Re Proofing

All things shotgun related.

Moderator: dromia

Post Reply
Message
Author
Nelly2014
Posts: 411
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 8:14 pm
Home club or Range: WNSC, UKPSA, SDC, MYOB
Contact:

Re Proofing

#1 Post by Nelly2014 »

I have seen a few discussions about reproofing barrels after work has been done which appear to only apply to rifles, and usually more often rimfire, cutting down, re-threading, crowning etc and the threat of breaching some section of the firearms act.
However, I've never seen anything about re-proofing modified S1 shotgun barrels eg re-threading for choke or chopping and fitting muzzle brakes. So does this not apply to shotguns in any way?
Rockhopper
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 2:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Re Proofing

#2 Post by Rockhopper »

Same rules apply to shotguns.
User avatar
Blackstuff
Site Supporter Since 2015
Posts: 7709
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 1:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Re Proofing

#3 Post by Blackstuff »

Not the proofing part, but pay special attention to S6 of the Firearms Act 1988!!

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/45/section/6

It creates stupid oddities in the firearms regs where a shotgun bought in a certain configuration is legal, a gun you add a different (shorter) barrel would be legal but if you shortened the barrel you already have you could be committing an offence kukkuk
DVC
User avatar
Mattnall
Site Supporter Since 2016
Posts: 2858
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:32 pm
Home club or Range: Harlow TAC, NRA, BSRC
Contact:

Re: Re Proofing

#4 Post by Mattnall »

The proof act states that any barrel that "be unduly reduced in Substance or Strength " is deemed unproved (s111).

It has been argued that a barrel shortened isn't reduced in substance or strength within the meaning of the GBPA.
Not sure how this works with shotgun barrels but I would guess if the bore has been reamed out the proof marks might not represent the proof status of the barrels so it's back to the proof house for them. However if you can argue the substance and strength hasn't been unduly reduced and the marks still represent the status of the barrels then it might be OK. It would be the smith who does the work and hands it back to you that would be the one that needs to be convinced as he'd be liable I guess.

As with most things regarding proof it is not very scientific or ultimately safe.
Arming the Country, one gun at a time.

Good deals with Paul101, Charlotte the flyer, majordisorder, Charlie Muggins, among others. Thanks everybody.
artiglio
Posts: 709
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:40 am
Location: KENT
Contact:

Re: Re Proofing

#5 Post by artiglio »

I stand to be corrected, but is the reason for the proof house now stamping at the muzzle end of the barrel as well done to negate the grey area of “substance or strength” in that any work would remove the proof mark, which in itself is an offence if the firearm is then not sent back for proof?
User avatar
Mattnall
Site Supporter Since 2016
Posts: 2858
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:32 pm
Home club or Range: Harlow TAC, NRA, BSRC
Contact:

Re: Re Proofing

#6 Post by Mattnall »

I believe that as a result of them having no answer to the question of shortening doesn't make it weaker so therefore not reduced in substance or strength that they did just this.
Arming the Country, one gun at a time.

Good deals with Paul101, Charlotte the flyer, majordisorder, Charlie Muggins, among others. Thanks everybody.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests