Interstate transfer


PDA






wyofool
July 20, 2009, 03:44 PM
I understand that an interstate transfer of a handgun between non-ffl holders requires the transfer of the handgun to a ffl in the buyers state. My question is does the handgun have to be sent by carrier or can the seller deliver it in person to the ffl to be picked up by the buyer?

If you enjoyed reading about "Interstate transfer" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hightech
July 20, 2009, 03:59 PM
You may deliver the firearms yourself to the receiving FFL.
There is no regulation against it.

If you ship it you must use a common carrier and notify them that it is a firearm.

hightech

wyofool
July 20, 2009, 04:02 PM
Would it be legal for both of us to show up at the ffl together to arrange the transfer?

dirt_j00
July 20, 2009, 04:17 PM
I've done this before.

Seller = MS resident
Buyer = AL resident

Went to a pawn shop (FFL) near the stateline on the AL side, and he transferred them. $15/each

almostfree
July 20, 2009, 04:36 PM
Me too. I'm from Texas but am currently working in Fairbanks, AK. The buyer (AK resident) and I went to to an FFL to do the transfer who insisted we didn't need him and that a FTF between us was legal. I politely told him that I didn't feel it was and that I'd prefer we went ahead with a transfer.

dirt_j00
July 20, 2009, 05:26 PM
Yeah, the FFL I used said he didn't think it was necessary either. ATF says otherwise though.

Oro
July 20, 2009, 06:08 PM
ATF says otherwise though.

Exactly, that was just a poorly informed FFL dealer.

Most FFL's on state borders are familiar with this and do it all the time. No problem.

deadin
July 20, 2009, 06:27 PM
Exactly, that was just a poorly informed FFL dealer.

Just having a FFL doesn't automatically make one an expert.
(Just like having a high post count doesn't make one either.:evil:)

NavyLCDR
July 20, 2009, 06:39 PM
If you ship it you must use a common carrier and notify them that it is a firearm.

If shipping to an FFL, notification is only required by the company's policy, not by Federal law.

Art Eatman
July 20, 2009, 11:51 PM
From a cite in the Intrastate thread that's running:

"ATF 'Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide' (ATF P 5300.4) says:

(B8) May a nonlicensee ship a firearm by common or contract carrier?

A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by a common or contract carrier to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.

In addition, Federal law requires that the carrier be notified that the shipment contains a firearm and prohibits common or contract carriers from requiring or causing any label to be placed on any package indicating that it contains a firearm.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(2)(A), 922(a) (3), 922(a)(5) and 922(e), 27 CFR 478.31 and 478.30]"

So, for Interstate:

1. Nonlicensee can ship to any FFL, anywhere.
2. Carrier must be notified.
3. Carrier must not put a label on the package.

NavyLCDR
July 21, 2009, 01:10 AM
As I stated, Art, there is NO Federal STATUTE that requires a shipper be notified of the shipment of a firearm going to an FFL. It is only company policy. If you would care to post the STATUTE that requires a shipper to be notified of a firearm being shipped to an FFL, I would love to see it. But let me save you some searching:

18 USC 922(e):
(e) It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to deliver or cause to be delivered to any common or contract carrier for transportation or shipment in interstate or foreign commerce, to persons other than licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors, any package or other container in which there is any firearm or ammunition without written notice to the carrier that such firearm or ammunition is being transported or shipped; except that any passenger who owns or legally possesses a firearm or ammunition being transported aboard any common or contract carrier for movement with the passenger in interstate or foreign commerce may deliver said firearm or ammunition into the custody of the pilot, captain, conductor or operator of such common or contract carrier for the duration of the trip without violating any of the provisions of this chapter. No common or contract carrier shall require or cause any label, tag, or other written notice to be placed on the outside of any package, luggage, or other container that such package, luggage, or other container contains a firearm.

Notice the underlined part. WRITTEN notification of a firearm shipment is ONLY required by STATUTE IF the shipment is going to OTHER THAN an FFL. It is NOT required by STATUTE to notify if it is going to an FFL. The ATF FAQ contains an error, the ATF knows the faq contains an error, they have admitted that it contains an error, but they are not going to change it. HOWEVER the ATF FAQ is NOT law and you CANNOT be prosecuted for going against their erroneous FAQ. However, you did get two out of three requirements of the actual STATUTE correct.

M36
July 22, 2009, 09:48 AM
The verbage your looking for is in the statute you listed. The term shipping "to persons other than licensed" is saying that it is unlawfull to ship by common carrier through interstate shipping to someone who is not a licensed dealer, collector etc. The requirement for notification is in the same sentence that says you cannot ship directly to the person your selling to in another state.

The USPS has form 1508 that is filled out and submitted at the time of shipping. Although telling them of the firearm shipment, this is written notice. Im not familiar with FedEx or UPS paperwork.

NavyLCDR
July 22, 2009, 10:13 AM
The verbage is in the statute Navy. It does not have a specific statute per say, but it is covered by what Art listed.

You said two opposing things here M36:

1. The verbage is in the statute Navy.
2. It does not have a specific statute per say

So which is it? It is either in the statute or it is not. Just in case you missed it the first time, it is NOT REQUIRED by any FEDERAL STATUTE to notify a carrier of a shipment of a firearm if that shipment is going to an FFL. I posted the applicable statute.

What Art posted is NOT LAW. It is an ATF faq that the ATF has admitted contains an error.

M36
July 22, 2009, 10:30 AM
Bad post, I made a couple of edits before getting to what is posted now. You happen to catch one that I changed.

You did post the right statute but I question your interpretation. From your interpretation of the statute are you saying that anyone, can ship by any means and is not required to notify the shipper that the box contains a firearm, just because it is going to an licensed dealer?

NavyLCDR
July 22, 2009, 01:24 PM
1. A non-FFL can NOT use the US Post Office to mail a handgun to anyone, that is against post office regulations.

2. Anyone using the US Post Office, whether it be a private party mailing a rifle, or an FFL mailing any firearm, must notify the Post Office of the firearm, that is in the post office regulations - which are CFRs - Code of Federal Regulations.

3. Anyone shipping any firearm by common or contract carrier is NOT REQUIRED by FEDERAL law to notify that common or contract carrier IF that shipment is intrastate (within the same state) as the shipper, or going to a licensed manufacturer, dealer, collector or importer (IE an FFL holder) regardless of which state that FFL holder is located in.

4. The common carriers' (UPS and FEDEX) COMPANY POLICIES require notification to them of the firearm, however, it is not Federal law that requires it.

5. Shipments to non-FFLs out of state require WRITTEN notification of the firearm to the carrier, because, more than likely, the shipment is illegal anyway.

6. Let's say you believe Art and are sending a firearm out of state, back to the manufacturer for repair. You go to the Fedex counter and say, I have a pistol in this box that I am sending to S&W for repair. The Fedex counter guy says, "Cool. It has to by air, that will be $70". He sends the package off. So, according to what Art posted, have you complied with the requirement? And, if so, what requirement have you complied with?

Art Eatman
July 22, 2009, 01:41 PM
478.31 (b) about labels.

Don't worry about believing me. The ATF regs are STILL stickied at the top of the Legal Forum page.

NavyLCDR
July 22, 2009, 02:24 PM
Art,

27 CFR 478 says exactly the same thing, what's your point?

The requirement for written notice to the carrier still ONLY applies IF the shipment is going out of state AND the shipment is going to non-license holder.

TITLE 27--ALCOHOL, TOBACCO PRODUCTS, AND FIREARMS

CHAPTER II--BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES,
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PART 478_COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION--Table of Contents

Subpart C_Administrative and Miscellaneous Provisions

Sec. 478.31 Delivery by common or contract carrier.

(a) No person shall knowingly deliver or cause to be delivered to
any common or contract carrier for transportation or shipment in
interstate or foreign commerce to any person other than a licensed
importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector,
any package or other container in which there is any firearm or
ammunition without written notice to the carrier that such firearm or
ammunition is being transported or shipped: Provided, That any passenger
who owns or legally possesses a firearm or ammunition being transported
aboard any common or contract carrier for movement with the passenger in
interstate or foreign commerce may deliver said firearm or ammunition
into the custody of the pilot, captain, conductor or operator of such
common or contract carrier for the duration of that trip without
violating any provision of this part.
(b) No common or contract carrier shall require or cause any label,
tag, or other written notice to be placed on the outside of any package,
luggage, or other container indicating that such package, luggage, or
other container contains a firearm.

M36
July 22, 2009, 03:15 PM
Navy, you can believe what you want to believe, and I will agree that there is a distinction in the statute relating to "interstate" and "intrastate".

But to go onto a public forum and dispense information that it is legal to violate federal regulations concerning shipping of firearms to anyone is pretty reckless and ignorant on your part.

In your last statement, you sound like you are justifying your flawed logic by purposely not notifying a shipper of a firearm that you are sending to avoid paying a higher shipping fee. Great move

So, tell us, and the ATF folks that sometimes read these forums, how many firearms have you shipped and failed to notify the shipper that the contents were a firearm so you can save a buck?

Im all for a good discussion, but I'm drawing the line on this one. You obviously think that you are a little smarter than federal regulations.


Why dont you call your local ATF field office and get it from the horses mouth.

I'm out.

NavyLCDR
July 22, 2009, 06:43 PM
Why don't you call your local ATF field office and get it from the horses mouth

Is this close enough for the horses mouth for you or can you see the mouth from the end that you are at?

http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/1034/batfn.jpg

Please don't go away mad. Just go away.

grndslm
July 25, 2009, 12:00 PM
So does this mean I don't have to follow UPS' and FedEx's rules on notifying them of the handgun I'm shipping to a licensed dealer/manufacturer/etc.?? ... just because it's not federal law?

Surely UPS and FedEx could punish me for disobeying them, even if it were not an unlawful action.

NavyLCDR
July 25, 2009, 12:22 PM
UPS or FedEx punish you? NO. Company policies have no statutory weight. In order for them to have a claim against you in court, they would have to prove that they were damaged in some way, such as you shipped a loaded gun and it discharged in shipping.

Return your shipment to you? YES.

Fail to reimburse you on an insurance claim? YES.

Look, not once on this thread have I ever even suggested shipping a firearm in violation of any company policy. I have no idea why that was even brought up. All I did was to correct a mistaken post that said Federal law required notification.

grndslm
July 25, 2009, 01:26 PM
Look, not once on this thread have I ever even suggested shipping a firearm in violation of any company policy.Nor did I suggest that you mentioned company policies.

Your letter was good enough for the government aspect, but I was interested in the complete truth as to what FedEx and UPS could do, since they do require you to notify them.

deadin
July 25, 2009, 03:24 PM
I suppose, technically, they could take you to court for breaking the contract you agreed to when you shipped. It wouldn't be worth their time, but it would be an option.
And proof of damage in some way? How about the "extra" shipping charges you cheated them out of?

GonHuntin
July 25, 2009, 03:45 PM
There are no "extra shipping charges" if it's a long gun........there is also no law that requires that a handgun be shipped overnight......again, that is company policy with no force of law behind it.

Navy is absolutely correct......even though the BATF FAQ says you have to notify a common carrier, this statement is not supported when you look at the actual statutes that regulate shipping firearms.........the BATF obviously knows the FAQ is incorrect but does not fix the inaccuracy.........

grndslm
July 25, 2009, 03:52 PM
I suppose, technically, they could take you to court for breaking the contract you agreed to when you shipped. It wouldn't be worth their time, but it would be an option.
And proof of damage in some way? How about the "extra" shipping charges you cheated them out of?

I never agreed to any contract, tho...

And if it would be impossible for the gun to discharge during shipment, why would they need to charge me that "extra" expedition fee. Those extra fees damage me too.

hvengel
July 25, 2009, 04:43 PM
Back to the original question. In California this would be considered a Person to Person Transfer (PPT) and there are no laws that would prohibit it. But the system used by FFL's to get state part of the paperwork done has no provision for entering an out of state person info into the system for either the buyer or the seller. So even though it is not against the law the state has effectively prohibited this type of transaction (IE. and out of state seller doing a PPT to a California resident).

deadin
July 25, 2009, 05:40 PM
Unless California has a unique definition of PPT it is against Federal law for an interstate transfer of a handgun without the use of a FFL.
Or are you saying that CA FFL's can't receive a handgun from out of State unless it is on the CADOJ list? That's not what I've been led to believe per several of our CA members when it comes to guns no longer in production.

(And you wonder why sellers just don't want to deal with anyone in CA:mad:)

I never agreed to any contract, tho...

Ah, but you did just by using their service. They agreed to deliver your shipment and you agreed to their fees and rules. Did you sign the slip you fill out for shipping? Even if you didn't sign anything, there is an implied contract for service, conditions and renumeration.

hvengel
July 25, 2009, 06:06 PM
No that not what I wrote. In Ca you do PPT through an FFL only even for in state transfers. Anything else is illegal. The law does not say anything about prohibiting an out of state seller from doing a PPT through a Ca FFL and before the new system went in place a few years ago the system accommodated this. But a few years ago FFLs had to put new automated systems in place to handle the state forums for this that uses a card reader and this system does not allow out of state sellers information to be processed since it only works with Ca. IDs and there is no way to enter this information for out of state sellers.

This has nothing to do with the not unsafe list.

NavyLCDR
July 25, 2009, 07:20 PM
grndslm,

Sorry I seemed to indicate that you were getting on my case for suggesting what people do or not do. It actually wasn't you accusing me of that, it was the 4 time poster who decided he couldn't handle the truth and disappeared.
V/R,
John

deadin
July 25, 2009, 08:06 PM
hvengel,
That's what I understood you to say. However just a week or so ago there were several posts from California residents that indicated this isn't true.
I'm not from CA, so I cannot dispute your statement with any authority.
I guess I will have to accept it as stated unless someone else familiar with the CA laws wants to step up.

In the meantime, I guess I will list anything I have for sale as "Will not ship to CA." (or maybe "Cannot ship to CA".

Librarian
July 26, 2009, 10:43 AM
hvengel has it right. As implemented (with no statutory authority) CA person-to-person sales can be completed only by CA residents at a CA FFL.

A CA PPT is exempt from the Handgun Roster; an interstate transfer into CA is not exempt, unless the buyer is exempt (primarily LEO).

ServiceSoon
July 26, 2009, 08:14 PM
Me so confused. The government is doing a very good job of making criminals out of peaceful citizens with no intent to do harm to others.

Mousegun
July 26, 2009, 10:03 PM
This question comes up a lot and I too have asked variations of it a few months back.

Navy LT came through with hoards of good information then as he does often when the question arises.

It is clear that he has researched the situation extensively and I honestly think he has it together when it comes to inter and intra state transfer of firearms.

Thanks for the information you are willing to provide and the many times you have provided it.

Just my humble opinion.

deadin
July 26, 2009, 10:39 PM
OK. let's try this from another direction......
Can a California FFL01 (dealer) accept a shipment of a handgun (used, no longer in production) from another FFL01 in a different State? No "private party" transfer involved. It comes off of an out-of-state FFL's book and goes onto a California FFL's book.
The California FFL can then transfer (i.e. "sell") said handgun to a CA resident.

Does this work??

I'm asking because I'm about to list a Hammerli M162 Free Pistol on Gun Broker and want to know whether I can include California as somewhere I will sell to or not.
I will ship via a FFL on my end.

Librarian
July 26, 2009, 11:19 PM
Can a California FFL01 (dealer) accept a shipment of a handgun (used, no longer in production) from another FFL01 in a different State? No "private party" transfer involved. It comes off of an out-of-state FFL's book and goes onto a California FFL's book.

The California FFL can then transfer (i.e. "sell") said handgun to a CA resident.

Does this work??
Depends.

In your case, the Hammerli 162 is exempted from the Handgun Roster by specific mention in PC 12132(h)(2).

Therefore, yes, you can do that.

The shipping FFL will also have to go through the idiocy of the CFLC (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/cflcoverview.php); FFLs have posted on Calguns that the actual time involved is quite small, but it is an annoyance some find unacceptable.

If you were selling some handgun not on the Roster that was NOT excepted, you still could do that, but the buyer would have to be exempt from the Roster (primarily LEO).

If you enjoyed reading about "Interstate transfer" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!