Radicalcleric
New member
Sometimes when this topic comes up the discussion gets a little wild with some people banging the table saying they know the law and blah blah blah. I would like to talk about the current situation with the CA "safety certifation" law that effects so many classic S&W revolvers, but I don't want any fights or egos getting in the way.
As most of you know, CA enacted a law where any handgun (DA revolvers and all semi-autos) had to be submitted for a safety test. Any such gun not on the approved list is banned for sale by dealers in CA. This law seems to prevent CA residents from buying older handguns that are no longer in production and therefore not on the approved list because nobody wants to pay for having them approved.
A good friend and I were discussing this situation last night with a CA FFL holder who operates a large gun shop in a big CA city. He had just completed a course with the state DOJ to learn all about the laws affecting gun selling. He pointed out that the statute clearly states that private transfers, one non-FFL to another, are expemt from the requirement regarding the safety test. If Bob has a M29-2 that he wants to sell to Jim, they go to the local FFL and he transfer the gun from seller to buyer. Even though the gun is not on the approved list, private transfers are exempt from this requirement. Furthermore, an FFL can display unapproved consignment guns for sale in his shop in a separate case, and transfer them to the buyers. He cannot offer for sale, on his own behalf, a gun not on the approved list.
Now, my dealer friend noted that nowhere in the law does it say that the two parties involved in the private party transfer are required to both be CA residents. He maintains that it would be perfectly legal for a private party in another state to send an unapproved gun to a CA FFL for a private party transfer to a CA buyer.
We have looked at the law, and it does say that private party transfers are exempt from the safety requirement, and I don't see anything there about out of state sellers being banned from selling to in-state buyers. The FFL I was talking with holds that as he had it explained to him by the DOJ representative, only professional dealers (FFL holders) would be prohibited from sending an unapproved gun into CA for trnasfer to a buyer. A non-FFL holder would be exempt according to state law just as would be any in-state private party transfer seller. He said that he had transferred a number of guns to CA buyers from out of state sellers (non-FFLs) and the DOJ running the background checks had said nothing.
If he is correct, this would have a profound effect on CA residents who wanted to purchase older guns that are not on the approved list.
Please, no arguing or posturing, but I would like to hear some input from people familiar with CA gun laws. If you have a reasonable point to make, pro or con, let's hear it. But again, no fights or yelling at each other. Discussions on gun laws often break down into shouting matches about who is more knowledgeabe. I would like some calm, reasoned discussion here. Thanks.
As most of you know, CA enacted a law where any handgun (DA revolvers and all semi-autos) had to be submitted for a safety test. Any such gun not on the approved list is banned for sale by dealers in CA. This law seems to prevent CA residents from buying older handguns that are no longer in production and therefore not on the approved list because nobody wants to pay for having them approved.
A good friend and I were discussing this situation last night with a CA FFL holder who operates a large gun shop in a big CA city. He had just completed a course with the state DOJ to learn all about the laws affecting gun selling. He pointed out that the statute clearly states that private transfers, one non-FFL to another, are expemt from the requirement regarding the safety test. If Bob has a M29-2 that he wants to sell to Jim, they go to the local FFL and he transfer the gun from seller to buyer. Even though the gun is not on the approved list, private transfers are exempt from this requirement. Furthermore, an FFL can display unapproved consignment guns for sale in his shop in a separate case, and transfer them to the buyers. He cannot offer for sale, on his own behalf, a gun not on the approved list.
Now, my dealer friend noted that nowhere in the law does it say that the two parties involved in the private party transfer are required to both be CA residents. He maintains that it would be perfectly legal for a private party in another state to send an unapproved gun to a CA FFL for a private party transfer to a CA buyer.
We have looked at the law, and it does say that private party transfers are exempt from the safety requirement, and I don't see anything there about out of state sellers being banned from selling to in-state buyers. The FFL I was talking with holds that as he had it explained to him by the DOJ representative, only professional dealers (FFL holders) would be prohibited from sending an unapproved gun into CA for trnasfer to a buyer. A non-FFL holder would be exempt according to state law just as would be any in-state private party transfer seller. He said that he had transferred a number of guns to CA buyers from out of state sellers (non-FFLs) and the DOJ running the background checks had said nothing.
If he is correct, this would have a profound effect on CA residents who wanted to purchase older guns that are not on the approved list.
Please, no arguing or posturing, but I would like to hear some input from people familiar with CA gun laws. If you have a reasonable point to make, pro or con, let's hear it. But again, no fights or yelling at each other. Discussions on gun laws often break down into shouting matches about who is more knowledgeabe. I would like some calm, reasoned discussion here. Thanks.