FAQ: Shipping

[Mssr. Eleganté]

The CA PC documents what is illegal and/or what must be done. It does not document what is legal.

Exactly!

The requirement that a C&R FFL holder report a C&R purchased out of state and brought into CA is in the CA PC.

Correct! And the requirement that firearms transfers go through a California licensed dealer is also in the PC. It's CPC Section 27545. Why do you claim that C&R FFLs are exempt from CPC 27545 for all C&R long guns. You just keep saying "it's different for C&R FFLs". CPC 2745 says it applies to anybody who is not a California licensed dealer. That means it applies to C&R FFLs too.

I said it changes in 2014 and it will no longer be 5 days, but 30 days, so it is not the same for long guns as it is today for handguns.

You're reading the wrong section of the law. The part you quote has to do with transfers that happen in California. It is for C&R long guns only and requires that the C&R FFL have a COE. The five day requirement that I'm talking about is for C&R handguns purchased while the C&R FFL is outside California. Starting next year it applies to C&R long guns as well, and the reporting requirement is still five days for both handguns and long guns.

CPC 27565.
(a) This section applies in the following circumstances:

(1) A person is licensed as a collector pursuant to Chapter 44 (commencing with Section 921) of Title 18 of the United States Code and the regulations issued pursuant thereto.
(2) The licensed premises of that person are within this state.
(3) The licensed collector acquires, outside of this state, a handgun, and commencing January 1, 2014, any firearm.
(4) The licensed collector takes actual possession of that firearm outside of this state pursuant to the provisions of subsection (j) of Section 923 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as amended by Public Law 104-208, and transports the firearm into this state.
(5) The firearm is a curio or relic, as defined in Section 478.11 of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

(b) Within five days of transporting a firearm into this state under the circumstances described in subdivision (a), the licensed collector shall report the acquisition of that firearm to the department in a format prescribed by the department.

It is legal under Federal law for a person with a C&R FFL to receive any C&R firearm.

But they must also comply with the laws of the State they are in. Having an FFL doesn't just exempt you from State laws, unless a State actually writes the exemption into their laws.

CA requires C&R handguns to go through a dealer.

It's funny that you say that. The only reason California law requires C&R handguns have to go through a dealer is because of CPC 27545 and that section applies to long guns as well. Why do you claim that C&R handguns have to go through a dealer and not C&R long guns? You seem to be claiming that C&R FFLs are exempt from CPC 27545. If that's the case (it's not) then why would you think C&R handguns have to go through a dealer? It doesn't make sense.

There are exemptions in the CA PC for those with a C&R FFL, as an example. So please show me where it is illegal for a person with a C&R FFL to receive a C&R long gun.

Yes, there are all kinds of exemptions in the CPC for people with C&R FFLs. But just because C&R FFLs are exempt from some CPC sections it doesn't make them exempt from all CPC sections.

The code section you quoted does not deal with the issue of the person having a C&R FFL.

The code section that requires firearms transfers in California to go through a California licensed dealer applies to all transactions "Where neither party to the transaction holds a dealer's license issued pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915." C&R FFLs do not hold a dealer's license, so they are subject to this section of the law just like non-licensees are. That means they are restricted to receiving 50+ year old C&R long guns. You seem to be claiming that California C&R FFLs are exempt from this section of the law for some other reason, but you won't post what it is.

Please show me where in the CA PC it allows a person to eat a blueberry muffin in a park on a Sunday.

The law doesn't work that way. The law generally tells you what's illegal to do, not what's legal to do. California law says firearms transfers in California have to go through a California licensed dealer. There is an exemption for C&R long guns that are over 50 years old. Starting next year there is an exemption for C&R long guns of any age, but the receiving party must have a C&R FFL and a COE.

[kemasa]

Exactly!

Correct, but you seem to be missing the point.

Correct! And the requirement that firearms transfers go through a California licensed dealer is also in the PC. It's CPC Section 27545. Why do you claim that C&R FFLs are exempt from CPC 27545 for all C&R long guns. You just keep saying "it's different for C&R FFLs". CPC 2745 says it applies to anybody who is not a California licensed dealer. That means it applies to C&R FFLs too.

Have you looked at all of the exemptions throughout the CA PC?

You're reading the wrong section of the law. The part you quote has to do with transfers that happen in California. It is for C&R long guns only and requires that the C&R FFL have a COE. The five day requirement that I'm talking about is for C&R handguns purchased while the C&R FFL is outside California. Starting next year it applies to C&R long guns as well, and the reporting requirement is still five days for both handguns and long guns.

Really? 27565(3) specifically says a handgun and there is no wording which says that changes in 2014.

Did you read 27966?

But they must also comply with the laws of the State they are in. Having an FFL doesn't just exempt you from State laws, unless a State actually writes the exemption into their laws.

No exemption is needed if it is not prohibited.

It's funny that you say that. The only reason California law requires C&R handguns have to go through a dealer is because of CPC 27545 and that section applies to long guns as well. Why do you claim that C&R handguns have to go through a dealer and not C&R long guns? You seem to be claiming that C&R FFLs are exempt from CPC 27545. If that's the case (it's not) then why would you think C&R handguns have to go through a dealer? It doesn't make sense.

27545? Interesting as there are many exemptions for that. C&R handguns are specifically mentioned, which is why.

Yes, there are all kinds of exemptions in the CPC for people with C&R FFLs. But just because C&R FFLs are exempt from some CPC sections it doesn't make them exempt from all CPC sections.

I never said it did, did I? The question is whether you have gone through all of the CA PC to see what you are claiming is true. It is difficult, to say the least, to follow everything and looking at one CA PC section is not good enough. Perhaps what you saying is correct, but perhaps not.

The code section that requires firearms transfers in California to go through a California licensed dealer applies to all transactions "Where neither party to the transaction holds a dealer's license issued pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915." C&R FFLs do not hold a dealer's license, so they are subject to this section of the law just like non-licensees are. That means they are restricted to receiving 50+ year old C&R long guns. You seem to be claiming that California C&R FFLs are exempt from this section of the law for some other reason, but you won't post what it is.

I have posted it, but you are not listening. There are numerous exemptions, written different ways, which makes it hard to tell what the actual case is. You can't just look at one section and ignore all the exemptions.

The law doesn't work that way. The law generally tells you what's illegal to do, not what's legal to do. California law says firearms transfers in California have to go through a California licensed dealer. There is an exemption for C&R long guns that are over 50 years old. Starting next year there is an exemption for C&R long guns of any age, but the receiving party must have a C&R FFL and a COE.

Exactly. You are pointing to one CA PC section and ignoring all others. A search of "27545" which also has exemptions in the same line (if it is on the next line I did not find it and include it) in the CA PC results in:

26361-26391:any of the exemptions from Section 27545, so long as that handgun is
27500-27590:exemption from Section 27545.
27850-27966:27850. (a) Section 27545 does not apply to a sale, delivery, or
27850-27966:27855. Section 27545 does not apply to the sale, delivery, loan, or
27850-27966:27860. Section 27545 does not apply to the sale, delivery, loan, or
27850-27966:27865. Section 27545 does not apply to sales, deliveries, or
27850-27966:27870. Section 27545 does not apply to the transfer of a firearm,
27850-27966:27875. Section 27545 does not apply to the transfer of a handgun,
27850-27966:27880. Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm
27850-27966:27885. Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm if all
27850-27966:27890. Section 27545 does not apply to the delivery of a firearm to
27850-27966:27895. Section 27545 does not apply to the sale, delivery, or
27850-27966:27900. (a) Section 27545 does not apply to the infrequent sale or
27850-27966:27905. Section 27545 does not apply to the transfer of a firearm if
27850-27966:27910. Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm to a
27850-27966:27915. Section 27545 does not apply to a person who takes title or
27850-27966:27920. Section 27545 does not apply to a person who takes title or
27850-27966:27925. (a) Section 27545 does not apply to a person who takes
27850-27966:27930. Section 27545 does not apply to deliveries, transfers, or
27850-27966:27935. Section 27545 does not apply to the sale, delivery, or
27850-27966:27940. Section 27545 does not apply to the sale, delivery, or
27850-27966:27945. Section 27545 does not apply to or affect the following
27850-27966:27950. Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm, other
27850-27966:27955. Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm if all
27850-27966:27960. (a) Section 27545 does not apply to the loan of a firearm if
27850-27966:Section 27545 does not apply to the sale, loan, or transfer of a
27850-27966:requirements are satisfied, Section 27545 shall not apply to the
28000:28000. A person who is exempt from Section 27545 or is otherwise
32100-32110:applicable exemption to Section 27545.
33850-33895:33895. Section 27545 does not apply to deliveries, transfers, or

So, have you gone through all of the spaghetti of the CA PC to ensure that it is not legal? Remember, if it is not prohibited, it is not illegal.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

...Have you looked at all of the exemptions throughout the CA PC?

Yes. Several of us here have scoured the CPC for years, trying to find an exemption to CPC 27545 for California C&R FFLs. The only one is the exemption for 50+ year old C&R long guns that everybody already knows about. There are exemptions for C&R FFLs who reside outside of California, but not for California C&R FFLs. We would have loved to find another exemption. We looked really, really hard.

Really? 27565(3) specifically says a handgun and there is no wording which says that changes in 2014.

Really? I posted the actual text of 27565(3) in my previous response. Do you see the part where it says it changes in 2014 to include any firearm? Here it is again...

27565(3) The licensed collector acquires, outside of this state, a handgun, and commencing January 1, 2014, any firearm.

Did you read 27966?

Yes. It says that starting in 2014 the 50+ year restriction goes away, but to take advantage of the C&R long gun exemption you will need to have a C&R FFL and a COE. I already explained that a few posts up in this thread. You even quoted part of that post.

No exemption is needed if it is not prohibited.

But it is prohibited by 27545. So an exemption is needed. Right now 50+ year old C&R long guns are exempted. There is no exemption for handguns or newer C&R long guns. Starting next year all C&R long guns are exempted, but only if the receiving party has a C&R FFL and a COE.

27545? Interesting as there are many exemptions for that. C&R handguns are specifically mentioned, which is why.

Yes, there are many exemptions to 27545. But none of them exempt C&R handguns or newer C&R long guns acquired in California by California C&R FFLs.

I never said it did, did I? The question is whether you have gone through all of the CA PC to see what you are claiming is true. It is difficult, to say the least, to follow everything and looking at one CA PC section is not good enough. Perhaps what you saying is correct, but perhaps not.

I have posted it, but you are not listening. There are numerous exemptions, written different ways, which makes it hard to tell what the actual case is. You can't just look at one section and ignore all the exemptions.



Exactly. You are pointing to one CA PC section and ignoring all others. A search of "27545" which also has exemptions in the same line (if it is on the next line I did not find it and include it) in the CA PC results in:



So, have you gone through all of the spaghetti of the CA PC to ensure that it is not legal? Remember, if it is not prohibited, it is not illegal.

You have not posted the exemption. You just posted a huge wall of text and said the exemption might be in there somewhere. And I'm not ignoring anything. I'm just not posting all the other exemptions in this thread because they are not relevant to this thread. You seem to be claiming that there are so many exemptions to CPC 27545 that one of them must support your argument, but you don't know which one it is, so you can't post it, but it's probably there, so I'm probably wrong.

[kemasa]

You seem to be claiming that there are so many exemptions to CPC 27545 that one of them must support your argument, but you don't know which one it is, so you can't post it, but it's probably there, so I'm probably wrong.

Incorrect. I am saying that the CA PC is such a mess it is hard to tell if it is there or not, whether it is banned or not.

28050, which deals with such transfers, is a PPT, which does not apply when the seller is out of state or not a CA resident. Or are you saying that a sale of a firearm from a private seller from out of state is limited to a FFL fee of $10?

27545. Where neither party to the transaction holds a dealer's
license issued pursuant to Sections 26700 to 26915, inclusive, the
parties to the transaction shall complete the sale, loan, or transfer
of that firearm through a licensed firearms dealer pursuant to
Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 28050).

28050. (a) A person shall complete any sale, loan, or transfer of a
firearm through a person licensed pursuant to Sections 26700 to
26915, inclusive, in accordance with this chapter in order to comply
with Section 27545.
(b) The seller or transferor or the person loaning the firearm
shall deliver the firearm to the dealer who shall retain possession
of that firearm.
(c) The dealer shall then deliver the firearm to the purchaser or
transferee or the person being loaned the firearm, if it is not
prohibited, in accordance with Section 27540.
(d) If the dealer cannot legally deliver the firearm to the
purchaser or transferee or the person being loaned the firearm, the
dealer shall forthwith, without waiting for the conclusion of the
waiting period described in Sections 26815 and 27540, return the
firearm to the transferor or seller or the person loaning the
firearm. The dealer shall not return the firearm to the seller or
transferor or the person loaning the firearm when to do so would
constitute a violation of Section 27500, 27505, 27515, 27520, 27525,
27530, or 27535. If the dealer cannot legally return the firearm to
the transferor or seller or the person loaning the firearm, then the
dealer shall forthwith deliver the firearm to the sheriff of the
county or the chief of police or other head of a municipal police
department of any city or city and county, who shall then dispose of
the firearm in the manner provided by Sections 18000, 18005, and
34000.


28055. (a) For a sale, loan, or transfer conducted pursuant to this
chapter, the purchaser or transferee or person being loaned the
firearm may be required by the dealer to pay a fee not to exceed ten
dollars ($10) per firearm.
(b) No other fee may be charged by the dealer for a sale, loan, or
transfer of a firearm conducted pursuant to this chapter, except for
the applicable fees that may be charged pursuant to Sections 23690
and 28300 and Article 3 (commencing with Section 28200) of Chapter 6
and forwarded to the Department of Justice, and the fees set forth in
Section 31650.
(c) The dealer may not charge any additional fees.
(d) Nothing in these provisions shall prevent a dealer from
charging a smaller fee.

Is that what you are saying?

[Mssr. Eleganté]

Incorrect. I am saying that the CA PC is such a mess it is hard to tell if it is there or not, whether it is banned or not.

28050, which deals with such transfers, is a PPT, which does not apply when the seller is out of state or not a CA resident. Or are you saying that a sale of a firearm from a private seller from out of state is limited to a FFL fee of $10?


Is that what you are saying?

According to the CPC, yes. According to the DROS software, no.

What I don't understand is, if you think that C&R FFLs are exempt from 27545 for C&R firearms, why do you think it only applies to C&R long guns? There is no section of the penal code that says only handguns have to go through a California dealer. Can you show the CPC that says only C&R long guns are exempt from 27545? I'm talking about before 2014.

[kemasa]

The first thing that you need to show is that 27545 applies, not that they are exempt from it. If 27545 applies to a firearm being shipped to a FFL from private party, then the max fee is $10, which almost all FFLs are violating. But this is not the only problem since there is a process that must be followed with regards to 28050, which means that a FFL can not accept a firearm from a private party since they can not swipe the ID, nor see the ID or anything else. If this were actually the case, then don't you think that someone at the DOJ would do something about it?

This all leads me to believe that 27545 does not apply in the case of a person shipping a firearm to a FFL and if it does not apply to a person shipping a firearm to a FFL, it might not also apply to a C&R long gun being shipped.

So, can you show me that 27545 applies to a firearm which is being shipped?

[Mssr. Eleganté]

...This all leads me to believe that 27545 does not apply in the case of a person shipping a firearm to a FFL and if it does not apply to a person shipping a firearm to a FFL, it might not also apply to a C&R long gun being shipped.

So, can you show me that 27545 applies to a firearm which is being shipped?

Do you agree that if 27545 doesn't apply to a C&R long gun being shipped then it also doesn't apply to a C&R handgun being shipped?

[kemasa]

27545 seems to apply to PPTs.

[kemasa]

FYI, I called the CA DOJ and they said that C&R long guns, not just those over 50 years old, can go directly to a CA C&R FFL holder.

[MudCamper]

Can a Californian non-FFL ship a C&R long gun to an 03 FFL in another state?

If so, how can you verify that a person is an 03 FFL? The ATF eZCheck does not work for 03 FFLs.

[Mssr. Eleganté]

Can a Californian non-FFL ship a C&R long gun to an 03 FFL in another state?

Yes.

If so, how can you verify that a person is an 03 FFL? The ATF eZCheck does not work for 03 FFLs.

To verify a C&R FFL you have to call the EZ Check phone number...

1-877-560-2435

[MudCamper]

Yes.

To verify a C&R FFL you have to call the EZ Check phone number...

1-877-560-2435

Thanks.

[CifaldiPrecision]

In some cases, yes, such as a return of a firearm for gun smithing work.

I am not arguing that you are correct, I know you are I am just trying to find this stated by the ATF for proof. I am poor in my googlefu can you provide a link showing proof please?

Thanks

[kemasa]

http://www.atf.gov/faq-page/321#t321n12421

Is a licensed gunsmith's return of repaired or customized firearms to their owners subject to the Brady law, including the provision for making background checks on transferees?

No, but it is unlawful to transfer a firearm to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person is a felon or is within any other category of person prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms. (See also question “A firearm is delivered to a licensee by an unlicensed individual for the purpose of repair. Is the return of the repaired firearm subject to the requirements of the Brady law? Would the transfer of a replacement firearm from the licensee to the owner of the damaged firearm be subject to the requirements of the Brady law?”)

[18 U.S.C. 922(d), 27 CFR 478.32(d)]

[CifaldiPrecision]

Thanks.