not the CA PC. It is stating that multiple non-handguns are considered a single transaction, not that handguns are NOT a transaction.

You are correct about the magazine ban, or lack thereof. For others, read CA PC 12020 (a)(2), (b) and (b)(21).

I am reading it exactly as it reads.

For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns.

Cut all of the middle stuff out if it makes it easier.

For purposes of this subdivision, a "transaction" means a single sale of any number of firearms that are not handguns.

Now go put in there loan or transfer instead of sale and the meaning is still the same. A transaction is a single sale of any number of firearms that are not handguns. Handguns are not included in a "transaction", therefore the requirement that "one firearm transaction shall be reported on each record of sale document" means you can do multiple sales of handguns per DROS. Now the DROS doesn't allow this and you cannot sell more than one handgun in 30 days to a single buyer (unless exempt), so really you can only do one handgun per DROS. However, this little SNAFU on the PCs part does mean that if you have a handgun DROS, it is not limited to a handgun purchase only. Since the handgun DROS does not meet the definition of a "transaction", then it doesn't count as a single sale. So when you piggy back long guns onto it, only the long guns count as the single sale, but of any number of long guns, per that DROS.

It is what it is.

[kemasa]

You don't even believe that. It does not say the only definition for a transaction nor does it say that a handgun is not a transaction. You can ignore the rest of the PC which talks about firearm transactions and which include handguns.

It also does not say that "single" is defined by what the Federal considers a firearm transaction either, but you seem to love to try that one.

I am not sure of why you would say such things, but personally I think it reflects poorly on you and your reading ability.

[tenpercentfirearms]

You don't even believe that. It does not say the only definition for a transaction nor does it say that a handgun is not a transaction. You can ignore the rest of the PC which talks about firearm transactions and which include handguns.

Actually, it does say both of those things.

(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.

So are you saying that other parts of the PC state what a handgun transaction are or how many handgun transactions you can include on one DROS? Well please share that information with us. And we know 12076 talks about fees, but fees are not how many guns you can put on a transaction.

It also does not say that "single" is defined by what the Federal considers a firearm transaction either, but you seem to love to try that one.

Defining single is pretty simple. The question is how long does a single transaction last? Of course you should know that, but you are too busy questioning my reading skills.

I am not sure of why you would say such things, but personally I think it reflects poorly on you and your reading ability.

Ah, when you don't have a leg to piss on, attack my reading ability, which clearly is at a higher level than yours in this thread.

In typical kemasa style, you still don't get it, but you think you do. And the only reason you think you do is because your masters want you to get it and you can't fathom questioning them.

Someday we will get you out of your chains and onto free soil. Then you will clearly see that I am correct on this.

However, it is all pointless because even though I am correct, I still don't run long guns on handgun DROSes...anymore.

[kemasa]

Please point out where it says "a handgun is not a firearm transaction".

Yes, other sections do talk about what firearm transactions are, you know that, or should.

Well, you won't accept the definition of "single" in the dictionary, so nothing that I will say will make any difference. One the DROS is submitted, the concept of single is over since the deal was done, if you add to it, then you are changing it and it is an additional sale. When you have to resort to try to what the Feds consider a transaction is, it shows that you can't understand the word "single".

Yeah, you love to make the personal attacks. I stand by my statement that your claims reflect poorly on you, but you have to resort to your absurd and baseless claims of my having a "master", false claims that I don't get it, then you have to add the claims of chains and other such garbage, which also reflects very poorly on you and your character.

So is it because your "master" won't let you add long guns on handguns DROS? It seems that your partner has more sense than you do and you can't convince her that your reading is correct. Perhaps that is why you feel the need to attack me when I call you on it.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Please point out where it says "a handgun is not a firearm transaction".

Please point out where it says, "a handgun is a firearm transaction". Oh wait it doesn't. It says,

(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.

Handguns do not meet the definition of a transaction in this subdivision.

Yes, other sections do talk about what firearm transactions are, you know that, or should.

Really. Do any of them deal with how many guns you can add to the register? Please post them up. The issue is can you add long guns onto a handgun DROS and the issue is can you add new long guns onto an existing DROS. Talks about fees are not relevant. So please show us where adding long guns onto a handgun DROS or adding new long guns onto a 4473 (since DROS really isn't limited) is prohibited. We know you can't.

Well, you won't accept the definition of "single" in the dictionary, so nothing that I will say will make any difference. One the DROS is submitted, the concept of single is over since the deal was done, if you add to it, then you are changing it and it is an additional sale. When you have to resort to try to what the Feds consider a transaction is, it shows that you can't understand the word "single".

Sure I accept single. My single sales are not over until the customer picks up the firearms, I print out the sales receipt, and I sign the 4473. That is a single sale. Single sales do not have a defined length of time. The only thing that is defined state wise is a customer must pick up within 30 days. That is it.

Yeah, you love to make the personal attacks. I stand by my statement that your claims reflect poorly on you, but you have to resort to your absurd and baseless claims of my having a "master", false claims that I don't get it, then you have to add the claims of chains and other such garbage, which also reflects very poorly on you and your character.

You are such a hypocrite. You are the first to always cry about personal attacks right after you make them. The facts remain that handguns are not a firearms transaction. You refuse to accept that because your DOJ masters told you otherwise. You won't take a logical position contrary to the authority figures in your life. Throw off your chains already!

So is it because your "master" won't let you add long guns on handguns DROS? It seems that your partner has more sense than you do and you can't convince her that your reading is correct. Perhaps that is why you feel the need to attack me when I call you on it.

Again, my partner doesn't want to take the risk on a $25 DROS. She is my partner and entitled to her opinion. Like you, she feels comfort in having the weight of oppression on her shoulders. It is a process. I am working on her. I would rather get her to feel comfortable selling Saiga shotguns and making money than saving a customer $25 with no profit to us. It is a trade.

You pick and choose your battles. There is no need for me to fight her over a $25 savings to my customer. So although we all know it is perfectly legal, we choose not to risk it. No big deal on my part.

And I am still waiting for the DOJ to come back and check 4473 #13509.

And that is the funny thing. It if it was so illegal, why wouldn't they come bust me? Why wouldn't they bust the many dealers all across the state that do it? Why would my ATF auditor say they see dealers doing it quite frequently?

That really is the part that cracks me up the most. Kemasa and his doom and gloom predictions that have never come true. Again, a fear of your keeper is strong around here.

[kemasa]

Wes, go do your homework and read the CA PC and you will find where it talks about handgun transactions. You don't want to listen, so I am not going to spoon feed you. Read the sections regarding reporting handgun transactions and non-handgun transactions. Seek and you will find.

You can not add long guns to a handgun DROS and it is not a single sale, loan or transfer if the two events happen at different times. There is also a requirement that there be a 10 day waiting period, which when you add the second firearm, you would have to wait 10 days after that. Read the CA PC and you will find what you are seeking, but I know you won't listen.

Wes, your claims of my having DOJ masters is a complete lie, so do you know what that makes you? Your others statements are also false, which only serves to confirm that you are a liar. You don't know anything about me, so your claims are baseless as well. I have no chains, but you have to resort to such stupid statements because you have nothing else. It makes you look bad in my opinion. Perhaps your playground friends are impressed, but I doubt that most other are.

Yes, if people don't agree with you then it must be due to feeling "comfort in having the weight of oppression". Instead of just accepting different views, you have to personally attack the person and make false claims. Yes, that shows your character.

No, "we" call don't know that it is perfectly legal because it isn't due to the problem with the word "single" and the requirement to report each firearm transaction, which a handgun and a long gun can not be part of the same single firearm transaction.

It is hard to prove what you did, which is why you have not been busted for it, but sooner or later you will. What is funny to me is your "logic" in which you state that because you have not been busted with it so far, then there is no chance that you will get caught in the future.

Wes, your statements of "keeper" and "master" are so pathetic. Grow up.
I stated a fact that your statements reflect poorly on you, then you resort to personal attacks. You don't get or understand that though.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Wes, go do your homework and read the CA PC and you will find where it talks about handgun transactions. You don't want to listen, so I am not going to spoon feed you. Read the sections regarding reporting handgun transactions and non-handgun transactions. Seek and you will find.

I already did my research, it says nothing about it. It says that a transaction is a sale of any number of firearms that are not handguns. Handguns are not a transaction. If you submit a NICS check (aka DROS) for a handgun, that same NICS check (DROS) can be used for long guns. It is that simple.

You can not add long guns to a handgun DROS and it is not a single sale, loan or transfer if the two events happen at different times. There is also a requirement that there be a 10 day waiting period, which when you add the second firearm, you would have to wait 10 days after that. Read the CA PC and you will find what you are seeking, but I know you won't listen.

You can and people do it all of the time. Cite a single case where the DOJ has stopped someone through loss of license or prosecution. [crickets]

Wes, your claims of my having DOJ masters is a complete lie, so do you know what that makes you? Your others statements are also false, which only serves to confirm that you are a liar. You don't know anything about me, so your claims are baseless as well. I have no chains, but you have to resort to such stupid statements because you have nothing else. It makes you look bad in my opinion. Perhaps your playground friends are impressed, but I doubt that most other are.

How can it be a lie when it is my opinion. Oh wait, literally think you are in chains don't you? This link might help you. http://specialed.about.com/od/literacy/a/figurative.htm

Yes, if people don't agree with you then it must be due to feeling "comfort in having the weight of oppression". Instead of just accepting different views, you have to personally attack the person and make false claims. Yes, that shows your character.

Right, you are judging my character for judging your character? That makes sense.

No, "we" call don't know that it is perfectly legal because it isn't due to the problem with the word "single" and the requirement to report each firearm transaction, which a handgun and a long gun can not be part of the same single firearm transaction.

Yet they can be part of the same single firearm transaction as a transaction involves any number of firearms that are not handguns. Handguns are not a single transaction because they are not a transaction. I am not sure why you can't understand that. The oppressive hand of your masters must be crushing your brain!

It is hard to prove what you did, which is why you have not been busted for it, but sooner or later you will. What is funny to me is your "logic" in which you state that because you have not been busted with it so far, then there is no chance that you will get caught in the future.

Actually I thought that was the whole reason you wanted me to publicly post a the 4473 number was so the DOJ could come check it out and bust me. Wouldn't that make it fairly easy? I have to laugh because I told you no one cared, I told you posting that number would prove nothing, and you still wanted the number. I gave the whole world the number and just as I predicted, the earth is still spinning. You crack me up.

Wes, your statements of "keeper" and "master" are so pathetic. Grow up.
I stated a fact that your statements reflect poorly on you, then you resort to personal attacks. You don't get or understand that though.

If they were pathetic, you would ignore them. Clearly the thought is resonating inside your head. It must be so loud you can't ignore it.

[kemasa]

Wes, you have failed. The CA PC does talk about handgun transactions. NICS is Federal, not State and is not the DROS and does not apply, so again you fail.

You little cricket statement is foolish and stupid. How about a reverse and asking you to prove that no one has ever been charged? Or better yet, write a letter detailing what you are doing with proof and see what happens. Yeah, we have been there before and you can talk, but that is all it is.

Wes, it is a lie because I am not in chains, either literally or figuratively, so no matter how you look at it, it is a lie.

Wes, you have shown your character by your false comments and your personal attacks.

The oppressive hand of your masters must be crushing your brain!

It is quite clear who's brain, if it is exists at all, has been crushed. You have a serious problem if you think that handguns are not a firearm transaction. Either you are just saying that as a troll, or you believe it, either way it is not good.

Wes, you posted a bogus 4473 transaction number, so it proved nothing.

If they were pathetic, you would ignore them. Clearly the thought is resonating inside your head. It must be so loud you can't ignore it.

Again more lies and it shows that you are delusional as well. The only reason I respond is because I don't want you to try to convince others to break the law and cause problems for them.

You also said that you would get a response from an attorney, but what was that about the crickets?

[jtmkinsd]

Seriously guys, can't you agree to disagree?

[kemasa]

It is one thing to disagree, but quiet another when Wes posts false information and promotes something which is illegal and which he does not even do himself. Then, add the personal attacks regarding chains, masters and all that.

Get Wes to grow up and then there will not be an issue.

[tenpercentfirearms]

I asked everyone at the CAFR meeting if they have ever been written up for adding long guns to a DROS. No one. I asked if anyone had heard about anyone getting written up for doing it. Nothing.

Then I got a mix of responses about how it was legal, wasn't legal, some people do it, some people don't.

I will see if my lawyer wants to take a look at it again for you Ken.

I'll just drop this here because you keep taking my bait and it is getting boring screwing with you. Plus, I like it when we work together.

Sorry I baited you and dragged this out. I'll stop here.

[kemasa]

Wes, so in other words you admit to being a troll.

I can well imagine that few would be written up. It is hard to impossible to prove that it was done unless the person admitted it, but first the DOJ inspector would have to suspect it, which is unlikely. But just because it is not likely nor that many, if any, have been caught, does it mean that it is legal. One of the main issues if the 10 day waiting period requirement after the sale of the firearm. As I stated, you can not legitimately claim that a firearm was sold several days prior than when you added it.

You never responded the last time you said you would get a statement from your lawyer, so it would not be again.

It is best to work together and to give responses which are sure to not get someone in trouble or at least have a good basis under the law. I don't want to see any FFLs to get in trouble due to bad or questionable advise, which is why I respond. You point out the issue with the high capacity magazine law, which I did not believe until I actually looked it up and you were correct on that. I would love to see someone push the issue of CA PC 12020. I have talked to the CA DOJ about it and the answers are funny, if you have a warped sense of humor. They get a bit nasty when you point out the problem and refuse to admit that the law is not what they claim it to be.