Quick question: Private transactions in CA


PDA






natedog
August 15, 2004, 04:44 AM
Let's say my next door neighbor wants to sell me a rifle in California. Does this transaction have to go through a FFL dealer? Or is it cash and carry?

If you enjoyed reading about "Quick question: Private transactions in CA" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Jim March
August 15, 2004, 05:40 AM
FFL.

Unless the neighbor is also your father, mother, daughter or son (and is otherwise qualified to own it). Then it's zero-paper.

In-family transfers are the last paperless transfers allowed in Calif :barf:.

I'm also assuming the rifle isn't an "AW" :rolleyes: and that no magazines bigger than 10rd are being transferred. Those would be problems.

gunsmith
August 15, 2004, 06:52 AM
I know a lifelong Democrat who bought a rifle from his neighbor.
This guy is 60+ and can not (will not) vote anything but Dem.

He couldn't believe that he broke the law by buying a rifle from his old friend, I told him he voted for the same folks that now made him a criminal.

I aint got it in me to turn him in for his "crime" though...it angers me that he could be so dang blind. He thinks he is pro gun but no one needs a "machine gun" anyway (his opinion not mine).
I have a feeling lots of old Dems are breaking this putrid law and not even realizing they are now criminals.
I also think many people just ignore it even though they know of the law.

Pilgrim
August 15, 2004, 12:11 PM
He couldn't believe that he broke the law by buying a rifle from his old friend, I told him he voted for the same folks that now made him a criminal.

I aint got it in me to turn him in for his "crime" though...it angers me that he could be so dang blind. He thinks he is pro gun but no one needs a "machine gun" anyway (his opinion not mine).
I have a feeling lots of old Dems are breaking this putrid law and not even realizing they are now criminals.
I also think many people just ignore it even though they know of the law.

I worked in a rural area PDRK gun shop for a few years until I moved to Idaho. We constantly had people coming in with firearms, pistol and long arms, who acquired them through a private party transfer without doing the paperwork. For the most part they were astonished that they had broken the law.

We also had customers who were shocked that there was a ten day "cooling off" period for rifles and shotguns. This has been the law since 1994 I believe.

The most embarrassing and uncomfortable moments were when people came in wanting to perform a private party transfer with PDRK designated "assault weapons". The owner did not have the required paperwork to own and possess, and of course the prospective buyer didn't have a PDRK permit to purchase and possess. We told those people to quickly remove the weapon from the shop and hope they didn't run into a peace officer in the parking lot.

Pilgrim

EOD Guy
August 15, 2004, 12:37 PM
Let's say my next door neighbor wants to sell me a rifle in California. Does this transaction have to go through a FFL dealer? Or is it cash and carry?

As Jim March said, FFL, unless immediate family member. OR If the rifle is a C&R over 50 years old, private party transfers are still legal and don't have to go through a dealer.

Sawdust
August 15, 2004, 01:36 PM
Strange...

I just had to take Californiastan's test for the Handgun Safety Certificate.

One question was in reference to this very subject.

The question was, to the effect, of "When do you NOT need to transfer a gun through an FFL?".

It was multiple choice answers; one answer being "between a brother and a sister"; that was the answer I chose, and it was marked wrong. The correct answer was, supposedly, none of the above.

I questioned this with the FFL and they said that the test was correct...

Sawdust

fastbolt
August 15, 2004, 02:18 PM
If you read through the material on CA DOJ's website ... http://caag.state.ca.us/firearms/pubfaqs.htm#20 ... you'll see that as long as the receiving party isn't a prohibited person and the firearm isn't an assault weapon, the transfer of a firearm between husband & wife (presumably of adult age able to own firearms), between parents & adult children, and between grand parents & adult grand children is still exempt from the FFL dealer transfer requirement ...

HOWEVER ... if the firearm is a handgun, an Operation of Law form must be filed with DOJ by the recipient within 30 days.

A lot of folks forget this ... or aren't even aware of the requirement.

EOD Guy
August 15, 2004, 02:21 PM
Immediate family is defined in the California penal code, section 12078(c)(3), as parent and child or grandparent and grandchild. For some reason, it does not include a spouse or siblings in the definition.

fastbolt
August 15, 2004, 03:47 PM
For a little more specificity read PC sections 12076(c) & (f), and PC 12078(i) ... which are those mentioned as related to this subject in the DOJ website.

The DOJ website is actually rather well organized, and a lot of useful information can be found within it.

EOD Guy
August 15, 2004, 04:31 PM
For a little more specificity read PC sections 12076(c) & (f), and PC 12078(i) ... which are those mentioned as related to this subject in the DOJ website.

Those references are out of date. They have nothing to do with transfers between family members.

fastbolt
August 15, 2004, 04:53 PM
Now I realize that ... after simply listing them from the sections in the DOJ website specifically addressing these issues ... but that's not uncommon when the code is updated periodically. They're the only references mentioned in the sections dedicated to answering these questions of the public ... so I simply listed them before looking them up in the code. Sorry.

The only time I've asked about the exchange of firearms between spouses I was told that as long as it wasn't an assault weapon that it wasn't a problem. (I called to ask what the "third degree of sanguinuity" meant ... as that word isn't in a lot of dictionaries, aside from encyclopedic references to royality and the assumption of rule within a royal family. :) )

Hopefully that hasn't changed.

That was when I learned that the transfer of handguns among the DOJ approved family members still required a DOJ filing. That surprised me ... I'd bet there's more than a few cops that are unaware of this procedure.

There's a contact/call listing for direct questions, but there aren't a lot of people available to answer phoned-in questions, or at least there wasn't according to the fellow I discussed some of these subjects with when I last called.

I'd call DOJ for the definitive answer to this question, just in case the website hasn't been updated to include changes in this subject. I'm certainly not the expert ...

Jim March
August 15, 2004, 05:26 PM
Heh. I forgot C&R.

If you enjoyed reading about "Quick question: Private transactions in CA" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!