Browning_grrl wrote:Just btw, I'd never even heard of this until I read this thread. Seems like utter nonsense to me.
It's what you get with an organisation called the worshipful company of gunmakers (really look it up, the proof house is run by them).
Holy Crap! What a complete anachronism. So, they have a little cabal of 14 countries that they are in league with as well - what a crock, imo.
So sad, I can't sell any guns into the UK without going through the portcullis of this ancient Lads' Club......
Where's that Fawkes fella when ya need him??
This is where it gets really ridiculous- if you were to sell it directly to a private FAC holder (i.e. not a dealer) they could possess and use it no problems. If they were to offer it for sale, they would then be committing an offence.
As an aside- do those rifles proofed before they started adding proof marks to the muzzle end to prevent "illicit" rethreading now count as not proofed?
My Question is when does proof run out?
Many say surplus rifles are 'in proof' but since when? For example my No.5 has never left the country or had a proof mark except for military proof (and maybe a sold out of service one, can't remember). For arguments sake Say I whacked 15,000 rounds through it and the gun was worn, is it still in proof? The gun has been altered just heavily used, but may be out of spec? Where does one draw the line
It has nothing to do with safety it is just an institutionalised money making scam, so like firearms legislation it is futile to look for any "reason" in its application.
Come on Bambi get some
Imperial Good Metric Bad
Analogue Good Digital Bad
Ah but since they cite safety etc as a reason for proofing can we then sue the socks of them if a newly proofed barrel /action self destructs a few rounds later??
Thinking of a case here with an SGC 9mm and an ammo question - who's to say the proof round didn't weaken the thing?? Surely a proof round invalidates the warranty as it's not a round thegun was designed for??
Agree it's an anachronism...like a lot of our laws.
Political Correctness is the language of lies, written by the corrupt , spoken by the inept!
If the proof load is max + 10%, then I would expect that firearm makers would not be designing there arms to only take max + 10%.
I would expect them to design them to beable to take a lot more.
And considering the "max" is something the makers "allow", should we expect that one shot with only 10% more would damage the gun?
If this was so then running at makers "max" the gun would probably have a probability of 50% chance of failure by following their own recommendations!
The loads that the proof house use are 150% so 50% more than so called factory. You are deluding yourself if you think that they are only 10% more than so called max loads.
Go do some proper research you guys.
Steve E wrote:The loads that the proof house use are 150% so 50% more than so called factory. You are deluding yourself if you think that they are only 10% more than so called max loads.
Go do some proper research you guys.
