Can a friend bring pistol (a gift) home to SF,CA?

[yhtomit]

A friend of mine lives in San Francisco, but is visiting her parents in the Deep South right now; she's long wanted a gun, and her father today gave her his Taurus 9mm pistol. She told me she plans to bring it with her home to California; while there are various reasons I think this might be a bad idea (and have told her that, flat out) which I don't care to get into right now, she is determined to do so. I told her that I had a vague understanding that California has restrictive gun laws (I know it's a tough place to get a carry permit, outside the circle of political power), but this page (http://crime.about.com/od/guns/f/gunlaw_ca.htm) makes me think perhaps I was overstating the case.

She assured me that she would be completely sure before she returns to California that she'd be breaking no laws in doing so, but I'm uneasy about it.

- She's not "moving" to California, but rather already lives there; however, the gift to her is genuine -- her father's known for years that she'd like one of her own, and decided to give her his own.

- I understand that California has a list like Maryland does of "approved" handguns; since Taurus is a decent brand with many decades of operation (more than a century, isn't it?), I'd *guess* that any model of Taurus should be on that list, but is there a queryable database run by the state to find out for sure?

So, I'd really appreciate any hints / clues that anyone where, esp. Californians, can provide. If she keeps it in her apartment in San Francisco, is she violating any law? If she drives it to the range for target practice? (See the current thread about what it takes to shoot a gun or even keep one at home in NYC -- sheesh.)

Thanks for any insight --

timothy

 

[dav]

She can bring it into the state no problem.

Once here she has to register it with the DOJ.

I'll look up some rules, but check the DOJ website, they have FAQs that answer this question.

From the DOJ site (http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php#25)

# Can I give a firearm to my adult child? Can he/she give it back to me later?

Yes, as long as the adult child receiving the firearm is not in a prohibited category PDF logo [PDF 10 kb / 1 pg] and the firearm is a legal firearm to possess, the transfer of a firearm between a parent and child or a grandparent and grandchild is exempt from the dealer transfer requirement. However, if the firearm is a handgun, you must submit an Report of Operation of Law or Intra-Familial Handgun Transaction PDF logo [PDF 481 kb / 2 pg] and $19 fee to the DOJ within 30 days. Assault weapons may not be transferred in this fashion. See Penal Code section 12285, subdivision (b).

(PC section 12078(c))

 

[kcmarine]

I thought that San Fransisco got rid of handguns... or was I wrong?

 

[dav]

Good point, kcmarine. I forgot about that. Still, that law is illegal, so it won't matter to the state. Just don't tell anyone in San Francisco!

Also, while it is none of my business really...

Why in the world would you suggest she not have a 9mm, yhtomit?

 

[yhtomit]

dav: Considering that I generally encourage everyone to have guns, that's a fair question, so I apologize that the answer I have is vague -- namely, that while she's a *smart* girl, and interesting to be around, I'm not sure she's mature enough in certain of her attitudes (there's detail behind that, but not IMO appropriate for this forum) to possess a gun. Maybe never will be; not every *thing* is for every*body*. (And of course, maybe I'm an insensitive jerk, and wrong, for thinking that she perhaps not have a gun. Wouldn't be a new experience for me ...)

timothy

 

[461]

A gift from a father is perfectly legal to own and is exempt from the approved list. She brings the gun back and files the proper form with DOJ, pays the $19.00 and it's done. The San Francisco gun ban was shot down instantly on appeal so it's not an issue either.

 

[Ratzinger_p38]

The San Francisco gun ban was shot down instantly on appeal so it's not an issue either.

I was surprised after that happened, that even the liberal mayor criticized the gun ban as just a cheap 'political statement'. Smartest thing he's ever said.

 

[SAG0282]

I was surprised after that happened, that even the liberal mayor criticized the gun ban as just a cheap 'political statement'. Smartest thing he's ever said.

He didn't criticize it, but rather praised it as more or less symbolic despite it's illegality. Newsom never met a gun law he didn't like.

 

[Ratzinger_p38]

He didn't criticize it, but rather praised it as more or less symbolic despite it's illegality. Newsom never met a gun law he didn't like.

I was living in San Fran at the time (no I didnt vote for it) and what I heard him say he made it sound like "boy that was a waste of time". Sort of like, it was a nice gesture but cmon.

 

[SIOP]

Because they are residents of different states, it was a felony for her to accept (and her father to give) the gun in the first place. That's federal law, I don't know about California's laws.

Disclaimer: This doesn't mean I agree with the law, I'm just telling you what the law says. And there is no exception for transfers between family members living in different states.

 

[209]

So, we're talking federal law here.

If my son and I live in different states, and I decide to gift him one of my handguns, we'd have to transfer it through an FFL holder?

Would the FFL have to be in his state of residence?

Also, the way I read the law, a rifle or shotgun isn't an issue. I can just give one of those to him.

 

[SIOP]

So, we're talking federal law here.

If my son and I live in different states, and I decide to gift him one of my handguns, we'd have to transfer it through an FFL holder?

Correct. Well, to be legal anyway. I think it's BS.

Would the FFL have to be in his state of residence?

Handgun yes, long gun no.

Also, the way I read the law, a rifle or shotgun isn't an issue. I can just give one of those to him.

No, a rifle or shotgun has to go through an FFL, but the FFL can be in either state as long as neither state has a law prohibiting such a transfer.

 

[larry_minn]

They need to check this out in detail and not take word of a message board. Some issues to consider. Last I heard Calif. had a restriction on mags over 10 rds. What was in prior (to some date I can't remember) are legal but you can NOT bring in mags over 10 rd (unless LEO,etc,etc) (not sure if that is issue with this gun)

Now my thoughts are. First does it need to be registered in Kalif? If not and her dad has owned it for say 12 yrs...... Her dad gave it to her a decade ago but she has been storing it "in the deep South" till now. That won't help with mags but will for cross state (assuming she lived there at that time)

 

[SIOP]

They need to check this out in detail and not take word of a message board. Some issues to consider.

Now my thoughts are. First does it need to be registered in Kalif? If not and her dad has owned it for say 12 yrs...... Her dad gave it to her a decade ago but she has been storing it "in the deep South" till now. That won't help with mags but will for cross state (assuming she lived there at that time)

Heck, if they just wanted to lie about it they wouldn't have bothered to ask what the laws were in the first place.

 

[Zoogster]

No not legal at all. A long gun can be purchased out of state, a handgun per federal law cannot be purchased by a resident of one state in another state. The firearm in question can however by shipped to an FFL where if legal in CA she can go through a background check and have it registered to her in CA (and pay a fee to do so) picking it up after the waiting period.
There is some exceptions to federal and state law but they do not apply in this case. CA law always requires registration of the handgun in all cases, via a fee. I also imagine a normal 9mm will have a standard magazine that exceeds 10 rounds which is illegal to import into the state. This means she would have to purchase CA legal magazines (permanently half empty) and leave the standard ones outside of CA.

So bottom line is the only legal route is for her father to retain ownership of it and transfer or sell it to her via an FFL in her own state. She can then take it home if it is CA legal and is absent those evil standard magazines.

She will not be able to legaly carry in SF anyways. The Bay Area is one of the most notorious anti CCW areas. So why a handgun that complicates things? He could just buy her a shotgun and make it much simplier.

 

[Quiet]

From my understanding of out of state gifts to CA...

Under Federal law, the dad needs to send the handgun to a CA FFL dealer, who then transfers it to the daughter.

Under CA law, the daughter needs to have a HSC (Handgun Safety Certificate) prior to taking possession of the handgun. Once she takes possession of the handgun, she has 30 days to "register" it & pay a fee to CA DOJ.
(link to form used to notify CA DOJ www.ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/oplaw.pdf )

Depending on what you are doing, possessing an unregistered handgun in CA is a felony.

For regular people, after 01-01-2000, magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds can not be brought into CA.

 

[Librarian]

It looks like the intrafamilial transfer thing works only in-state. I think Quiet and Zoogster have it right.

I would guess the out of state transfer might be prohibited by 18 USC 922 (a)(3):

§ 922. Unlawful acts
(a) It shall be unlawful—
(3) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;

Of course, real legal advice from a California lawyer would be more valuable than my guess.

 

[HankB]

In terms of "over 10 round" magazines . . . if the woman was in California before they banned normal mags, its entirely possible that she had some "grandfathered" mags tucked away in the back of her closet since before California's ban. Lots of people - even minors - had magazines well before they had the gun that took them.

 

[Quiet]

In terms of "over 10 round" magazines . . . if the woman was in California before they banned normal mags, its entirely possible that she had some "grandfathered" mags tucked away in the back of her closet since before California's ban. Lots of people - even minors - had magazines well before they had the gun that took them.

It is possible that she had ownership of greater than 10 round capacity magazine prior to 01-01-2000. But, it really depends on when she became a resident of CA (before or after 01-01-2000), in order for this scenario to be legal.

 

[yhtomit]

Ten years ago, she was neither in California nor old enough to buy a handgun. (Though I guess there's no age limit for buying magazines ... but, eh, the question is moot anyhow )

Also, I am *not* interested in helping her "sneak" anything past anyone! Just the opposite; if she's going to bring a gun to California, I want to make sure that everything is 100 percent perfectly legal.

timothy

 

[JerryM]

As far as I have been able to determine it is an illegal transfer from the father. He must transfer it through a FFL in the state where the daughter resides.
I have in the past checked this with ATF, and that is the case.
Most dealers seem not to know the law.

Jerry

 

[FortyCalGlock]

Wow ,such uncertainty and the hoops the gubmint wants subjects to jump through for a gift from a family member. This girl could easily become a "criminal" in the eyes of the law and the hippies in CA. This is the problem with gun control. I just hope that Taurus doesn't have a threaded barrel or bayonet mount.

 

[JerryM]

The only way to transfer a gun to a child in another state without going through a FFL is a bequest. But it must be specific, and listed in the will.

Jerry

 

[nate392]

ask her if the mags are over 10 rds, my taurus 9mm is 17+1, so in that case its a no no

 

[dav]

Federal law 922 does seem to be the controlling consideration

§ 922. Unlawful acts
(a) It shall be unlawful—
(3) for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to transport into or receive in the State where he resides (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, the State where it maintains a place of business) any firearm purchased or otherwise obtained by such person outside that State, except that this paragraph (A) shall not preclude any person who lawfully acquires a firearm by bequest or intestate succession in a State other than his State of residence from transporting the firearm into or receiving it in that State, if it is lawful for such person to purchase or possess such firearm in that State, (B) shall not apply to the transportation or receipt of a firearm obtained in conformity with subsection (b)(3) of this section, and (C) shall not apply to the transportation of any firearm acquired in any State prior to the effective date of this chapter;

Section b(3) has an alternative to the father giving her ownership of the firearm:

(3) any firearm to any person who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in whichthe licensee's place of business is located, except that this paragraph (A) shall not apply to the sale or delivery of any rifle or shotgun to a resident of a State other than a State in which the licensee's place of business is located if the transferee meets in person with the transferor to accomplish the transfer, and the sale, delivery, and receipt fully comply with the legal conditions of sale in both such States (and any licensed manufacturer, importer or dealer shall be presumed, for purposes of this subparagraph, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have had actual knowledge of the State laws and published ordinances of both States), and (B) shall not apply to the loan or rental of a firearm to any person for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes;

So it appears to this non-attorney that if he loans her the gun for competition and target practice, that she can take it home to CA. I see nothing regarding how long the loan is allowed to last (although it does specify temporary use).

Pretty much moot though, if timothy talks her out of it!