And was it an actual background check, or did they just keep a record of who they received the items from?
If the latter, the same thing would have happened to you at a gun dealer, by federal law:
27 CFR 478.125(e) Firearms receipt and disposition by dealers. Except as provided in § 478.124a with respect to alternate records for the receipt and disposition of firearms by dealers, each licensed dealer shall enter into a record each receipt and disposition of firearms. In addition, before commencing or continuing a firearms business, each licensed dealer shall inventory the firearms possessed for such business and shall record same in the record required by this paragraph. The record required by this paragraph shall be maintained in bound form under the format prescribed below. The purchase or other acquisition of a firearm shall, except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, be recorded not later than the close of the next business day following the date of such purchase or acquisition. The record shall show the date of receipt, the name and address or the name and license number of the person from whom received, the name of the manufacturer and importer (if any), the model, serial number, type, and the caliber or gauge of the firearm.
--- Snip ---
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/27/478.125
Of course, it doesn't specifically say that a DL must be checked, but it seems like it would be a foolish dealer to omit that (and for all I know, CA may require verification).
In the other direction, the person subsequently purchasing the gun from the dealer would need to show ID and undergo a background check, but the check is not required in a private party sale. And I agree with you that that should change: the background check should be universal, whether the seller is a dealer or not (as it is here in CA)...
= new reply since forum marked as read