Moving back to CA, do you need to re-register firearms that were purchased in CA?

[elemental]

A federal form 4473 is not registration since the form lives with the dealer.

Aww yes it is. It is not "your name to gun S/N" indexed, but it is "gun S/N to name" index (at least last FFL transfer name). You are correct that 4473s are held by the dealers (while in business), but that doesn't make it not a registry just distributed. This is used all the time to find the owner (via FFL) of a gun.

When people talk about a gun registry they really mean changing, replacing, or adding a new registry that allows them to index by name (i.e. John Dow owns ….) and yes this is already the case for title 2 items.

But this is way off topic. At the core of the question, if you bring anything into CA as a new resident (including moving back) and it’s not already in the CA registry you will need to add it. This technically includes any grandfathered gun that you took out and are now bringing back in, but it would be up to them to prove that you took it out and brought it back vs just leaving it in CA while you were gone.

Handguns purchased/transferred through a CA FFL dealer have been registered since 1931.

We are talking about the DROS registry which started in 2000. I'm not sure but the 1931 date sounds like the federal NFA title 1 section, but if your right it just makes the grandfather date evan older.

 

[westsidearms]

Aww yes it is. It is not "your name to gun S/N" indexed, but it is "gun S/N to name" index (at least last FFL transfer name). You are correct that 4473s are held by the dealers (while in business), but that doesn't make it not a registry just distributed. This is used all the time to find the owner (via FFL) of a gun.

The 4473 is not a registry. Yes, it is possible they could track you down using a trace, but that still does not make it a registry. The government has no idea you have the firearm until they trace it. A registry they know exactly that you have it and can find it without a trace.

When people talk about a gun registry they really mean changing, replacing, or adding a new registry that allows them to index by name (i.e. John Dow owns ….) and yes this is already the case for title 2 items.

But this is way off topic. At the core of the question, if you bring anything into CA as a new resident (including moving back) and it’s not already in the CA registry you will need to add it. This technically includes any grandfathered gun that you took out and are now bringing back in, but it would be up to them to prove that you took it out and brought it back vs just leaving it in CA while you were gone.

We agree. And I would say do not do it. Screw them. Let them figure out you moved out and came back and did not register your firearms.

We are talking about the DROS registry which started in 2000. I'm not sure but the 1931 date sounds like the federal NFA title 1 section, but if your right it just makes the grandfather date evan older.

DROS is older than 2000. Not sure of the exact date, but would guess possibly closer to 1991 when the handgun registration began.

 

[elemental]

The 4473 is not a registry. Yes, it is possible they could track you down using a trace, but that still does not make it a registry. The government has no idea you have the firearm until they trace it. A registry they know exactly that you have it and can find it without a trace.

From a practical point of view I totally agree, but from a technical definition point of view it is. They could get the data, but they would need to scan all dealer records which should be blocked by the courts based on current laws (key words being should and current).

DROS is older than 2000. Not sure of the exact date, but would guess possibly closer to 1991 when the handgun registration began.

Yeah, I didn’t have the exact dates, but it sounds like the relevant update is 1991 one which added PPTs.

 

[westsidearms]

From a practical point of view I totally agree, but from a technical definition point of view it is. They could get the data, but they would need to scan all dealer records which should be blocked by the courts based on current laws (key words being should and current).

We are splitting hairs. I still think the 4473 is not a registry because there are plenty of states that allow private party sales outside of dealers. Once that occurs, the chain is potentially broken and that data will not point to where the gun is. And that is using lawful means of transfer and ignoring that anyone could illegally sell firearms anywhere and also break the chain.

They say they are not scanning records. Further, I have tons of records they have no access to until they ask me about a serial number. Even further, unless they have the gun serial number either through having the physical gun or knowing about it, they still have no idea who guns belong to. If I were a Free American (not living in California) and they wanted to know which Glock I owned, they have zero clue. Glock sells their pistols to wholesalers and Glock would have zero guesses which FFL I used from any number of wholesalers too. Again, that is not a registry.

California has a clear registry. They can look up your guns by name and hell even that registry is used to sell you ammunition instantly.

 

[Librarian]

DROS is older than 2000. Not sure of the exact date, but would guess possibly closer to 1991 when the handgun registration began.

DROS is known by that name since 1924.

Required use of an FFL for in-CA transfers was 1991.

See the old Calguns wiki article, http://web.archive.org/web/20191018...p?title=Time_Line_of_California_Firearms_Laws

Sadly, the wiki 'broke' in 2015, and cannot be updated.

 

[elemental]

Totally agree the 4473 breaks with states the don't use a FFL for PPT.

no access to until they ask me about a serial number.

Correct. My point is they can ask.

 

[AR15barrels]

Correct. My point is they can ask.

They can only ask if they have a serial number which means they have to have your serial number before they can research who owns the gun.
If they have your serial number, you done something wrong, like letting the gun get stolen or you left it at some crime scene.

 

[elemental]

That's not the only way, but again not the point of this thread.

 

[46knuck]

There's one thing that we felt better in CA was the kids education. This was at least true in my kids district. Trust me, if it was my choice alone, the. I would not move back. However, wife's job pays significantly higher there so financially it makes sense.

I am glad you have a good school district, there a few left in the state but not many at all. Nationally California ranks 37th out of 50 for best education system, thanks to one party that has been in control in Sacramento for over 35 years. Income is important, I'm sure it was a tough decision overall for your family. Good Luck with it all.

 

[SLORNR]

I moved out of CA and brought a few CA firearms with me, will be moving back and would need to register all of my out of states firearms. Do I need to include those that I brought from CA and now back?

Just a recommendation. Suggestion.

If you have not moved yet, set up a Firearms/NFA Trust in the state you are in now. Assuming it is an NFA legal state.

Put people on the trust that are close (Family) and make yourself the primary executor. Leave all the non CA compliant firearms and accessories in a safe or vault on the property of someone else also on the trust. This is the only way I have access to privately owned NFA items and freedom firearms not legal in CA. Of course, NEVER bring these items into CA. You actually have to get permission from the ATF to take privately owned registered SBR and Machine Guns to another NFA legal state. CA is a no go without special licenses like the kind used by Hollywood Prop Houses, FFL/SOT dealers or exempt Government Agencies.

I live like a vagabond and get to use these items with greater frequency than I anticipated, and I appreciate them even more than if I had 24/7 immediate access.

 

[SLORNR]

You can have multiple state residency under California law, but not under federal law.

Please refer to 27CFR478.11 for the federal definition of "State of Residence" and note the requirement to be physically present within a state in order to be a resident of the state. Additionally note from the examples contained in the regulation how quickly, and easily, a person with homes in multiple states can change their residency, but they're only a resident of one state at a time.

I am very aware, as is the IRS.

 

[RickD427]

I am very aware, as is the IRS.

Then I'm sure that you're also aware that the definition of "Residency" for the purposes of firearms laws, has nothing to do with the definition of "Residency" for tax purposes.

 

[SLORNR]

Then I'm sure that you're also aware that the definition of "Residency" for the purposes of firearms laws, has nothing to do with the definition of "Residency" for tax purposes.

Sure. But for the sake of bandwidth preservation, what exactly is the point you are trying to make regarding “Residency” for the purposes of firearms laws?