I have a family member who lives in California and is very interested in my SIG 320 Compact Carry. Is it legal to transfer from an FFL in Michigan to an FFL in California a pistol that isn’t on the enumerated approved list? It would either be a gift or a sale for a really good price.

Nope.

quote:

Originally posted by Nismo:
Nope.

Succinct and to the point!

quote:

Originally posted by G-Man:

quote:

Originally posted by Nismo:
Nope.

Succinct and to the point!

But wrong.

It can be done, but it depends on the relative.

It has to be a close one, like a parent, son, or daughter; not something like a distant cousin.

You also have to go through all the usual CA gun ownership BS and it must be delivered through an FFL.

I’ll try to post a link to the official site when I’m in front of my computer unless someone else beats me to it.

quote:

Originally posted by rmfnla:

quote:

Originally posted by G-Man:

quote:

Originally posted by Nismo:
Nope.

Succinct and to the point!

But wrong.

It can be done, but it depends on the relative.

It has to be a close one, like a parent, son, or daughter; not something like a distant cousin.

You also have to go through all the usual CA gun ownership BS and it must be delivered through an FFL.

I’ll try to post a link to the official site when I’m in front of my computer unless someone else beats me to it.

It is my son, so yes a close relative.

I've been assured by a salesman at a reliable LGS that one can indeed gift an off-roster firearm to a parent or son in CA.
A California FFL will know--I suggest your son go to a good local gun store and ask how to do it.

You're right. I'll keep my mouth shut in the future. My apologies.

http://wiki.calgunsfoundation...._Some_Family_Members

He’s checking with an FFL on his end. I wanted to make sure it was legal on my end before I contact a dealer in Michigan. I appreciate the input!

Also
No magazines that have a higher capacity of 10 rounds

Do you have to prove where you obtained a firearm in Kommiefornia?

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Do you have to prove where you obtained a firearm in Kommiefornia?

You might be surprised to learn that it was Gov. Ronald Reagan who signed the Mulford Act, which prohibits the carrying of firearms on your person, in your vehicle, and in any public place or on the street, and he also signed off on our 15-day waiting period for firearm purchases.

“There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons,” Reagan said at the time.

He also supported bans on "assault-style" weapons, and said, “I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.”

Well I learned something new about this. From the Wiki:

Example of interstate intrafamilial transfer
Suppose you live in California, and your grandparent lives in Texas. Your grandparent wants to give you a pistol as a gift.

Since your grandparent is yet living, this transfer is not an inheritance.

Because it is interstate, Texas to California, the pistol must go to a CA FFL - the receiver may not take possession until the transfer has occurred at the CA FFL - so
CALL the FFL ahead of time to see if he understands interstate intrafamilial transfer; any FFL who suggests you do not need his services for an interstate intrafamilial transfer does NOT understand it.

ASK about the fees; there are no regulations limiting the transfer fees on interstate transfer.

ASK whether the FFL will accept a shipment from a non-licensed person; that is legal, but some have a business practice to accept only from other licensed persons.

Handguns transferred via intrafamilial transfer are NOT subject to the Roster.

Handguns should be accompanied by a letter of gift, specifying giver's name and relationship (e.g. John Smith, Grandfather), the handgun (e.g. Glock 17 9mm pistol, serial 12345), and the receiver's name (e.g. Little Jimmy Smith).

Since the transfer must use a CA FFL, the ordinary rules for an FFL transfer must be followed, including background check and 10-day wait. The receiver should be at least 18 years old for a long gun, 21 for a handgun; if a handgun, the receiver may have an unexpired Handgun Safety Certificate; otherwise, from 2015 forward, a Firearms Safety Certificate is required for any firearm.
The FFL should use the DROS "Curio/Relic/Exempt" process, and add a comment "27870PC intrafamily transfer".

Perfectly legal. Find an FFL who will accept and transfer the gun. Most will. Do not ship magazines over 10 rounds.

You guys are awesome! Another example of the invaluable resource and knowledge base that is SIGForum!!

.... and 21 for a shotgun as of 2020...

Sounds like you have ideas for Xmas gifts for years to come!

Since it's your son, you can do an intra-familial transfer. And I encourage that you don't stop at this one because handguns that are otherwise hard to get (i.e. off roster of handguns CA deems as safe) in CA bring a premium on the secondary market.

Before he moved to California, he depleted my gun safe pretty well. In fact, I have three adult sons who each took about a 1/4 of my firearm collection when they left the nest. I don’t have much to gift them any more, but I prefer it that way.

quote:

Originally posted by G-Man:
Before he moved to California, he depleted my gun safe pretty well. In fact, I have three adult sons who each took about a 1/4 of my firearm collection when they left the nest. I don’t have much to gift them any more, but I prefer it that way.

This way they can enjoy them now.

Definitely a win-win!

quote:

Originally posted by rmfnla:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Do you have to prove where you obtained a firearm in Kommiefornia?

You might be surprised to learn that it was Gov. Ronald Reagan who signed the Mulford Act, which prohibits the carrying of firearms on your person, in your vehicle, and in any public place or on the street, and he also signed off on our 15-day waiting period for firearm purchases.

“There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons,” Reagan said at the time.

He also supported bans on "assault-style" weapons, and said, “I do not believe in taking away the right of the citizen for sporting, for hunting and so forth, or for home defense. But I do believe that an AK-47, a machine gun, is not a sporting weapon or needed for defense of a home.”

Reagan wasn't a friend of the Second Amendment. He also signed off on the last and, essentially complete ban on new full auto guns.