Paso Robles Police Chief / stolen handgun not registered

[bobby68]

The local news here is reporting this case, the particulars are available through the links below. She is claiming that she was not obligated to register her handgun. In california, my understanding is that there is no "registration" only the transfer process required when exchanging firearms. Is this correct? Is this process also necessary between husband and wife when the firearm changes possession between them (the cheif, a female, and her spouse were/are in process of divorce-that is how she claims she received the handgun).

Did this women violate the Law? if so, is the district attorney able to prosecute regardless if the police refuse to file charges? This incident involved to local departments, hers, and another where the weapon was later recovered then returned to the chief.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32994007/ns/local_news-san_luis_obispo_ca/

http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/story/861955.html

 

[billwiese]

There's likely some handwaving btwn spousal transfer issue contrasted with community property concept. There's enough grey area there that it might be defendable - if it's "yours" already, why do you have to repaper it (regardless of whom it's already papered to).

In any case, it's more puzzling that there's no other record of the gun in the system, but this could be due to bad reporting. There is a chance that the "Sig 380" is a Sig P230 that moved into the state before Jan 1 1991 and was transferred to her spouse, etc.

I will note that a huge percentage of handguns in CA have no recent paper trail (or paper is buried). Unpapered private transfers were legal between Californians until Jan 1 1991. And folks moving into CA until Jan 1 1998 did not have to paper their guns they imported either.


Bill Wiese
San Jose CA

 

[Yellowfin]

This sounds like witch hunting of a pro gun police chief. Too bad, too, as I really like Paso Robles. Great place to visit and their wine is the very best in California by far.