Split PPT for off roster handgun

[kemasa]

CA PC 12077

(f) Effective January 1, 2003, the purchaser's name, date of
birth, and driver's license or identification number shall be
obtained electronically from the magnetic strip on the purchaser's
driver's license or identification and shall not be supplied by any
other means except as authorized by the department. This requirement
shall not apply in either of the following cases:
(1) The purchaser's identification consists of a military
identification card.
(2) Due to technical limitations, the magnetic stripe reader is
unable to obtain the required information from the purchaser's
identification. In those circumstances, the firearms dealer shall
obtain a photocopy of the identification as proof of compliance.
(3) In the event that the dealer has reported to the department
that the dealer's equipment has failed, information pursuant to this
subdivision shall be obtained by an alternative method to be
determined by the department.
(g) As used in this section, the following definitions shall
control:
(1) "Purchaser" means the purchaser or transferee of a firearm or
the person being loaned a firearm.
(2) "Purchase" means the purchase, loan, or transfer of a firearm.
(3) "Sale" means the sale, loan, or transfer of a firearm.

You have to try, if it does not work then and only then can you photocopy it instead. If the sale is done at a gun show and you don't have a computer, you can manually enter the information, but then at the time of a pickup you have to swipe the DL/ID and save it to a file.

In this case, you would also need a signed DROS worksheet. Do you really want a signature that you did not see signed???

I think you are too far into the gray area to be acceptable. It is far better to eliminate the whole problem by getting rid of the certified list, at which point none of this is required. Also, do you really think that all the hoops is acceptable for $10? Is it worth the risk for $10 if the DOJ says you can't do it and the law seems to agree?

Also:

12082

(b) The Attorney General shall adopt regulations under this
section to do all of the following:

This means that the regulations adopted are law.

[halifax]

CA PC 12077


You have to try, if it does not work then and only then can you photocopy it instead. If the sale is done at a gun show and you don't have a computer, you can manually enter the information, but then at the time of a pickup you have to swipe the DL/ID and save it to a file.

In this case, you would also need a signed DROS worksheet. Do you really want a signature that you did not see signed???

I think you are too far into the gray area to be acceptable. It is far better to eliminate the whole problem by getting rid of the certified list, at which point none of this is required. Also, do you really think that all the hoops is acceptable for $10? Is it worth the risk for $10 if the DOJ says you can't do it and the law seems to agree?

Wait! Wait! Which FFL gets the $10?

Are the shipping costs violating the $10 MAX?

[kemasa]

Not a problem. Since the law requires that the seller deliver it to the FFL, a remote FFL can not do that, so only the FFL who gets it would be able to get the $10.

The FFL is not charging the shipping fees, so that is not a problem either.

Yeah, a lot for $10.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Yet faxed, photo copied or emailed copies of IDs are taken all the time for individuals shipping firearms for dealer sales...hmmm

The bound book is a federal requirement. What does the federal regulations state about signing firearms into your bound book? Does it say you have to look at an ID when you sign the firearm in? What does it say is sufficient proof of whom you are receiving the firearm from?

Then once you are done answering those questions, explain why the federal definitions of an unrelated topic have anything to do with the specific state penal code requirements of verifying the identities of your buyer and seller in a private party transaction. The state is very clear on what types of ID are acceptable for starting a DROS.

[ke6guj]

In this case, you would also need a signed DROS worksheet. Do you really want a signature that you did not see signed???

what if I have my signature notarized before I send you the signed worksheet?

[kemasa]

Then that is nice proof for the CA DOJ that the person was not there in person and all that involves.

[jtmkinsd]

CA PC 12077

(f) Effective January 1, 2003, the purchaser's name, date of birth, and driver's license or identification number shall be
obtained electronically from the magnetic strip on the purchaser's
driver's license or identification and shall not be supplied by any
other means except as authorized by the department.

Only the purchaser.

You have to try, if it does not work then and only then can you photocopy it instead. If the sale is done at a gun show and you don't have a computer, you can manually enter the information, but then at the time of a pickup you have to swipe the DL/ID and save it to a file.

Only the purchaser.

In this case, you would also need a signed DROS worksheet. Do you really want a signature that you did not see signed???

If it matches the signature on the license? Sure.

I think you are too far into the gray area to be acceptable. It is far better to eliminate the whole problem by getting rid of the certified list, at which point none of this is required. Also, do you really think that all the hoops is acceptable for $10? Is it worth the risk for $10 if the DOJ says you can't do it and the law seems to agree?

Agreed on the hassle...but that wasn't the point of the OP's question...legally, it can be done.

[jtmkinsd]

The bound book is a federal requirement. What does the federal regulations state about signing firearms into your bound book? Does it say you have to look at an ID when you sign the firearm in? What does it say is sufficient proof of whom you are receiving the firearm from?

Then once you are done answering those questions, explain why the federal definitions of an unrelated topic have anything to do with the specific state penal code requirements of verifying the identities of your buyer and seller in a private party transaction. The state is very clear on what types of ID are acceptable for starting a DROS.

I was referring more to any FFL that accepts direct shipments from individuals for transfer. You have no problem accepting a photo copy of any given ID to transfer a firearm to a CA resident and "trust" they are the actual source of the firearm. And this is completely legal. Yet when it comes to PPTs, it's all of a sudden a no go because you have to "verify" who the seller is. I call BS...because nowhere does it state the seller is subject to the same scrutiny as the buyer...only in the case of the buyer being denied is this a problem. And if that happens...the gun gets shipped to an FFL near the buyer.

also, If DOJ accepts the same ID required by ATF for the source of a firearm for a dealer sale, why is it such a stretch to use the same process for an intrastate PPT? Where in 12082 or anywere else does it state the seller is required to physically be at the shop to PPT?

[kemasa]

You still have to get past:

The seller or transferor or the person loaning the
firearm shall deliver the firearm to the dealer who shall retain
possession of that firearm.

While you might want to read that a different way, it says "shall deliver", not "shall have delivered". My reading of this is that the seller has to bring it to the dealer, who retains it, which means it can not be shipped (no split PPT).

You also have to look at the regulations regarding swiping of the seller's ID. You can not just assume that it does not exist.

[jtmkinsd]

You still have to get past:



While you might want to read that a different way, it says "shall deliver", not "shall have delivered". My reading of this is that the seller has to bring it to the dealer, who retains it, which means it can not be shipped (no split PPT).

That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion...but that doesn't make it law. It's no stretch of reason to believe "delivering" a firearm to a dealer can include shipping it to them.

You also have to look at the regulations regarding swiping of the seller's ID. You can not just assume that it does not exist.

Where does it state the seller's ID must be swiped?

[kemasa]

You are also entitled to your opinion, but when it does not match up with what the law says and what the DOJ says, there is a bit of a problem. It is a stretch to claim that deliver to the dealer, with the paperwork requirements, can include having it shipped.

Have you looked at ALL of the regulations? Perhaps that is where you will find it.

[jtmkinsd]

You are also entitled to your opinion, but when it does not match up with what the law says and what the DOJ says, there is a bit of a problem. It is a stretch to claim that deliver to the dealer, with the paperwork requirements, can include having it shipped.

Have you looked at ALL of the regulations? Perhaps that is where you will find it.

I've looked at everything I can find...if you can show me one scrap of text that says the seller's ID must be swiped, I would appreciate it. We can agree to disagree on what "deliver" means.

As for what DOJ says...give them a call, I did. It was seen as legit (for what a phone call to DOJ is worth). If you or they have different information then they should put out a bulletin.

[kemasa]

Get it in writing from them. One person there recently said that a father in another state can transfer a firearm to his son in CA with just filling out the intrafamilial form and not going through a FFL, which is false as Federal law does not allow it.

It would be great if they allowed it, but when I have asked the answer is no. I suspect the same is true for others.