Dros started. Can I add another rifle???

[kemasa]

As was said, there is no limit on the number of long guns purchased. There is a limit on the number of handguns, unless you are exempt (for example. if you have a C&R FFL and CA DOJ COE or that the handgun is transferred as a PPT). If there were two handguns transferred within 30 days and neither was exempt from the 1 in 30, the second one will be rejected.

Also, you can not add a long gun to a handgun DROS (although some will claim otherwise, but all firearm transactions have to be reported and in CA each handgun is a firearm transaction and any number of non-handguns done as a single sale, loan or transfer is consider a single firearm transaction).

[tenpercentfirearms]

Also, you can not add a long gun to a handgun DROS (although some will claim otherwise, but all firearm transactions have to be reported and in CA each handgun is a firearm transaction and any number of non-handguns done as a single sale, loan or transfer is consider a single firearm transaction).

More lies. You can add long guns to a 4473 using a handgun DROS. I personally don't do it at my shop, but others have and not been busted for it. It is up to your dealer and if they don't want to do it, don't sweat them over it.

[kemasa]

Wes, it is not a lie. You are wrong.

There is no issue adding a long gun to a 4473 as that is fine under Federal law. Read the CA PC, not in a warped manner (such as claiming that handguns are not a firearm transaction), and you will see that each firearm transaction must be reported. A firearm transaction is a handgun or any number of non-handguns that are part of a single sale, loan or transfer. So, a handgun and a long gun are two separate firearms transactions and therefore both must be reported on two separate DROS.

This can be confirmed with the CA DOJ. I have even talked to BATF agents and they also understand it, even though it is CA law and they deal with Federal law. Talk to a firearm attorney.

Wes, put up or shutup, get the Cal Guns Foundation to make a legal statement/opinion about this. Promoting illegal activity on this forum is in violation of the rules.

[leelaw]

Cite your claims kemasa

[tenpercentfirearms]

Wes, it is not a lie. You are wrong.

There is no issue adding a long gun to a 4473 as that is fine under Federal law. Read the CA PC, not in a warped manner (such as claiming that handguns are not a firearm transaction), and you will see that each firearm transaction must be reported. A firearm transaction is a handgun or any number of non-handguns that are part of a single sale, loan or transfer. So, a handgun and a long gun are two separate firearms transactions and therefore both must be reported on two separate DROS.

You paraphrased the PC. You did not cite it. Here are the citations which do not state what you just claimed.

12077(d) Where the register is used, the following shall apply:
(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.

Where in that does it say a handgun or any number of non-handguns are part of a single sale? It says a transation is a single sale, loan, or transfer of any number of firearms that are not handguns. Handguns are not included, so they are not a transaction. That is the penal code talking there, not me and not Kemasa.

This can be confirmed with the CA DOJ. I have even talked to BATF agents and they also understand it, even though it is CA law and they deal with Federal law. Talk to a firearm attorney.

We have gone over this. Dana from the CA DOJ has stated it is his opinion that adding a long gun to a handgun is legal. We have hashed out in the penal code that a handgun is not a transaction. My ATF auditors have stated they have seen CA FFLs adding long guns to handgun transactions. So we can play the "so and so said it is...", but obviously we both know people on both sides of the coin.

Wes, put up or shutup, get the Cal Guns Foundation to make a legal statement/opinion about this. Promoting illegal activity on this forum is in violation of the rules.

You put up. Get the Calguns Foundation to state it is illegal. Get the DOJ to put it in writing. You are the one that is so convinced it is wrong, you offer up the proof. It isn't my responsibility to do anything more than I have done in previous threads. I showed my theory and I backed it up. I then stated that my partner doesn't wish to do it so we do not add long guns to handguns. So that is up to the individual dealer to decide what to do.

If you are so correct, prove to me I am wrong. I would have no problem stating the penal code doesn't allow it if that were the case.

For those of you who haven't seen this dog and pony show before, here are some links.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=31037

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

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=240302

I am sure there are more, but for those of you wanting to waste a bunch of your time reading Ken and I banter, go for it. You definitely should be wiser on this subject when you are finished.

[kemasa]

Wes, you are on the Board of the Calguns Foundation, it would be much easier for you to get them to make a statement on the issue.

Read the CA PC, not just the one section. Don't take things out of context.

[CharlesV]

Ok in my case, back to the dates,
Step 1. DROS one handgun and one longgun Aug 1
Step 2. DROS second handgun Sept 1 from the same dealer.

My question was, during August and the above transaction, can i buy another longgun from another dealer?

Secondarily, now reading the posts im totally confused about whether the first dealer will DROS all three in one transaction or separate DROS for each. Is there a consensus on either side of any fence?

[kemasa]

Long guns are not limited, you can buy one every hour if you want to.

You can not DROS all three in one transaction. Two handguns and one long gun require 3 DROS (if you want to follow the law). If you are exempt from the 1 in 30, then you can do two or more handguns, one right after another, which saves some money (ie. C&R FFL & COE).

You mentioned 01-Aug and 01-Sept, that is a month apart. Are you talking about getting them and doing the paperwork all at the same time or what?

[rbetts]

Just saw this thread. Wes, How do you get around the number of firearms stated on the CA DROS when you increase the number of firearms you have put on the 4473 after the original sale date.

DO you cancel the DROS and make your customer wait another 10 days?

Never heard of being able to increase the DROS number without recreating a new DROS.

Please let us know how this works so we can do the same thing ?

[tenpercentfirearms]

Just saw this thread. Wes, How do you get around the number of firearms stated on the CA DROS when you increase the number of firearms you have put on the 4473 after the original sale date.

DO you cancel the DROS and make your customer wait another 10 days?

Never heard of being able to increase the DROS number without recreating a new DROS.

Please let us know how this works so we can do the same thing ?

I simply cross out the number on DROS and write in the number of guns this customer is really getting. Sometimes it is more and sometimes it is less.

I don't write down any number on the 4473 until the sale is complete after the salesperson signs it.

[rbetts]

Does Increasing the number create DOJ Scrutiny? Any case where this has been addressed here before. News to me and in a good way!!

[kemasa]

While Wes claims to do this, you might want to look at the CA PC. Wes is claiming that the sale does not end until the firearms are delivered, but then there is the 10 day waiting period after a sale. If you ask the CA DOJ they say that it is not legal to do it.

While it is hard to get caught doing this, it is not legal to do it based on my reading of the CA PC. There are many things that are done which are not legal and it is rare for the person to get caught, but that does not mean that it is worth the risk.

[tenpercentfirearms]

While Wes claims to do this, you might want to look at the CA PC. Wes is claiming that the sale does not end until the firearms are delivered, but then there is the 10 day waiting period after a sale. If you ask the CA DOJ they say that it is not legal to do it.

While it is hard to get caught doing this, it is not legal to do it based on my reading of the CA PC. There are many things that are done which are not legal and it is rare for the person to get caught, but that does not mean that it is worth the risk.

Definitely read post 20 and the three links before you decide to do this. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...2&postcount=20

The CA DOJ says it is legal to cross out the number of long guns and put a lessor number. I wonder why they won't allow you to put a greater number?

You can also avoid this by simply putting 20 long guns on every DROS and then have every single client decide they want less.

There are a ton of ways to play this dog and pony show. The DOJ knows they don't have a leg to stand on.

[kemasa]

Definitely read post 20 and the three links before you decide to do this. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...2&postcount=20

The CA DOJ says it is legal to cross out the number of long guns and put a lessor number. I wonder why they won't allow you to put a greater number?

Simple, because a person can decide that they don't want a firearm and it is perfectly acceptable to decide to not buy it, just like a person can decide that they don't want to buy any firearm.

You can also avoid this by simply putting 20 long guns on every DROS and then have every single client decide they want less.

Incorrect. You are playing games and there is a reason why this is not acceptable. Do you know why? Either you should or I suspect you do and don't want to admit it.

There are a ton of ways to play this dog and pony show. The DOJ knows they don't have a leg to stand on.

Really? Then get a known firearm attorney to give a legal opinion on this and be done with it. There are several who post on this site and who could post their opinion. If you read the CA PC you will see that the CA DOJ does have a leg to stand on with this. While I think that it is stupid and wrong, that does not change the laws. You should be able to add additional long guns and you should be able to include long guns with a handgun purchase, but the law does not allow that.

You are playing games, such as trying to claim that what the Federal law determines to be a transaction and what is allow makes a difference with respect to CA law, which is not the case. Nor is it the case that the CA BOE and what they claim is a sale, specifically when sales tax is due, applies either. The BOE is a funny case since the sale does not end until the item is delivered, yet there is a 10 day waiting period after the sale of a firearm, so how could that ever work? It is different issues.

You are basically giving false information which could cause a person to have serious problems. Considering your position with the CalGuns Foundation, I have to wonder why you would choose to do this and continue to do this. You have stated that your partner does not agree with some of the things that you promote so you don't do it, yet you continue to promote it for others.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Simple, because a person can decide that they don't want a firearm and it is perfectly acceptable to decide to not buy it, just like a person can decide that they don't want to buy any firearm.

Can't go both ways. If you can cross out a number and put less, you can cross out a number and put more.

Incorrect. You are playing games and there is a reason why this is not acceptable. Do you know why? Either you should or I suspect you do and don't want to admit it.

Why is this not acceptable? Who decided a number should even be on the DROS? Penal Code? I think not.

Really? Then get a known firearm attorney to give a legal opinion on this and be done with it. There are several who post on this site and who could post their opinion. If you read the CA PC you will see that the CA DOJ does have a leg to stand on with this. While I think that it is stupid and wrong, that does not change the laws. You should be able to add additional long guns and you should be able to include long guns with a handgun purchase, but the law does not allow that.

It does or they would have arrested me already.

You are playing games, such as trying to claim that what the Federal law determines to be a transaction and what is allow makes a difference with respect to CA law, which is not the case. Nor is it the case that the CA BOE and what they claim is a sale, specifically when sales tax is due, applies either. The BOE is a funny case since the sale does not end until the item is delivered, yet there is a 10 day waiting period after the sale of a firearm, so how could that ever work? It is different issues.

Federal law defines how long a transaction lasts. State law does not. I thereby follow Federal law and do not violate a non-existent state law. No problem there.

You are basically giving false information which could cause a person to have serious problems. Considering your position with the CalGuns Foundation, I have to wonder why you would choose to do this and continue to do this. You have stated that your partner does not agree with some of the things that you promote so you don't do it, yet you continue to promote it for others.

I do not give out false information. I quote penal code and make logical arguments. I further am clear that in the case of adding long guns to a handgun DROS, my partner doesn't want me to do that. It isn't worth a customer's $25 to argue with her over it. I tell others specifically not to do it either if they don't want to. I am not sure why that bothers you so. It doesn't bother me. It doesn't seem to bother anyone else.

As a board of director on the Calguns Foundation, I evaluate cases and decide what is worthy of our donors support. You have pointed my behavior on this issue to the board and they didn't ask me to stop.

I guess I will run this by a lawyer again and see if he cares this time. Not sure why he would when no one else does including the CA DOJ.