Legal Question about buying off roster gun from private party transfer

[Librarian]

Not sure if you knew but a lot of people that buy guns and drive them into state lines run a potential felony charge down the line. I used to work for a gun store and proper way to bring your property from out of state you need to send it from FFL TO FFL but a lot of gun stores won’t do that cause they don’t know how to accept peoples (property) transfers from out of state.

Absolutely not.

People who buy guns out of state are already running some Federal risk, and CA PC 27585 requires that any guns obtained by a CA resident be conveyed to a CA FFL for re-conveyance.

That's different from New Resident. CA law allows no-FFL import. For a New Resident to send his/her guns to a CA FFL would indeed be confusing to the FFL, because it is not needed. But the 'voluntary' report of those guns, at least in CA's view, gets the guns into AFS associated with the resident.

Failure to register is a misdemeanor - PC 27590 (a) - if you have no other 'color'.

And, "FFL to FFL" is a business practice applied by many FFLs - it is not a requirement in either CA nor Federal law.

 

[Librarian]

So librarian: based off PC 27560 (if you are the new resident/seller) you can sell the off roster (firearm) as long as you meet 27545 to a CA Resident? Just confirming. I thought the same...

That's what the black-letter law says.

 

[Librarian]

That’s why when people have dual IDs and buy guns out of state and bring them back and sell them for profit, those are the ones who are getting rich, normally what they don’t know also is us as employees of gun stores if a person does more than 5PPTs we have to report it and if it’s law enforcement doing it we contact their chief cause believe it or not a lot of people who buy off rosters and sell them are law enforcement as well.

Pretty clear violation of Federal law 18 USC 922 (a)(3 and 5) - that would be 5 years in Federal prison and/or $10,000 fine, loss of gun rights forever, etc.

EDIT: someone violating Federal law that way would also seem to be violating CA PC 27585 - and for a handgun or semiautomatic centerfire rifle, such a violation would be a felony through PC 27590(c)(7).

(c) If any of the following circumstances apply, a violation of this article shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, or by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment:

LE agencies often have rules for their members; violation can get you fired, aside from other potential legal issues.

 

[westsidearms]

I'm curious, if someone is selling an off roster gun and it is not registered in CA first, it won't pass the PPT process, correct? Or are you saying an off roster gun not registered in CA can pass the PPT process but then later on, the new owner will run into issues?

How do you check if an off roster gun you're looking at is registered in CA?

I have never had a PPT fail because of the gun. Now is that because none of the hundreds of PPTs I have conducted in the last 20 years were all properly registered to the seller and the DOJ checks on them or is it because the DOJ does not care? I think that answer is quite obvious.

Sure if you get in a shooting or decide to be a criminal, the ATF will do a trace to figure out what happened with that gun. That does not necessarily mean you are going to get in trouble. If there is zero evidence you conspired to have someone buy a gun out of state and unlawfully import it into California so you could PPT it, then you would not be convicted of a crime. So if you answer an ad for PPT gun and buy it not knowing a clue about where it came from, but it passes the DROS and is delivered, the state is going to have a hard time claiming you did anything wrong. Could they claim your gun is contraband and try and confiscate it from you? Sure if you were in a shooting or they are prosecuting the seller. You would need to get a lawyer and fight that.

If you are being legitimate and buying and off roster handgun from someone, I personally would not worry about it. The PPT DROS is evidence you did things properly and you cannot control the seller nor even determine where they got it from. However, if you want to live life risk free, then never buy a off roster handgun PPT. Your choice.

 

[00pj00]

I'm curious, if someone is selling an off roster gun and it is not registered in CA first, it won't pass the PPT process, correct? Or are you saying an off roster gun not registered in CA can pass the PPT process but then later on, the new owner will run into issues?

How do you check if an off roster gun you're looking at is registered in CA

If someone moves to CA with off-roster guns, they have 90 days from when they bring the gun into the state to sell them OR register them. That means you could potentially buy a gun off of someone who recently brought it into the state and that gun is not yet registered in CA. The gun would become registered in CA, to you, once you do the PPT. So this is a scenario where a non-registered gun can pass the PPT process, assuming it is legal to own in CA. Just wanted to call out that scenario to help answer your question. I'm not sure what happens with guns that were not legally brought into the state, e.g., illegally imported by a CA resident or not reported within the required time frame - did you get an answer on that?

 

[vplaza96]

If someone moves to CA with off-roster guns, they have 90 days from when they bring the gun into the state to sell them OR register them. That means you could potentially buy a gun off of someone who recently brought it into the state and that gun is not yet registered in CA. The gun would become registered in CA, to you, once you do the PPT. So this is a scenario where a non-registered gun can pass the PPT process, assuming it is legal to own in CA. Just wanted to call out that scenario to help answer your question. I'm not sure what happens with guns that were not legally brought into the state, e.g., illegally imported by a CA resident or not reported within the required time frame - did you get an answer on that?

Thanks. No, I didn't see a clear answer but sounds like if it's not registered, it can still pass DROS/PPT but at a later time, if used in a self defense situation, it may be determined that it was never registered. And that's where the trouble supposedly can happen.

But without any method or tools for a buyer to determine if an off-roster gun they are buying has been registered, it sounds like it's a 'take your chances' situation with any off-roster PPTs.

 

[lopez1171]

Done a fair number of PPT’s and I’ve never paid until the transaction was processed and did the inspection inside the store at the counter. Last PPT the seller told me to hang on to the money till we are back outside.

 

[treelogger]

If someone moves to CA with off-roster guns, they have 90 days from when they bring the gun into the state to sell them OR register them.

60, not 90. For example see https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/ab991 or read the PC.

I'm not sure what happens with guns that were not legally brought into the state, e.g., illegally imported by a CA resident or not reported within the required time frame - did you get an answer on that?

That's a very good question, and only people inside the DoJ BoF would know the accurate answer. But there is a pretty good guess we can take: If a gun shows up in a DROS which has never been in California, the DROS process (run by the DoJ) has no records from its own databases, the so-called AFS (I think that stands for Automated Firearms System, not sure). There is no federal registry it can consult, because the ATF famously does not have a registry. If the gun is not reported as stolen nor involved in crime, it won't be in the NTC database (national tracing system). In the normal course of business, guns that show up for the first time in the state will enter the AFS as a DROS from an FFL, since the FFL doesn't have to notify the DoJ when they receive a gun from an out-of-state distributor (they only have to enter the gun into their bound book). But a gun that first shows up in a PPT is also not that unusual, because of new residents selling them within 60 days. So my guess would be that the DoJ simply doesn't look or care whether the guns as sold within 60 days, until and unless other trouble shows up.

 

[westsidearms]

60, not 90. For example see https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/ab991 or read the PC.


That's a very good question, and only people inside the DoJ BoF would know the accurate answer. But there is a pretty good guess we can take: If a gun shows up in a DROS which has never been in California, the DROS process (run by the DoJ) has no records from its own databases, the so-called AFS (I think that stands for Automated Firearms System, not sure). There is no federal registry it can consult, because the ATF famously does not have a registry. If the gun is not reported as stolen nor involved in crime, it won't be in the NTC database (national tracing system). In the normal course of business, guns that show up for the first time in the state will enter the AFS as a DROS from an FFL, since the FFL doesn't have to notify the DoJ when they receive a gun from an out-of-state distributor (they only have to enter the gun into their bound book). But a gun that first shows up in a PPT is also not that unusual, because of new residents selling them within 60 days. So my guess would be that the DoJ simply doesn't look or care whether the guns as sold within 60 days, until and unless other trouble shows up.

This is a great observation. Do not forget old guns that existed before registration was required. Perfectly legally for them to stay unregistered until they decide to PPT them. So they would have no AFS record and be perfectly legal to sell and buy.

 

[SSSLICKSSS]

This is a great observation. Do not forget old guns that existed before registration was required. Perfectly legally for them to stay unregistered until they decide to PPT them. So they would have no AFS record and be perfectly legal to sell and buy.

California thinks they are smart by making rules but kind of stupid since their rules aren’t 100% fine print then?

 

[westsidearms]

California thinks they are smart by making rules but kind of stupid since their rules aren’t 100% fine print then?

I am not sure what "aren't 100% fine print" means, but the more complex the law written by people who do not understand how any of this works, the easier it is for people to think of clever ways to comply and still accomplish what they want to accomplish. There also comes a point where the small bureau that handles all of this cannot keep up with it all and just cannot enforce the rules. Not to mention 99% of this is just harassment of gun owners and does absolutely nothing to stop real criminals from actually infringing upon the rights of others. Which then starts to encourage people to just do what they are going to do because if the government wants to make them a criminal perpetrating a victimless crime, why not just go all in?

I still advocate do not be the low hanging fruit, but at some point good people need to start realizing they should just live their life and not worry so much about the nanny state that is not competent enough to come after them. Do not become a gun dealer and do that. They actually come see me occasionally so I have to stay legit. I have many customers that are either unknowingly or purposely breaking California law and the vast majority of them will never get caught. The sooner you realize no one cares, the sooner you just live your life until the Supreme Court strikes it all down anyway.

 

[treelogger]

Do not forget old guns that existed before registration was required.

The number of legally owned guns that are not in AFS is already small, and is shrinking rapidly. Since 1991, all handgun purchases and transfers have been papered. That's nearly 35 years ago! And the number of guns sold has been increasing steadily, probably by a factor of 2x or 3x since then (the exact statistics are on the DoJ web site). For long guns, the DROS system has had their make/model/serial entered only since 2014. But the DoJ has been photographing or scanning dealer's bound books and/or 4473 copies, and is going back to the 1920s. We are reaching the point where a gun that has no records will be the rare exception, so rare that it is highly likely to be associated with an illegal act.

 

[DJD100]

Ok, so, if I purchase an off-roster Sig P365 FCU and go ahead and assemble it into a complete 365-380 with my parts at PPT time, and then DROS the complete firearm assembled as a 365-380, is that legal (and will a FFL have issues doing it that way since the real sale is just for a stand-alone FCU)?

Again, my goal is to have a P365-380 DROS'd (both serial and caliber), just to make my IA happy as they want both caliber and serial on the record.

 

[Librarian]

This is a great observation. Do not forget old guns that existed before registration was required. Perfectly legally for them to stay unregistered until they decide to PPT them. So they would have no AFS record and be perfectly legal to sell and buy.

Also inheritance and intrafamilial transfer is supposed to be reported, even though those usually get to skip the FFL.

Along with all the other 'reports' CA expects, I suspect only a small percentage of the 'required' reports ever get made.

I have opined that about 50 years should be long enough for an un-papered gun to need to be transferred to inheritors, so somewhere around 2040 CA may start checking and enforcing that transferred handguns be in AFS; 2064 might be similarly reasonable for long guns but I'd wager that the 2040 change would be general.

If I win that wager, send $ to my estate; I don't expect to collect in person in 2040.

 

[SSSLICKSSS]

I am not sure what "aren't 100% fine print" means, but the more complex the law written by people who do not understand how any of this works, the easier it is for people to think of clever ways to comply and still accomplish what they want to accomplish. There also comes a point where the small bureau that handles all of this cannot keep up with it all and just cannot enforce the rules. Not to mention 99% of this is just harassment of gun owners and does absolutely nothing to stop real criminals from actually infringing upon the rights of others. Which then starts to encourage people to just do what they are going to do because if the government wants to make them a criminal perpetrating a victimless crime, why not just go all in?

I still advocate do not be the low hanging fruit, but at some point good people need to start realizing they should just live their life and not worry so much about the nanny state that is not competent enough to come after them. Do not become a gun dealer and do that. They actually come see me occasionally so I have to stay legit. I have many customers that are either unknowingly or purposely breaking California law and the vast majority of them will never get caught. The sooner you realize no one cares, the sooner you just live your life until the Supreme Court strikes it all down anyway.

The number of legally owned guns that are not in AFS is already small, and is shrinking rapidly. Since 1991, all handgun purchases and transfers have been papered. That's nearly 35 years ago! And the number of guns sold has been increasing steadily, probably by a factor of 2x or 3x since then (the exact statistics are on the DoJ web site). For long guns, the DROS system has had their make/model/serial entered only since 2014. But the DoJ has been photographing or scanning dealer's bound books and/or 4473 copies, and is going back to the 1920s. We are reaching the point where a gun that has no records will be the rare exception, so rare that it is highly likely to be associated with an illegal act.

If I may ask how do you know this knowledge of them going back to the 1920s and scanning dealers records and all?

 

[00pj00]

60, not 90. For example see https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/ab991 or read the PC.


That's a very good question, and only people inside the DoJ BoF would know the accurate answer. But there is a pretty good guess we can take: If a gun shows up in a DROS which has never been in California, the DROS process (run by the DoJ) has no records from its own databases, the so-called AFS (I think that stands for Automated Firearms System, not sure). There is no federal registry it can consult, because the ATF famously does not have a registry. If the gun is not reported as stolen nor involved in crime, it won't be in the NTC database (national tracing system). In the normal course of business, guns that show up for the first time in the state will enter the AFS as a DROS from an FFL, since the FFL doesn't have to notify the DoJ when they receive a gun from an out-of-state distributor (they only have to enter the gun into their bound book). But a gun that first shows up in a PPT is also not that unusual, because of new residents selling them within 60 days. So my guess would be that the DoJ simply doesn't look or care whether the guns as sold within 60 days, until and unless other trouble shows up.

Sorry, my mistake: 60 days is correct - thanks for flagging that.

Even if trouble shows up, my guess is that as long as the buyer legally purchased the gun via an FFL, the buyer would not get in trouble for owning a gun that later is determined to have been imported illegally in whatever scenario (unless the buyer knew at the time it was illegal). I assume worst case it gets confiscated, but that's a relatively minor worry if it was necessary to use it in self-defense.

 

[00pj00]

Done a fair number of PPT’s and I’ve never paid until the transaction was processed and did the inspection inside the store at the counter. Last PPT the seller told me to hang on to the money till we are back outside.Wou

Would the FFL know at the time the transaction was conducted in store between the buyer and seller that the gun was illegal? I think that would only come back with the background check, when the buyer comes to pick up the gun, wouldn't it? I'm assuming the background check and approval of the transaction includes a check on the gun.

 

[Librarian]

If I may ask how do you know this knowledge of them going back to the 1920s and scanning dealers records and all?

If you'll take a somewhat vague answer, because I don't recall precisely ...

In some testimony for some CA court case, the CA DOJ testified it was key-entering the old pre-computer DROS forms, adding the data to AFS. They were paper from 1924 through 1998 (PC 28205) and have been electronically-submitted-only since 1998.

Some years ago, a poster at Calguns reported that a gun he had purchased through a CA FFL in the 1970's sometime had appeared in AFS for him. Apparently they started with the most recent and worked backwards; don't know how far back they are in 2025, but data from the 80s or earlier is likely out of date today.

Of course, all they had was handgun info, and since pre-1990 one did not need to use a CA-licensed gun dealer for transfers, quite a lot of handgun transfers were not papered at all.

 

[westsidearms]

The number of legally owned guns that are not in AFS is already small, and is shrinking rapidly. Since 1991, all handgun purchases and transfers have been papered. That's nearly 35 years ago! And the number of guns sold has been increasing steadily, probably by a factor of 2x or 3x since then (the exact statistics are on the DoJ web site). For long guns, the DROS system has had their make/model/serial entered only since 2014. But the DoJ has been photographing or scanning dealer's bound books and/or 4473 copies, and is going back to the 1920s. We are reaching the point where a gun that has no records will be the rare exception, so rare that it is highly likely to be associated with an illegal act.

The CA DOJ does not have access to 4473s to scan and add to AFS. Pre-2014 long gun DROS has no gun information. The number of long guns pre-2014 is in the millions.

Would the FFL know at the time the transaction was conducted in store between the buyer and seller that the gun was illegal? I think that would only come back with the background check, when the buyer comes to pick up the gun, wouldn't it? I'm assuming the background check and approval of the transaction includes a check on the gun.

A check of the gun to see if it is stolen. Trying to input assault weapon information stops it right away and you cannot hit submit. Other than that, they have no idea what configuration guns are in and I have never heard of them contacting a dealer to ask.

 

[treelogger]

The number of long guns pre-2014 is in the millions.

And these days, every year about 1/3 or 1/2 of a million new long arms are sold in the state. Do that for a decade or two, and the pre-2014 (or pre-1991 or pre-1968) guns become the rare exception. Exactly as Librarian said above.