Fifth Circuit Federal District Court finds against residency handgun requirement

[MillCreek]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/11/federal-court-rules-residency-requirements-pistol-/?page=1

Wow, this will be a major decision if it survives appeal.  It essentially removes the residency requirement under the 1968 GCA for handgun purchases.  This particular case involves residents of Washington DC (which has no gun stores) who tried to purchase a handgun in Texas and bring it back home to DC.

[Ben]

If upheld, I wonder how things will work for people from states with waiting periods? I'm guessing you'll go through the instant check in the state you purchased from, then have to drop the handgun off at an FFL in your resident state, pay the fees, and wait your required period.

[Firethorn]

Wow, this is good. 

If upheld, I wonder how things will work for people from states with waiting periods? I'm guessing you'll go through the instant check in the state you purchased from, then have to drop the handgun off at an FFL in your resident state, pay the fees, and wait your required period.

DC - no state, no local FFLs.  This puts the restriction into the same categories as things like abortion provisions - the court generally frowns on states that try to ban abortions by the 'simple' expedient of imposing regulatory hurdles such that no abortion provider can exist under them.  (note, this is neutral about actual positions on abortion).  Same with voting and such.

Ergo, you can't have both a law that says 'no gun dealers in DC' and one that amounts to 'you have to buy your handgun in DC if you're a DC resident'.

Dropping the gun off at a local FFL for the waiting period would be just stupid, as you'd simply skip that step if you intend harm.  Makes it even more obvious that they're useless, in my opinion.

[Ben]

Dropping the gun off at a local FFL for the waiting period would be just stupid, as you'd simply skip that step if you intend harm.  Makes it even more obvious that they're useless, in my opinion.

I agree, and understand how it would work for DC, but was curious how it would apply to buying a handgun in a free state and bringing it into a not so free state. I'm sure if this goes through at some point I'd be able to go to a gun store in Nevada and buy a handgun and the store wouldn't care less what CA's laws are. However, if for instance, I was approached by LE at a gun range and they decided to run my gun's serial number only to find it wasn't registered in CA, then what? Which is why I'm figuring that unless this ruling went through another iteration to handle "waiting period" states, that I would be stuck with a second DROS.

[Angel Eyes]

I agree, and understand how it would work for DC, but was curious how it would apply to buying a handgun in a free state and bringing it into a not so free state. I'm sure if this goes through at some point I'd be able to go to a gun store in Nevada and buy a handgun and the store wouldn't care less what CA's laws are. However, if for instance, I was approached by LE at a gun range and they decided to run my gun's serial number only to find it wasn't registered in CA, then what? Which is why I'm figuring that unless this ruling went through another iteration to handle "waiting period" states, that I would be stuck with a second DROS.

Just guessing, but you'd probably still have to register it.  I believe the Cali DOJ has a form you fill out and mail in with a nominal fee.  A second DROS would probably not be necessary.

There is also California's "safe handgun" roster: what happens if you buy an off-roster handgun out of state?

[MikeB]

There is also California's "safe handgun" roster: what happens if you buy an off-roster handgun out of state?

Currently when buying a rifle out of state you are still restricted to what is legal in your home state according to the law as I understand it. Not usually an issue in a state like PA, and I don't normally buy(especially in person) from out of state FFL's.

I don't see this ruling changing that type of reasoning at this time, but the logic in it could possibly help bring down so called "safe lists" in states like CA and MA. Or even possibly AWB's in other states. It also may not affect them at all. I'm constantly amazed at the way some judges torture the written words in laws to find decisions that make no sense.

[Ben]

Just guessing, but you'd probably still have to register it.  I believe the Cali DOJ has a form you fill out and mail in with a nominal fee.  A second DROS would probably not be necessary.

There is also California's "safe handgun" roster: what happens if you buy an off-roster handgun out of state?

I knew about that form, but thought it was just for incoming residents versus current residents (outside of C&R or other FFLs) buying in person out of state, but I can't keep up with the rules here, so who knows?

I'm thinking the roster might be on the way out via lawsuits soon, given how small it has gotten since the microstamping debacle. It's getting close to a de facto handgun ban.

[freakazoid]

Just guessing, but you'd probably still have to register it.  I believe the Cali DOJ has a form you fill out and mail in with a nominal fee.  A second DROS would probably not be necessary.

There is also California's "safe handgun" roster: what happens if you buy an off-roster handgun out of state?

There are ways around the roster, converting them into single shots then once in, back to normal.
And for bringing things into state and registering, you have so long to do it. Not sure how long that is though, 6 months I think. How are they to know when it was brought in if you ever got questioned.

[Angel Eyes]

There are ways around the roster, converting them into single shots then once in, back to normal.

The single-shot exemption is no longer an option:  https://www.gunownersca.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=220:governor-jerry-brown-signs-ab-1964-to-ban-single-shot-exemption&catid=91:2013-articles&Itemid=179

[freakazoid]

The single-shot exemption is no longer an option:  https://www.gunownersca.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=220:governor-jerry-brown-signs-ab-1964-to-ban-single-shot-exemption&catid=91:2013-articles&Itemid=179

Well son of a b...

[230RN]

I'm gonna buy a trailer so I can haul a bunch of legal books and journals around with me behind my car.

Terrified Terry