New Underground Regulation? 1 in 30 C&R+COE

[BONECUTTER]

Dealers be Advised:

Please be advised that the exemption pursuant to Penal Code section 27535, subdivision (b)(9), only permits an individual to purchase more than one handgun every thirty days if that handgun is a curio and relic as defined under federal law.

Thus, if the handgun being purchased is not a curio and relic as defined under federal law, the individual who 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, and has a current certificate of eligibility issued by the Department of Justice pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 26700) of Chapter 2, is subject to the limitation as provided in Penal Code section 27535, subdivision (a).

Dealers shall not process any DROS transaction that violates this provision.

Thoughts?

[ugimports]

i just saw that...lame, but what can be done to challenge? The population this impacts is very low.

[zinfull]

It does not say it applies to only C&R in the regulations. They are more than specific about other places where they do apply to only C&R so this is just a Harris illegal law. Thank you San Fran for all your ****heads.

So in reading the law if it implies C&R then it should also imply to the others that are exempted.

[scootle]

Sigh. Just heard about this today... I wonder what triggered this advisory?

[rbetts]

Here is the Penal code Reference:

27535. (a) No person shall make an application to purchase more
than one handgun within any 30-day period.
(b) Subdivision (a) shall not apply to any of the following:

(9) Any person who 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, and has a current
certificate of eligibility issued by the Department of Justice
pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 26700) of Chapter 2.


So it does not say AND IS ONLY BUYING A C&R firearm ANYWHERE!!!

UNDERGROUND REGULATION What are our next steps on this??

[BONECUTTER]

There was a post a few days ago about a guy DROSing 6 handguns and DOJ calling the dealer. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=928346

The sad part is they bullied the dealer into canceling the 5 other DROS's. If it was really illegal you think they would of just 1 in 30 rejected them and not asked the dealer to cancel.

I'm guessing they received some calls and try to flex their muscles right now.

[ugimports]

There was a post a few days ago about a guy DROSing 6 handguns and DOJ calling the dealer. http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=928346

The sad part is they bullied the dealer into canceling the 5 other DROS's. If it was really illegal you think they would of just 1 in 30 rejected them and not asked the dealer to cancel.

I'm guessing they received some calls and try to flex their muscles right now.

Interesting...they didn't call me when I DROSd 3 handguns to myself using the same FFL03/COE exemption.

I agree if they bullied the dealer than something is fishy if they didn't flag the 1-30 days as the reject for the DROS.

I really don't see why they care.. the only people that are doing this have been vetted by the feds (FFL03) + the DOJ vetted them (COE). What are they really afraid of? Oh, I remember...it's not about safety... it's about gun ban..*sigh*

[ammoparadise]

Oops just made another post about this, should have looked here first. We literally had to cancel an appointment today because of this interpretation. This makes absolutely no sense.

[Librarian]

Also under discussion in Politics and Activism Forum.

[EBR Works]

Oops just made another post about this, should have looked here first. We literally had to cancel an appointment today because of this interpretation. This makes absolutely no sense.

Sadly, it does make perfect sense from the DOJ's perspective. They want to stop as many transfers of SSE guns for the remainder of the year as they can. This will really hurt clients that have more than 8 firearms lined up for transfer with their FFL03/COE. The dealers will suffer lost income and returns of firearms being held for DROS. They want us to feel pain. Luckily, CGF and CAL-FFL are on it, which may give us a few months later in the year to push these through again. Now is the time to donate to CAL-FFL so they can pay for this lawsuit and give some of the pain back! :

https://www.calffl.org/donate/

I just donated $1000. Who will join me? Please donate whatever amount you can!

Please just do it!
.
.
.
.

[scootle]

Sadly, it does make perfect sense from the DOJ's perspective. They want to stop as many transfers of SSE guns for the remainder of the year as they can. This will really hurt clients that have more than 8 firearms lined up for transfer with their FFL03/COE. The dealers will suffer lost income and returns of firearms being held for DROS. They want us to feel pain. Luckily, CGF and CAL-FFL are on it, which may give us a few months later in the year to push these through again.

That's an interesting point... that this is pro-active effort by the DOJ (aka Kamala) to start making life difficult while AB1964 wends its way through the legislative farce of a process.

[munkeeboi]

FML...just when I got my COE, picked up a gun from 10 day hell and 2 guns inbound to my FFL

What I could've had in my safe by the end of May gets delayed to July.

[curvejunkie]

I had a long discussion with DOJ on this. Very heated at times, and I read the PC to the lady. It made no difference. I was told it was a ATF thing, and that was that.

When i asked for the letter from the ATF that they were using as justification on this, which they said they had, dead silence. There was mass confusion on their part on the phone. Six different people, six different answers and arguments. Finally I gave up...

[Ocguy31]

I had a long discussion with DOJ on this. Very heated at times, and I read the PC to the lady. It made no difference. I was told it was a ATF thing, and that was that.

When i asked for the letter from the ATF that they were using as justification on this, which they said they had, dead silence. There was mass confusion on their part on the phone. Six different people, six different answers and arguments. Finally I gave up...

I'm not an FFL, but I can say that generally when you see that kind of confusion/frustration at the Customer Service level of any organization, it is because they aren't confident in their policy, or do not agree with it themselves.

[ugimports]

I had a long discussion with DOJ on this. Very heated at times, and I read the PC to the lady. It made no difference. I was told it was a ATF thing, and that was that.

When i asked for the letter from the ATF that they were using as justification on this, which they said they had, dead silence. There was mass confusion on their part on the phone. Six different people, six different answers and arguments. Finally I gave up...

ATF doesn't give a crap. They have a multiple sales form for a reason