Question?- California transfer of ownership
I reside in California in a county with no special restrictions of its own on the sale of firearms. I placed for sale in the local classifieds, a conventional Winchester sporting shotgun. Nothing odd or special about the gun...it is a 3-shot sporter. I purchased the gun new in 1981...thirty years ago.
So, I am getting calls from a number of people asking if I will just sell them the gun without transferring it through a dealer. I have refused to do this and do not intend to do it.
Oddly, I have sold guns in the past via this little local weekly classified flyer and have not had this issue of, "let's make this deal just between us girls" come up. Now it has come up from about five people inquiring about the gun in the past few days. So, my thinking is that this is coming from some dim bulb lawman getting all his pals to call, foolishly trolling for a bust.
Be that as it may, one guy told me that these older guns, which for all practical purposes do not appear on any record, are legally allowed to be transfered between individuals with a simple bill of sale. Further, this guy has stated that he has a couple pals in the local County Sheriff's Department who told him this is legal. I still will not sell the gun without going through a current FFL holder, yet I am wondering if this guy's statement has any validity. How could it be if there is no check to see if the buyer is legally entitled to own a firearm?
Can anyone comment on this with any authority?
And, no, regardless of the answers here, I am not going to sell the gun without going through a local FFL holder to handle the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) and background check.
EDIT-1-EDIT
Mark, thank you for the clarification.
Wolf.
EDIT-2-EDIT
quote:Zip down to page 37 of the DOJ pamphlet, in addition to confirming Mark's post it provides the CA codes regarding sale and transfer of long guns. http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2007.pdf
CA gun laws are sufficiently complicated that friend's relating what LE said may not have been accurate; or LE may have made a mistake.
In addition to some not so pure motives, I think part of the reason you experience "sell it to me directly" could be due to new shooters getting involved in the sport and they know nothing of CA gun laws. Also, in most states what they want to do is perfectly legal. We're the odd duck. I've had a few folks in the last month or so ask me about buying guns, they're new to it and are astounded at what we have to go through to do it legally.
dfletcher,
Relating to what you said (above), three points:
1. Good point, relating to the complexity of CA gun laws. Not everyone knows every thing (I sure do not) and incorrect advice could be an issue, that is certain.
2. I had not considered the "new shooter" group and while most of these guys seemed to be familiar with guns, who knows? I was kind and civil to everyone who called, of course and I suppose, unless I know for sure otherwise, just about everyone deserves the benefit of simple doubt or misunderstanding.
3. I guess my thoughts of the worst could have gotten the better of me on this one.
I very much appreciate your comments and thanks for the heads-up on the CA DOJ website and page number.
Wolf.
So, I am getting calls from a number of people asking if I will just sell them the gun without transferring it through a dealer. I have refused to do this and do not intend to do it.
Oddly, I have sold guns in the past via this little local weekly classified flyer and have not had this issue of, "let's make this deal just between us girls" come up. Now it has come up from about five people inquiring about the gun in the past few days. So, my thinking is that this is coming from some dim bulb lawman getting all his pals to call, foolishly trolling for a bust.
Be that as it may, one guy told me that these older guns, which for all practical purposes do not appear on any record, are legally allowed to be transfered between individuals with a simple bill of sale. Further, this guy has stated that he has a couple pals in the local County Sheriff's Department who told him this is legal. I still will not sell the gun without going through a current FFL holder, yet I am wondering if this guy's statement has any validity. How could it be if there is no check to see if the buyer is legally entitled to own a firearm?
Can anyone comment on this with any authority?
And, no, regardless of the answers here, I am not going to sell the gun without going through a local FFL holder to handle the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) and background check.
EDIT-1-EDIT
Mark, thank you for the clarification.
Wolf.
EDIT-2-EDIT
quote:Zip down to page 37 of the DOJ pamphlet, in addition to confirming Mark's post it provides the CA codes regarding sale and transfer of long guns. http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2007.pdf
CA gun laws are sufficiently complicated that friend's relating what LE said may not have been accurate; or LE may have made a mistake.
In addition to some not so pure motives, I think part of the reason you experience "sell it to me directly" could be due to new shooters getting involved in the sport and they know nothing of CA gun laws. Also, in most states what they want to do is perfectly legal. We're the odd duck. I've had a few folks in the last month or so ask me about buying guns, they're new to it and are astounded at what we have to go through to do it legally.
dfletcher,
Relating to what you said (above), three points:
1. Good point, relating to the complexity of CA gun laws. Not everyone knows every thing (I sure do not) and incorrect advice could be an issue, that is certain.
2. I had not considered the "new shooter" group and while most of these guys seemed to be familiar with guns, who knows? I was kind and civil to everyone who called, of course and I suppose, unless I know for sure otherwise, just about everyone deserves the benefit of simple doubt or misunderstanding.
3. I guess my thoughts of the worst could have gotten the better of me on this one.
I very much appreciate your comments and thanks for the heads-up on the CA DOJ website and page number.
Wolf.
0
-
Long guns which are over 50 years old may be transferred between private parties in CA without the need for an FFL to handle the transfer. A shotgun made in 1981 is well short of the needed half century. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Wolf.
I reside in California in a county with no special restrictions of its own on the sale of firearms. I placed for sale in the local classifieds, a conventional Winchester sporting shotgun. Nothing odd or special about the gun...it is a 3-shot sporter. I purchased the gun new in 1981...thirty years ago.
So, I am getting calls from a number of people asking if I will just sell them the gun without transferring it through a dealer. I have refused to do this and do not intend to do it.
Oddly, I have sold guns in the past via this little local weekly classified flyer and have not had this issue of, "let's make this deal just between us girls" come up. Now it has come up from about five people inquiring about the gun in the past few days. So, my thinking is that this is coming from some dim bulb lawman getting all his pals to call, foolishly trolling for a bust.
Be that as it may, one guy told me that these older guns, which for all practical purposes do not appear on any record, are legally allowed to be transfered between individuals with a simple bill of sale. Further, this guy has stated that he has a couple pals in the local County Sheriff's Department who told him this is legal. I still will not sell the gun without going through a current FFL holder, yet I am wondering if this guy's statement has any validity. How could it be if there is no check to see if the buyer is legally entitled to own a firearm?
Can anyone comment on this with any authority?
And, no, regardless of the answers here, I am not going to sell the gun without going through a local FFL holder to handle the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) and background check.
EDIT--EDIT
Mark, thank you for the clarification.
Wolf.
Zip down to page 37 of the DOJ pamphlet, in addition to confirming Mark's post it provides the CA codes regarding sale and transfer of long guns. http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/Cfl2007.pdf
CA gun laws are sufficiently complicated that friend's relating what LE said may not have been accurate; or LE may have made a mistake.
In addition to some not so pure motives, I think part of the reason you experience "sell it to me directly" could be due to new shooters getting involved in the sport and they know nothing of CA gun laws. Also, in most states what they want to do is perfectly legal. We're the odd duck. I've had a few folks in the last month or so ask me about buying guns, they're new to it and are astounded at what we have to go through to do it legally.0 -
I am happy to hear of this. The main advantage is not having to pay the FFL & the state of Kalifornia. You can also avoid the ten day waiting period.
Would it be correct to assume this would also apply to buying a long gun on consignment that was being handled by an FFL?
Re: Reply by Mark. Bummer[xx(]0 -
quote:Originally posted by gruntled
I am happy to hear of this. The main advantage is not having to pay the FFL & the state of Kalifornia. You can also avoid the ten day waiting period.
Would it be correct to assume this would also apply to buying a long gun on consignment that was being handled by an FFL?
No. In the case of a consignment the firearm is being transferred to you from an FFL dealer and dealers by law may not transfer firearms to a non licensee without the ten day wait. The fifty year exemption rule on long guns is only for transfers between private individuals. If you obtain a firearm of any age from a dealer you will be waiting ten days.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments