[alamosaddles]

Ok, here's a question, anyone who can answer this will be thanked very much.

Suppose that joe shmo living in california wants an xyz, and that california has stated xyz is prohibited, or anything along those lines.

Now, if joe shmo buys an xyz from me, and wants me to send it to him......what is my liability in a legal sense in this situation? I mean, frankly, I don't care if california classifies xyz as prohibited or not. I figure, it's up to the receiving FFL in california to transfer or not transfer the xyz. Thoughts or factual statements on the topic? XYZ could be a hi cap magazine, belt or ar15 lower, or anything else for that matter.

 

[southbysouthwest]

Ok, here's a question, anyone who can answer this will be thanked very much.

Suppose that joe shmo living in california wants an xyz, and that california has stated xyz is prohibited, or anything along those lines.

Now, if joe shmo buys an xyz from me, and wants me to send it to him......what is my liability in a legal sense in this situation? I mean, frankly, I don't care if california classifies xyz as prohibited or not. I figure, it's up to the receiving FFL in california to transfer or not transfer the xyz. Thoughts or factual statements on the topic? XYZ could be a hi cap magazine, belt or ar15 lower, or anything else for that matter.

CA FFL dealers can indeed receive "banned" stuff, like AW or high capacity mags since they are still allowed to sell them to LEOs, just not the general public. So sending an item to a CA FFL only depends on the FFL receiving it as no laws would be broken. Now the receiving FFL can only sell certain items to those with proper permits or those that are exempt such as LEOs. On high capacity mags, it could only go to a FFL dealer, an Armored Car company, a LEO or a LEA. If you do send to anyone other than a FFL, I would ask for official letterhead from the Armored Car Company or LEO/LEA if I were you to show where it was sent.

 

[George W]

Some answers maybe

Well since I live in your example state I'll try to answer.

Not sure what your asking actually but.
If you are sending something to an FFL in Calif. And the receiving Calif.FFL will sign for or receive it then he must know what he is doing.
People in Calif for the most part know the loop holes. You can't sell an assembled hi cap mag to us here but you can ship a rebuild high cap mag kit. which is nothing more than a dissasembled high cap mag in a bag. We can repair our broken pre ban mags with parts from new mags. You have not broken any California laws buy sending the magazine into california in pieces.
Should the buyer re-assemble the magazine into a complete functioning magazine he has broken the law not you.
You can send us and we can legaly purchase belted live ammo from anyone and anywere as long as it is linked in no more than 10 rnd belts. It is legal to send as long as it has been broken down into a can of 10 rnd belts and a few loose rnds that used to hold the belts together.
Basically we can own purchase ,buy , have ap and ball ammo. Anything else is illegal.
You will not have broken any California laws buy selling it to a California resident. I would suggest that you get the buyer to send you some kind of a letter that states they are of legal age to purchase it but that would be all that is required.
I know it sounds retarded and frankly it is.

Basics:
Links by them selves are perfactly legal to sell to anyone here.
Linked ball or ap ammo is legal to sell to us as long as it is broken down into belts of no more than 10 rnd belts .
Hi cap mag's are illegal to ship to us ( Exception : Some people have a special licence to purchase Hi -cap magazines Ask for a copy of there licence if there legit they will send it if they don't then don't sell to them.)

You can send the mag in pieces as a repair kit. It is legal to purchase repair parts for your legally owned pre ban mags. What the buyer does with them is not your problem . If your worried take a picture of it in pieces before you send it.

I appreciate you asking these questions .
I hope this helps you understand .
Please feel free to ask more question .

GW

 

[alamosaddles]

ok, let me clarify. I'm not asking because of any particular transaction I am considering or have been asked to engage in. It's just that I see some sellers state "will not ship to so and so" and therefore, I'm wondering if I did ship to so and so, if the state of California has anything they can say to me for doing so, or if the federal govt. aka (ATF) does either?

Here's a real example, regarding the .50 receivers that are being included in the group buy now. One member of this board asked if TNW would sell it to California. Seems to indicate that it's possible the company, TNW may say no sales to california. If I took that receiver and shipped it to the FFL in Cali, am I in hot water, or if anything was said to me by Cali, could I tell them to take a hike and buzz off?

 

[George W]

.50 BMG receivers to Calif.

I own a TNW built M2 I purchased from TNW. When I bought it they had gone thru the process of getting approval from Calif. DOJ and it came with a letter stating it was Calif. Doj compliant. Since then anything that fires a .50bmg round has been banned for future sale to Calif resident. Barret, TNW, Blugrass Armory and others have built weapons that are chambered for a new round which is basically a modified .50 bmg rnd.
It would be illegal to sell a weapon that fires the .50 BMG round to a california resident (Law enforcment exempt)

You are correct some people unfortunatly don't /won't bother to ask they will just turn there back and refuse to even ask what the laws are.

Parts kits or parts for the .50 bmg are legal.
A complete receiver or gun that fires the .50 BMG rnd is forbidden.
It is legal for those that owned them and registered them before 2006 to still have them.
Now if the weapon shoots the new rnd only and it transferes thru a FFL then you are not breaking any Calif laws.
Most manufactures make a Calif. legal version of what ever it is. Barrett was one of the first to recognize the Calif. people and the BS we have to deal with with the .50 ban and helped find away around the BS .50 ban.

Keep the questions coming.
This is healthy for the gun community.I hope other Calif gun owners will chime in.

PS be back in 30 mins
GW

GW

 

[alamosaddles]

I suppose the long and short of it is, that I don't really give a rats ass what California or any other state or county or city or juridstiction says or feels. As along as it is not a crime which I can get pinched for, I will sell and send anything anywhere in the US, and it's up to the receiving end to know their own laws and/or limitations.

I own a TNW built M2 I purchased from TNW. When I bought it they had gone thru the process of getting approval from Calif. DOJ and it came with a letter stating it was Calif. Doj compliant. Since then anything that fires a .50bmg round has been banned for future sale to Calif resident. Barret, TNW, Blugrass Armory and others have built weapons that are chambered for a new round which is basically a modified .50 bmg rnd.
It would be illegal to sell a weapon that fires the .50 BMG round to a california resident (Law enforcment exempt)

You are correct some people unfortunatly don't /won't bother to ask they will just turn there back and refuse to even ask what the laws are.

Parts kits or parts for the .50 bmg are legal.
A complete receiver or gun that fires the .50 BMG rnd is forbidden.
It is legal for those that owned them and registered them before 2006 to still have them.
Now if the weapon shoots the new rnd only and it transferes thru a FFL then you are not breaking any Calif laws.
Most manufactures make a Calif. legal version of what ever it is. Barrett was one of the first to recognize the Calif. people and the BS we have to deal with with the .50 ban and helped find away around the BS .50 ban.

Keep the questions coming.
This is healthy for the gun community.I hope other Calif gun owners will chime in.

PS be back in 30 mins
GW

GW

 

[hagar]

I suppose the long and short of it is, that I don't really give a rats ass what California or any other state or county or city or juridstiction says or feels. As along as it is not a crime which I can get pinched for, I will sell and send anything anywhere in the US, and it's up to the receiving end to know their own laws and/or limitations.

I am sure some either do not want to involve themselves or it is not worth there effort to stay on the cutting edge of what new laws (if any) may be current. The dealers may think they have enough business without making the extra effort.

If I had it all to do over again I would call my business "The Weapon Shop of Isher". It relates to an old science fiction story from the early fifties. I do not remember who wrote it. I think it was either Issac Asamov or Ray Bradberry. It was about a weapon store the government was trying to close down but they could not do it because the store traveled back and forth through time. Whenever they showed up it was gone into either the past or future.

 

[franks71vw]

me personally i couldnt give a hoot and not bother to sell to the commie states I would help fight and write letters but thats sums it all for me

 

[George W]

Well unfortunatly attidudes like that are part of the problem.
Your attitude will continue to spred the problem because you have a closed mind an an open mouth. Your attitude an actions can, do and , will influence others. We can do without your attitude.
Open minds and open mouths are welcome to help communicate and educate the masses.

You have the right to disagree and I support that but this is a gun board for gun people to promote safe , legal gun ownership and to help preserve the 2nd ammendment. Personnal opinions about State politics and the people that live there should not be part of it. It's hard to support the 2nd ammendment and at the same time tell someone it doesn't apply to me because of what state I live in.

You can't support the second ammendment and then in the next breath say but it only applies to me and the people in my state.
How is that helping?

I really don't want this to turn into a purse fight.
We have had our differences in opinion and thats the beauty of this country we have the freedom to do that.
I only ask how you would feel if you were on the receiving end.
GW

 

[Lone Ranger]

LT,

18 USC 922(b)(2); unlawful for licensee to ship or sell any firearm when it will place the recipient in violation of state law or published ordinance.

 

[franks71vw]

Thank You Ranger its not an attitude it is what it is.....

 

[George W]

Ok I'll bite

And your point is????????

Were in this whole thread is someone asking you or any seller to do anything that goes against 18 USC 922 (b)(2).
According to this code referance it backs up my point if it doesn't break this code then you have nothing to worry about nor would ALamosaddles

Were did I go against this statute ?
Please explain.

His whole point for asking as I read it was to try and understand if there is a law he would be breaking or if it is just un informed people with attitudes towards people in what they see as un-gun friendly as you put it communist states .

He is asking for facts not opinions.
At least LR is giving him facts.

 

[alamosaddles]

LT,

18 USC 922(b)(2); unlawful for licensee to ship or sell any firearm when it will place the recipient in violation of state law or published ordinance.

Thank you. That's what I was looking for. Now, keeping 18 USC 922(b)(2) in mind, if I sent a firearm to an FFL in that state, the recipient would be classified as the FFL and not as the end user correct?

 

[alamosaddles]

I may have missed the disagreement in this thread...not sure.

Anyhow, I'll expand on my point and purpose for the question.
I wanted to know for this reason. I don't want to be burdened with researching and knowing all of the laws governing firearms in other states in order to sell and ship to those states. That being said, if I can legally ship and deliver to an FFL a xyz, even if xyz's are illegal for civilians, then I am not breaking the law, and I am not in any violation of the rules that govern my licensure. I rather for the receiving FFL to know and understand the laws in his municipality, than for me to try and comprehend them a thousand miles away. I think as a buyer, one should know if what they are buying is ok or not in their location.

I mean, how do I know if the buyer is exempt from a ban or not, if the buyer is a leo or not? The transferring FFL can figure that out and either transfer the weapon or not.

Finally George, your right about that, I just want to make sure I'm not breaking the law if I do ship to your state for example.

As always, Lone Ranger came and clarified what I was searching for

And your point is????????

Were in this whole thread is someone asking you or any seller to do anything that goes against 18 USC 922 (b)(2).
According to this code referance it backs up my point if it doesn't break this code then you have nothing to worry about nor would ALamosaddles

Were did I go against this statute ?
Please explain.

His whole point for asking as I read it was to try and understand if there is a law he would be breaking or if it is just un informed people with attitudes towards people in what they see as un-gun friendly as you put it communist states .

He is asking for facts not opinions.
At least LR is giving him facts.

 

[Lone Ranger]

Thank you. That's what I was looking for. Now, keeping 18 USC 922(b)(2) in mind, if I sent a firearm to an FFL in that state, the recipient would be classified as the FFL and not as the end user correct?

I believe so (if my fever stricken brain follows correctly). If the dealer possessing/receiving it was a violation, theoretically, a pox on both your houses. If a dealer can get it legally, but not a non-licensee then your liability ends with sending it to the FFL. Theory on my part - haven't seen this one play out in real life.

 

[CaliBoundAR15]

Well, since this thread seems to be about me, I'll chime in.

Alamo here offered to receive a TNW receiver for me if in fact they would not sell it to me in CA, and then ship it to my FFL dealer here. The CA .50 BMG ban applies to rifles of which the M2 Browning is not. Plus, I believe the receivers are marked "50 cal", not .50 BMG but I am still waiting on verification of that. I am looking to set it up in .50 DTC anyway, so it is really a moot point.

 

[alamosaddles]

I believe so (if my fever stricken brain follows correctly). If the dealer possessing/receiving it was a violation, theoretically, a pox on both your houses. If a dealer can get it legally, but not a non-licensee then your liability ends with sending it to the FFL. Theory on my part - haven't seen this one play out in real life.

Ok, now, I am only familiar with Florida firearms laws etc., but do you know any instance where a particular firearm is for example legal here in my state, but illegal even for an FFL to receive? I'm not talking about an unregistered MG for example, just a particular type or class of firearm? I mean, can a state or municipality make it illegal for a FFL to possess a firearm in his or her inventory if it is legal according to federal law?

 

[alamosaddles]

Well, since this thread seems to be about me, I'll chime in.

Alamo here offered to receive a TNW receiver for me if in fact they would not sell it to me in CA, and then ship it to my FFL dealer here. The CA .50 BMG ban applies to rifles of which the M2 Browning is not. Plus, I believe the receivers are marked "50 cal", not .50 BMG but I am still waiting on verification of that. I am looking to set it up in .50 DTC anyway, so it is really a moot point.

Wasn't explicitly about you Cali, I've had the question on my mind for a short while, it was just refreshed with the TNW question was all.
Either way, if need be, my offer for you stands.

 

[Lone Ranger]

do you know any instance where a particular firearm is for example legal here in my state, but illegal even for an FFL to receive? I mean, can a state or municipality make it illegal for a FFL to possess a firearm in his or her inventory if it is legal according to federal law?

That is quite possible - some states ban MG possession, silencers, different degrees of semi-auto bans and "evil" cosmetic features. I think Chicago/Cook County has banned most everything. Using IL for an example, non-licensees can't get MGs, but SOTs and cops can.... but SOTs and cops can't have silencers (although might be an exception on silencers for 07s who build them). Some states limit MG possession to C&R guns, say semi-autos are bad, blah, blah. You got that yellow book now - check it out and you will give up trying to take it all in, especially when you see all the ordinances. Wyoming gets my bet for retirement because it takes up the least amount of page space.

 

[alamosaddles]

That is quite possible - some states ban MG possession, silencers, different degrees of semi-auto bans and "evil" cosmetic features. I think Chicago/Cook County has banned most everything. Using IL for an example, non-licensees can't get MGs, but SOTs and cops can.... but SOTs and cops can't have silencers (although might be an exception on silencers for 07s who build them). Some states limit MG possession to C&R guns, say semi-autos are bad, blah, blah. You got that yellow book now - check it out and you will give up trying to take it all in, especially when you see all the ordinances. Wyoming gets my bet for retirement because it takes up the least amount of page space.

I'd think that since for the most part, LE can purchase or obtain anything, then an FFL in that state or municipality could always be in possesion of a banned item, with the "purpose" of trying to sell it to the local LE dept. But you are right, way too many if's and's and but's to grasp it all. I'm pretty much set for Florida, and set on federal rules. It's other states that are the doozy. I'm gonna have to look into a parcel in Wyoming......