Shipping a gun to CA? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Shipping a gun to CA?


jknight8907
01-23-2012, 21:12
Are there any circumstances in which a gun sold to a person in California does NOT have to be shipped to a California FFL? I'm selling a subcompact lower here and a member wanted to buy it, but did not want it shipped to an FFL. He told me FFL's were for 'civilians' and that he had Department of Justice papers that he would email me which allowed him to receive guns directly. This is what the letters (4 of them, each for a different gun) say:


RE: Receipt Confirmation for Report of Handgun Ownership

Dear (name here):

This is to acknowledge that the Department of Justice has received and processed your Report of Handgun Ownership for the following firearm listed below.

That's from the Bureau of Firearms.

I told him that looked like a simple acknowledgement for the standard registration every person with a pistol in CA does, and that the lower had to go to an FFL. He got pissed at me and told me "I give up!!!"


Am I wrong here?

WASR10
01-23-2012, 21:24
It sounds to me like you made the right move. Knida fishy... You can go to calguns dot net and ask the legal experts there if you want to be sure.

The Habit
01-23-2012, 21:33
I think you played it correctly. I certainly wouldn't have risked it. Of course, a call to BATFE probably would have cleared it up pretty quickly. Out of curiosity, I'd call them anyway and forward them the emails (with his personal information removed) just to see what is what.

WoodenPlank
01-23-2012, 22:14
Yep, sounds like you made the right call. If the part you were selling bears a serial number, Im pretty darn sure it MUST go to an FFL under federal law.

CrookCounty
01-23-2012, 22:19
NO you are 100% in the Green Zone man...don't ever make exceptions for people...ALWASY ship to a FFL to be safe. Remember ANY document can be made up.

CrookCounty
01-23-2012, 22:20
Shipping firearms

Firearms may not be mailed or shipped interstate from one non-FFL to another non-FFL but may be shipped intrastate. Personally owned rifles and shotguns may be mailed or shipped to an FFL in any state for any lawful purpose, including sale, repair, or customizing. An FFL may ship a firearm or replacement firearm of the same kind and type to a person from whom it was received. Under U.S. Postal regulations, handguns may be sent via the Postal Service only from one FFL to another FFL, or between authorized government officials.

A person may ship a rifle or shotgun to himself, in care of a person who lives in another state, for purposes of hunting.

Firearms delivered to a common carrier for shipment must be accompanied by a written declaration to the carrier of the contents of the shipment, if mailing to persons other than licensed importers, licensed manufacturers, licensed dealers, or licensed collectors. Notice to the carrier is not required when shipping to one of the licensed entities aforementioned. Letter from ATF summarizing shipping responsibilities under the law: Media:BATFE shipping letter.jpg

427
01-23-2012, 22:22
Don't do business with this person. What he's asking you to do is illegal.

CAcop
01-23-2012, 23:55
The only exception I can think of is weapons being shipped to a police officer but it must be shipped to a department address and they must supply letterhead from their chief. There is a bunch of paperwork that must go along with it. I can't think of anyone who has done it at my PD in the 14 years I have been in the business. Essentially the department is acting like an FFL. For all I know they could have closed this loophole.

emopunker2004
01-24-2012, 00:00
yeh he's shaddy. i'd just avoid him all together

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 00:34
It's not only firearms.
I had a guy asking me if I would take some 13 round magazines apart and ship them as "spare parts" to CA.
Needless to say, I didn't.

acaligunner
01-24-2012, 01:03
It's not only firearms.
I had a guy asking me if I would take some 13 round magazines apart and ship them as "spare parts" to CA.
Needless to say, I didn't.

This is perfectly legal if he owned Hi-Capacity mags before 2000.
There are a lot of CA gun owners that own hi capacity mags and
Need Re-build kits.

Once again perfectly legal if they are rebuilding a old/or damaged
Hi cap mag.

We can own 'parts' for whatever old mags.

12131
01-24-2012, 01:05
Fishy! Agree that you should avoid him like the plague.

igorts
01-24-2012, 01:12
lower receiver with serial must be shipped to FFL.
disassembled mag is ok to ship as repair kit IF the person legally possesses original hi-cap bought before 2000 or as LEO. but since it's a hole in regulations, last part often skipped. some even charge a buck or 2 for disassembly

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 04:10
Repair kit does not include a brand new magazine 4 gen G21 magazine with all parts.

Bren
01-24-2012, 04:21
Are there any circumstances in which a gun sold to a person in California does NOT have to be shipped to a California FFL? I'm selling a subcompact lower here and a member wanted to buy it, but did not want it shipped to an FFL. He told me FFL's were for 'civilians' and that he had Department of Justice papers that he would email me which allowed him to receive guns directly. This is what the letters (4 of them, each for a different gun) say:



That's from the Bureau of Firearms.

I told him that looked like a simple acknowledgement for the standard registration every person with a pistol in CA does, and that the lower had to go to an FFL. He got pissed at me and told me "I give up!!!"


Am I wrong here?

My best guess is, you are right and the person who wants the lower is a criminal trying to scam you into becoming the same. If I were you, I report the scam the member attempted to at least the Glock Talk mods (although, technically, it's a the attempt alone could get him prison time if reported to law enforcement).

California has no power to override federal law, even if they tried. Federal law requires the sale to go through an FFL in the buyer's state.
I think you played it correctly. I certainly wouldn't have risked it. Of course, a call to BATFE probably would have cleared it up pretty quickly. Out of curiosity, I'd call them anyway and forward them the emails (with his personal information removed) just to see what is what.

If a person had tried to convince me to commit a crime that could send me to prison and end my right to own a gun, I would not remove his personal information.

svtpwnz
01-24-2012, 04:49
As others have stated, this sounds shady as hell to me. I ONLY ship to an FFL PERIOD, no matter what state the firearm is going to.

OctoberRust
01-24-2012, 05:49
Are there any circumstances in which a gun sold to a person in California does NOT have to be shipped to a California FFL? I'm selling a subcompact lower here and a member wanted to buy it, but did not want it shipped to an FFL. He told me FFL's were for 'civilians' and that he had Department of Justice papers that he would email me which allowed him to receive guns directly. This is what the letters (4 of them, each for a different gun) say:



That's from the Bureau of Firearms.

I told him that looked like a simple acknowledgement for the standard registration every person with a pistol in CA does, and that the lower had to go to an FFL. He got pissed at me and told me "I give up!!!"


Am I wrong here?



Call the BATFE and let them know his user name on this board, and what he's trying to do. That should give him more important things to worry about beside a lower being shipped to him illegally. :supergrin:

jknight8907
01-24-2012, 05:56
Thanks guys. FYI his username here is 'repo4sale'. http://glocktalk.com/forums/member.php?u=178865

Bren
01-24-2012, 06:02
Thanks guys. FYI his username here is 'repo4sale'. http://glocktalk.com/forums/member.php?u=178865

I'd be interested in his explanation for why he tried this, since he seems to claim to be pretty knowedgeable in his posts. Seems like he needs to not be a member any more if he is using GT to commit crimes.

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 06:10
Before we start a lynch mob, I do would like to hear his side. :dunno:

jknight8907
01-24-2012, 06:15
Was this a G27, G26 or G33?

I can pay for it via US Postal Service MO.
Will pay for $15 Dept of Justice Registration.
And Will pay for FEDEX Ground Prepaid Label.
Background-Resume:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/johnjason-chun/12/270/860
Yours truly,
JohnJasonChun.com
Cell 949-254-3179 and Work 888-532-7999

It was a G33, so it's compatible with either a G33 or G27 upper as-is. A G-26 upper will require a new ejector ($7 from Glockmeister).

OK YOU HAVE A SALE, THIS IS WHAT I NEED.
$300 US POSTAL SERVICE MONEY ORDER.
FEDEX PREPAID RETURN LABEL.
WHAT IS YOUR FULL NAME, ADDRESS & CELL# FOR THE MONEY ORDER AND FEDEX PREPAID RETURN LABEL? I ALSO NEED A PHOTO OF THE SERIAL NUMBER FOR THE MONEY ORDER AND THE DEPT. OF JUSTICE TRANSFER FORM. YOURS TRULY,
JOHNJASONCHUN.COM

I don't think a DOJ transfer form will be necessary on my end, that will be between you and the dealer you receive the gun at (I cannot ship the gun directly to you, it has to go to a dealer since the frame is the part of a Glock that bears the serial #). You can save your ground shipping label, as a non-FFL I have to ship it overnight.


(my address was here)

JOHNATHAN, I HAVE A DHS ID#/ FFL IS FOR CIVILIANS. I HAVE REGISTERED 4 GLOCKS WITH THE DEPT. OF JUSTICE. GIVE ME YOUR EMAIL AND I'LL EMAIL YOU THE 4 CONFIRMS FROM THE DEPT. OF JUSTICE.

As far as I can tell those are just confirmations that you sent in a BOF-4010A form or similar on handguns you owned or bought. Unless you've got law enforcement credentials or something, the frame will be shipped to an FFL only. Sorry, that's the law.

OK, I GIVE UP....


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

jknight8907
01-24-2012, 06:23
Not sure if that quote worked. Tapatalk doesn't like big blocks of text. If it's not there I'll forward it to someone who would be willing to post it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

OctoberRust
01-24-2012, 07:08
:popcorn: Now it's getting good.

oldnoob
01-24-2012, 09:31
It's not only firearms.
I had a guy asking me if I would take some 13 round magazines apart and ship them as "spare parts" to CA.
Needless to say, I didn't.

This is 100% legal.

1) Receiver has pre ban 10+ rd mag, and would like to use yours as part kit. He (or she) can use any or all parts to repair/replace his mag that owned prior to the ban.

2) Civilian can own them as part kit or most often call Magazine Rebuild Kit. If he or she choose to travel out of state where there is no hi cap ban. He can choose to reassemble the kit to a full mag and use it. However, before he return to CA, he will need to disassemble the mag to mag kit again.

acaligunner
01-24-2012, 09:42
Repair kit does not include a brand new magazine 4 gen G21 magazine with all parts.

YES it does, that's why Californians can legally buy Magpil
P-Mags or E Mags to replace standard hi cap AR Mags!

Do you really want to debate Ca law with someone who lives here?

There is Nothing illegal about Owning Hi Capacity Magazine PARTS,
Or re-built kits.

I can even buy and legally own 20 Round drums for the Saiga 12.

I can legally buy, assemble, restore, whatever--- ANY 1st-2nd
3rd- 4th-1000 generation Hi Cap magazine because I've owned
Original capacity Glock magazines.

You are adding FUD, plain and simple.

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 10:10
...Civilian can own them as part kit or most often call Magazine Rebuild Kit...
If all parts of a 11 or more round after ban manufactured magazine are in one package then it is not a parts kit, it's a dissembled magazine.
Now if it is in different packages shipped, then it is parts.

Botton line is, the people of California have to stand up for their rights and get people into place who will change CA back to the great state it once was.
Where are the demonstrations in Sac against those laws?
How many gun owners in CA wrote a letter to their "representatives"?

SanPedroShooter
01-24-2012, 10:23
What a load of garbage. A disassembled mag is parts. Period. I am glad that people that live in Maine are such California law experts...


Do you propose that I keep all my mag parts in seperate baggies? Or maybe seperate rooms? A magazine is a magazine in California when it is assembled as such. Untill then its a parts kit.

oldnoob
01-24-2012, 10:26
If all parts of a 11 or more round after ban manufactured magazine are in one package then it is not a parts kit, it's a dissembled magazine.
Now if it is in different packages shipped, then it is parts.


In your scenario, what you call "dissembled magazine" qualify as "magazine rebuild kit". And it's perfectly legal to buy/sale/trade/ship/gift in and out of CA in one packages.

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 10:30
Well, if you all are so sure about this, SHOW ME where it states so!
Otherwise it's a nice opinion.

jknight8907
01-24-2012, 10:33
Well, if you all are so sure about this, SHOW ME where it states so!
Otherwise it's a nice opinion.

Start your own thread about it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

SanPedroShooter
01-24-2012, 10:34
What do you mean like a penal code? The PC states what you cant do, notwhat you can. Show me where mag parts/parts kit becomes a "dissasembled magazine", and were "disassembled magazines" are illegal.

I see what I can get. There is a flood of info on this topic. Thats why I was so suprised to see such an off the wall opinion. If you are correct, there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of retailers (under the intensely watchful eye of the CADOJ) breaking the law everyday...

ke6guj
01-24-2012, 10:43
Well, if you all are so sure about this, SHOW ME where it states so!
Otherwise it's a nice opinion.will this letter directly from CADOJ be enough?

http://hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

SanPedroShooter
01-24-2012, 10:49
The PC dosent address what consitutes a "repair kit". Common practice among several million CA gun owners and FFLs dictates that a "rebuid kit" is any collection of magazine parts. They remain as such untill assembled. There are no storage or shipping requirements. Its either a "high capcity ammuntion feeding device" or it isnt.

Here is a letter from the AG dated 2005, with some question and anwers. No where is there any refernce to "disassembled magazine" as legal definition, or parts having to be in seperate bags or containers. There is a qualifier that the **** heads at the CALDOJ usually answer any question with "its up to the 58 DA's..." Typical California....
http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

Here is the info page from the retailer I use occasionaly
http://www.calegalmags.com/Rebuild-Kit-Info_ep_42.html

Here's your best bet. Calguns Foundation wrote the book, and here it is...
http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/Large-capacity_magazine_restrictions

You should thank all mighty God you dont have to be an an expert, or at least conversant on these topics... It can feel like shameful distinction on a national gun forum. Of course knowledge is power....
http://www.calguns.net/

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 10:58
will this letter directly from CADOJ be enough?

http://hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-large-cap-magazines-2005-11-10.pdf

I would suggest you read A4 and A6 real carefully. You can be sure a DA would lay out the law not in your favor if it came to it!
IMHO LE and DA's don't bother with this yet. There is much more important to spend their time and recourses on.
Does not mean they can start one day!

427
01-24-2012, 11:36
At the end of the day, it's up to the seller if he/she wants to jump through all the legal hoops to sell firearms or firearms parts to people in California.

NotEnufGarage
01-24-2012, 11:40
If all parts of a 11 or more round after ban manufactured magazine are in one package then it is not a parts kit, it's a dissembled magazine.
Now if it is in different packages shipped, then it is parts.

Botton line is, the people of California have to stand up for their rights and get people into place who will change CA back to the great state it once was.
Where are the demonstrations in Sac against those laws?
How many gun owners in CA wrote a letter to their "representatives"?

FUD, FUD, FUD.. Regardless of whether it's in 1 package or two, it's a part kit and it's not illegal to ship to or posses in California.

Demonstrations for less gun control would be worthless here. It would just result in more laws being rushed through our legislature.

The people (gun owners) of California are fighting back, in the courts. Already the SAF, CRPA and CalGuns Foundation have won several lawsuits that resulted in unconstitutional laws being overturned and local jurisdictions changing their policies.

If you'll recall, a law was passed a few years ago (AB962) banning mail order sales of ammo to CA residents. It was overturned before it took effect.

Already, several counties, including Sacramento, have begun issuing CCW permits to anyone who qualifies and can afford them. 2 years ago they issued a grand total of about 30 CCW's. Last year it was over 700. This year, it should be well over 1500. I got mine!

What California gun owners need to do is out the "other-staters" who won't unify with us. Sellers who put "No Sales to California" in their GB or other ads do nothing to help us.

Want to help? Go to http://calgunsfoundation.org/donate.html and help with pending activities and lawsuits to overturn the high-cap mag ban, AW ban, "Safe Handgun" roster. All are being challenged in court as we speak.

SLO1911Fan
01-24-2012, 11:46
I would suggest you read A4 and A6 real carefully. You can be sure a DA would lay out the law not in your favor if it came to it!
IMHO LE and DA's don't bother with this yet. There is much more important to spend their time and recourses on.
Does not mean they can start one day!


You're dead wrong. As long as the magazine is disassembled its perfectly legal even in the same package. I've shipped mags, into, out of, and around CA, and talked to a DOJ rep before I ever shipped one. It appears you live in Maine, so why are you arguing about California laws which you appear to know little about?

As far at the OP. You made the right call. Even cops here have to use FFLs. I don't know what he thinks is so special about his DOJ ID# but it doesn't exempt him from state law.

acaligunner
01-24-2012, 12:03
If all parts of a 11 or more round after ban manufactured magazine are in one package then it is not a parts kit, it's a dissembled magazine.
Now if it is in different packages shipped, then it is parts.

Botton line is, the people of California have to stand up for their rights and get people into place who will change CA back to the great state it once was.
Where are the demonstrations in Sac against those laws?
How many gun owners in CA wrote a letter to their "representatives"?

Bottom line?!

Here's one for you. Ever hear about putting your foot in your mouth!
Because you just did it with the above misinformation.

You sir are Wrong! Aside from being wrong, you continue to swing
In the dark.

The facts are you are wrong and you screwed a Ca gun owner because
Of your ignorance.

acaligunner
01-24-2012, 12:17
You know MDW Guns, you are right we California people should
Take care of ourselves.

I'm gonna let the CA Gunners know you and your company are hostile
To Ca gun buyers.

We don't need fellow gun owners banning or giving us a hard time,
Because they ' Think ' we shouldn't own certain guns or mags

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 13:27
Why don't businesses like CDNN, CTD, Midway or Brownells sell to CA complete disassembled magazines as "complete part kids".
They sell anything else to CA and if it was so simple and clear they would not hesitate to sell it this way too.
No reason to get mad at me, get mad at the people who voted for these laws.
Again, read from http://hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-lar...2005-11-10.pdf answer 4 and 6.

stix213
01-24-2012, 15:04
Why don't businesses like CDNN, CTD, Midway or Brownells sell to CA complete disassembled magazines as "complete part kids".
They sell anything else to CA and if it was so simple and clear they would not hesitate to sell it this way too.
No reason to get mad at me, get mad at the people who voted for these laws.
Again, read from http://hoffmang.com/firearms/DOJ-lar...2005-11-10.pdf answer 4 and 6.

There are plenty of companies who sell complete magazine parts kits in CA as it is. The market has gotten pretty saturated here.

My guess is the relatively small customer base for mag rebuild kits, combined with the existing market saturation, plus the additional labor of disassembling each mag one at a time, is keeping a few of the big names from bothering.

mitchg233
01-24-2012, 15:06
At the end of the day, it's up to the seller if he/she wants to jump through all the legal hoops to sell firearms or firearms parts to people in California.

True, but in this case the buyer is trying to circumvent Federal law.

Bren
01-24-2012, 15:35
So this thread started out on the interesting issue of what appeared to be a Glock talk member trying to convince another Glock Talk member to commit a felony by shipping him a firearm directly, in another state with no FFL.

Neither California nor magazines were any material part of it.

Now it's gotten off on the typical mall-ninja rant about magazines and getting around California law.

The thread is about federal law and a pretty serious issue, so how about starting a new theread on the mag-ninja stuff.

jknight8907
01-24-2012, 17:38
Too bad he didn't notice this thread. Wonder what he'd have to say for himself.

MarcDW
01-24-2012, 17:51
To the OP question I thought we had that covered:
State law does only matter secondary here.
Even lets say he was within CA laws (which I don't think he is) the shipper would violate Federal law by shipping other then an FFL or PD.
PD does not mean individual officer, it means the Chief or designated person by the Chief of this PD to receive firearms and represents the PD.

427
01-24-2012, 17:55
True, but in this case the buyer is trying to circumvent Federal law.

I was referring in general to firearms and specifically to the mag issue in Cali.

In post #7 I stated my opinion of what was going on with the OP.:wavey:

mitchg233
01-24-2012, 19:13
I was referring in general to firearms and specifically to the mag issue in Cali.

In post #7 I stated my opinion of what was going on with the OP.:wavey:

Ok, we all know you should have stopped then.

jknight8907
01-24-2012, 19:15
Guys, if you want to debate mag laws, take it somewhere else.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk

acaligunner
01-24-2012, 20:35
[QUOTE=Bren;18480673]So this thread started out on the interesting issue of what appeared to be a Glock talk member trying to convince another Glock Talk member to commit a felony by shipping him a firearm directly, in another state with no FFL.

Neither California nor magazines were any material part of it.

****. Wait a minute, go back and read up on what was posted about
CA mags, when I see something wrong I post, and give facts that concern Ca guns/or gun related sales. Just because you want to skip uncertainties, doesn't mean other Ca gun owners will. ****

Now it's gotten off on the typical mall-ninja rant about

magazines and getting around California law.

First off I think you should slow your roll. What gives you the right
To say CA gun owners are getting around the law. Your statement is stupid, and offensive. Ca law states that we have the RIGHT to rebuild any pre ban mag. We are not getting around no law.

The thread is about federal law and a pretty serious issue, so how about starting a new theread on the mag-ninja stuff.

**** the. Maybe you should MYB. Don't add to the bs. We Ca gun owners know the law As well as anyone out there.

acaligunner

true believer
01-24-2012, 21:31
as we saw, dont sell to him...i think u got your answer...if it sounds fishy, it is..
so i'm closing the thread..i believe you got your answer..
as to any thing else, you need to contact eric..he is the only one who can bann..
good luck