Pistol + Long gun DROS fee.

[Mac7504]

Does the pistol have to have its own dros? I'm looking to pay only one fee; I know about being able to make multiple long guns at one time, but what about a handgun + long gun?

[EBR Works]

Must be separate DROS for each.

[Mac7504]

Must be separate DROS for each.

Thanks for confirming.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Does the pistol have to have its own dros? I'm looking to pay only one fee; I know about being able to make multiple long guns at one time, but what about a handgun + long gun?

Debatable.

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

Only your dealer can answer the question. We make people do it on two separate DROSes.

[kemasa]

Not really debatable, but some people still try. Each firearm transaction has to be reported. Each handgun is a firearm transaction and any number of non-handguns as part of a single sale, loan or transfer is a firearm transaction. This means that there are two firearm transactions to report, as stupid as it is and it really should not be this way, but it is. You can also confirm this with the CA DOJ.

[Mac7504]

Not really debatable, but some people still try. Each firearm transaction has to be reported. Each handgun is a firearm transaction and any number of non-handguns as part of a single sale, loan or transfer is a firearm transaction. This means that there are two firearm transactions to report, as stupid as it is and it really should not be this way, but it is. You can also confirm this with the CA DOJ.

It seems to be the general consensus that I will have to process two separate DROS fees, I'm sure my local FFL, such as Turners would agree.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Each handgun is a firearm transaction and any number of non-handguns as part of a single sale, loan or transfer is a firearm transaction.

Lies. The penal code states 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.

Handguns are specifically exluded from the definition of a "transaction". So you can only have a single transaction of any number of not handguns. Since a handgun is not considered a transaction, there is no PC 12077(d)(4) [or whatever number the damn penal code is now] restriction on how many handguns you can put on a DROS. Further, if you start a handgun DROS, any number of firearms that are not handguns can be reported on the DROS.

Now, will Turners piggyback them? Of course not. So basically be ready to pay your $25 twice. Most dealers, including myself, are not willing to test this one out for a $25 savings to the customer. Those that are should be commended.

[kemasa]

No Wes, it is not lies. It is just that you can't read the CA PC.

You need to read more of the PC as well as there are other places which talk about the reporting firearm transactions. All that sentence is saying is that multiple non-handguns that are part of a single sale, transfer or loan is considered a single firearm transaction. It does not mean that handguns are not firearm transactions.

[tenpercentfirearms]

No Wes, it is not lies. It is just that you can't read the CA PC.

Then why did I quote it?

You need to read more of the PC as well as there are other places which talk about the reporting firearm transactions.

Really? Where else does it say this? Remember, you made the claim, back it up or your claim will be dismissed as unfounded.

All that sentence is saying is that multiple non-handguns that are part of a single sale, transfer or loan is considered a single firearm transaction. It does not mean that handguns are not firearm transactions.

Not sure where you got that from. It specifically states what a "transaction" means and a handgun is not considered a transaction since it specifically leaves out handguns. I just read it as it is.

It is not our fault the legislators write horrible legislation. We just get to deal with it.

Anyway, there are tons of where we argue this to death. No need to rehash it out. Let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that. There are way too many other things we can better spend our time doing.

We should meet and have a shoot out one of these days. Three gun at Piru? I'll come your way.

[kemasa]

Then why did I quote it?

If you don't know what you did it, how in the world should I know?

Really? Where else does it say this? Remember, you made the claim, back it up or your claim will be dismissed as unfounded.

16550, 11106, 28170

Look at the section where is talks about what needs to be submitted for the two different types of firearm transactions. The numbers have changed to confuse people.

Not sure where you got that from. It specifically states what a "transaction" means and a handgun is not considered a transaction since it specifically leaves out handguns. I just read it as it is.

It is not our fault the legislators write horrible legislation. We just get to deal with it.

Anyway, there are tons of where we argue this to death. No need to rehash it out. Let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that. There are way too many other things we can better spend our time doing.

Yes, there are better things to be doing so please just drop the debatable part so that it does not have to be rehashed again.

We should meet and have a shoot out one of these days. Three gun at Piru? I'll come your way.

Shoot out? Hmmm, I am not sure of what exactly you mean by that. Showdown at high noon? Hollywood bank type of shootout?

I have not been to Piru, although I have heard about the place.

Perhaps a food event would be safer.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Shoot out? Hmmm, I am not sure of what exactly you mean by that. Showdown at high noon? Hollywood bank type of shootout?

I have not been to Piru, although I have heard about the place.

Perhaps a food event would be safer.

Shoot off probably was a better choice of words. We can advertise it. "Ken vs. Wes: The Shoot Off!" You pick a discipline, I pick a discipline and then we finish it with something we both suck at. Winner has the correct definition of a single transaction (I mean who really cares what is says right?).

I have no problems shooting with you. I don't take any of this banter personal. Now if you are saying you might have the urge to shoot me and that is why you would rather eat, then I will eat instead. However, who goes to eat unarmed?

[kemasa]

Such a shoot off would not actually solve the issue, but my terms:

Watermelons at 10 feet. Me on the roof, you on the ground.

No, I don't have the urge to shoot anyone. I bring my arms everywhere with me as they are not detachable :-).

Find more than one attorney who supports your view. That would means something. Finding one attorney would just say something about that attorney :-).

[EBR Works]

Selling tickets to this event?

[kemasa]

Perhaps, what would you pay?

[tenpercentfirearms]

Watermelons at 10 feet. Me on the roof, you on the ground.

You will have to explain this one to me.

No, I don't have the urge to shoot anyone. I bring my arms everywhere with me as they are not detachable :-).

Yeah I like fixed magazine devices too.

Find more than one attorney who supports your view. That would means something. Finding one attorney would just say something about that attorney :-).

Yeah it is on my list of things to do.