With all the interest show about all things Proof related,has the time come for the American Government to pass an American Proof Act?It would mean of course that 80% of the guns in the US would be out of or unproofed and would be subject to these laws .All new guns would need to be individually proofed , all second hand guns would need to be proofed prior to sale or re sale.Shotguns pistols and rifles.
Set up proof Houses in most States run under statute by the US Standards Agency{sorry I dont know there proper title}and proof to international CIP standards.
Its a great idea ,a great business opportunity.
And you would not like it at all.
Please keep the US Government out of our gun business.
That would be impossible to do here in this country because concerning a great number of the guns in this country the government has no idea who bought them or their current owner.
Oh boy, now there's an idea! Obama could set up the proof house under the BATF&E with his new anti-gun guy in charge. Might be unconstitutional to confiscate all the old guns, but at least there'd be no new ones escaping 'proof'. Might even be ok to require proof of all the old ones too; be a shame if none of'em 'passed'...Geo
Gunman, the great majority of American weapons are (were) built to handle loads far in excess of international CIP standards. That's why they are so heavy and often clunky. Even 100 year old shotguns sent to England for proof usually sail through without a hitch. But more important, let's do what Walt said! The govt has no business with its camel nose under my tent.
The two English Proof Houses were set up by and are still run by the gun trade. It was done to prevent poor quality stuff getting out and damaging the reputation of the legitimate trade. It was set up by an Act of Parliament but any changes are instigated by the Guardians of the Proof House who are Trade Members. One of the World's first, if not the first, consumer protection scheme. Lagopus.....
Todayss gun safety is already controlled by a "proof system". It is called tort law. If a manufacturer screws up and markets an unsafe product they get sued!!
Bob Jurewicz
Manufacturers here in the US do proof their guns. The loads used are far higher in pressure than any European proof house uses.
I don't fear US manufactured firearms, but, I fear my government.
Best,
Ted
Sorry Gunman, but we still prefer to be free of the King. While we like reading about your proof system, it is best enjoyed as long as it stays on your side of the Atlantic. The jack booted thugs of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division of our Treasury department are already beyond where we need them.
Similar ads sold Winchesters and others. The concept of 'stronger than necessary' is a marketing ploy and has appeal even if blown guns aren't a common event.
Note that even with proof laws Burrard's books do include examples of burst guns, most attributed to obstructions.
Bad ammunition and careless shooting have wrecked many more guns than poor manufacture.
Gunman, your countryman make shotguns to fit like fine tailored suit and built with enough steel to be safe and to handle with speed and grace. Ours are overbuilt and turned out at rate of popcorn bags. I suspect that only few in a given batch are shot with overloads to assure strength and safety.
I think Gunman had his tongue firmly in his cheek when he posted that comment! That Brit dry humour again!
I'm an Englishman and I don't know assure I know everything by a long shot. Yes, I'd like very much to know who makes the finest guns in the world today, PJ, please enlighten me!
Mike
If I won lotto. I would order O/U from Ivo Fabbri and SxS from Armi Fratelli Bertuzzi. One day I will tell you why Italians do it better and it's not because I now shoot one of their mass produced clunkers.
Good choices, PJ, but If I was to win the lotto, I'd buy, without hesitation, a really nice bulino engraved LH Perazzi MX8, nice wood, 30" 12 ga barrels, fixed chokes, bottom Improved Cylinder, top Modified.
It doesn't get nuch better than that for me.
Mike
Me, I would buy a 'tween the wars Boss and Purdey and a Parker A1 Special, and then a Fox FE and a Lefever Optimus and an Ithaca Sousa Grade. That would be just the first month check mind you.
Mike
I would buy 4 or 5 sections of good hunting land
You have gone off tipic. I think gunman's is a great idea. A US proof house run under the CIP and BATF rules. It sure would clean up all that unsafe junk that's on sale over there. Think of all the business. I wish I owned the US proof house.
John,
I imagine that if you could set up the equipment in a traveling road show you would make quite a bit by coming over here once a year and proofing guns. Perhaps at the Vintagers?
Just a thought, was Canada ever subject to British proof law?
I would buy 4 or 5 sections of good hunting land
That would be with the second month check!
Rob
It sounds a good idea but it would have to be backed by the law as it is in the UK. No one would have their guns proofed if they did not have to by law. In the UK it is illegal to offer a gun for sale if it is out of proof or unproofed but you can own and use a gun that is out of proof.
I don't know about Canada I have never been there on gun business. I just go there salmon fishing to BC.
Hey guys, these Proof masters are not Green Martians with Super Powers you know.
The Proof loads data that they subject the barrels/actions to are readily available in a DVD available from The Birmingham Proof House. You reloaders could then conjure up your own proof loads, subject your guns to the pain and then inspect for signs of damage.After all you guys don't have proof laws so it makes good sense to be happy you are not going to get a finger full of barrel next time you shoot your little beauty.
No offense to anyone in particular, but the thought of govenment mandated proof testing of used guns is offensive.
Chuck, it's my understanding that firearms are specifically excluded from consumer protection laws in the US.
Your feelings on the subject are not unique.
Personally I think the Proof Laws always have been & still are more for the benefit of the "Maker" than the consumer.
Personally I think the Proof Laws always have been & still are more for the benefit of the "Maker" than the consumer.
Why do you think this?
Post deleted, it was a stupid thing to say anyway!!!
As I understand it they were originated by the "Gunmakers" in order to weed put "Cheap" shotguns which were cutting into their market. They I think felt these cheap guns would fail proof & be removed from the market. In this they were only marginally successful I believe as many did pass proof. Further any gun which had successfully passed proof limited the maker's libility in case of a failure.
Having lived my entire life in a nation sans proof laws I will have to say the vast majority of "Questionable" guns as to safety & integrity, have been imported from nations which does have proof laws. I in no way feel handicapped because the US does NOT have them.
