First Time DROS

[echoarms]

As for the OP, I think he needs to do some reading in all that literature that was provided when he got his FFL. These are very basic questions, many of which are answered in the instructions on the back of the 4473.

OP, are you a DOJ certified HSC instructor? If not, you may not deliver handguns to anyone but HSC exempt purchasers. To do the demo, you must be certified.

I have read the federal rules which ironically enough are straightforward. My concerns are the state rules which are much less defined clearly and certainly not in one place.
Yes, I am an instructor.

[tenpercentfirearms]

The is a view expressed by the BATF, at least by certain people, but it has not been put in writing, as required. The law says that the lock has to be provided, but it is not clear as to who has to provide it.

Seems pretty clear to me. If the buyer were to provide it, it would say, "Unless the transferee provided a secure gun storage..." The dealer has to give the lock. Now, it makes no mention of where the dealer gets their locks from, but the dealer must provide. It doesn't say the dealer can't charge, but the dealer must provide.

[kemasa]

Read the whole law, not just talk of the section, and also notice the mention of a safe. So in the case of a PPT in which the lock comes from the seller, the FFL has to throw that out and provide a lock? If not, then the buyer can provide a lock to the FFL and the FFL can give it back.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Read the whole law, not just talk of the section, and also notice the mention of a safe. So in the case of a PPT in which the lock comes from the seller, the FFL has to throw that out and provide a lock? If not, then the buyer can provide a lock to the FFL and the FFL can give it back.

Why would the FFL throw out the lock? A PPT is no different than buying it from a wholesaler. The lock is provided from the source and the dealer is providing a lock. There is nothing about throwing anything out. It simply says that the transferee is provided a lock.

In theory the buyer could give the dealer a lock, but the dealer must provide the buyer a lock. If the buyer provides the lock, then that doesn't appear to be in step with the language of the law.

[kemasa]

Because the FFL has not provided it.

Why do you think that the seller can provide the lock and the FFL can provide the lock, but the buyer can not provide the lock? If the seller provides the lock, then the FFL is not providing the lock, right?

[tenpercentfirearms]

Because the FFL has not provided it.

Why do you think that the seller can provide the lock and the FFL can provide the lock, but the buyer can not provide the lock? If the seller provides the lock, then the FFL is not providing the lock, right?

If the seller provides the lock, how is it different than a factory gun coming with the lock?

This is all semantics. I would not tell any alphabet agency that the buyer provided the lock. I would tell them I provided the lock. That a buyer might have given me a different lock as a donation on the side is none of their business. However, if I were to say they gave me a lock to use for that transaction, then it might get iffy.

Words count when you are CYA. Understand we are talking about the same end result, but I am staying within the law in words and actions.

[kemasa]

If the seller provides the lock, how is it different than a factory gun coming with the lock?

Because if you follow the one view from the BATF, the FFL has not provided it.

Yes, it is all semantic and it should not matter who or how the lock is provided.

[tenpercentfirearms]

Because if you follow the one view from the BATF, the FFL has not provided it.

Can you be more clear? The FFL got the lock from the seller and provided it to the buyer. The FFL got the lock from the wholesaler/manufacturer and provided it to the buyer. They seem the same.

The FFL got the lock from the buyer and provided it to the buyer. It doesn't sound as clean.

Again, who cares. Just us.

[kemasa]

The BATF lawyer which I talked to said that the FFL has to provide the lock, no one else.I am not sure that he would accept the firearm coming with the lock. Also realize that the law mentions a safe as well, which seems to indicate that if the buyer has a safe, then it is acceptable, but that is not the view since it was claimed that the FFL would have to provide the safe.

[Eddy's Shooting Sports]

Jeez guys! I have the highest respect for both of you and your knowledge of gun laws, but talk about the epitome of thread jacking?!?!?




Greg David
Eddy's Shooting Sports
400 Moffett Blvd.,Suite F
Mountain View, CA 94043
(660)969-GUNS

T-F 12-7 W 12-9 Sat 11-5
Closed Sun/Mon

[echoarms]

Seriously. :-)

[echoarms]

BTW, do I fill out safe handle in affidavit for each handgun sold?

[eltee]

BTW, do I fill out safe handle in affidavit for each handgun sold?

You have a spot on the form to insert the DROS # so it is one form per gun since you can only do a single handgun per DROS. I note on the side or the back the type of gun but I do not believe it is a requirement.

[kemasa]

BTW, do I fill out safe handle in affidavit for each handgun sold?

Yes, unless multiple of the exact same model is sold (if the person is exempt from the one gun per 30 days, such as C&R FFL & CA DOJ COE). It is easier to just fill out the form multiple times though.

The exact model has to be used for the safety demo, so if you sold two similar firearms, you would need to do it twice unless it is the same model.

[Pancho Villa's Armory]

I'm a new FFL in SoCal getting ready to do my first handgun sale. Hoping someone can confirm for me the process.

1) Customer pays for gun in my inventory.
2) Fills out 4473 w/ picture ID needed
3) I enter data into DROS system
3a) For handgun, they must have secondary ID and HSC
4) Print DROS, right thumbprint on back
5) Wait 10 days
6) Pick up gun, making sure a lock is included

what do you mean by secondary ID if handgun, like if the ID/CDL is not showing correct home address?