doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Proof House in USA??

Excellent post, lagopus--and that's what those of us who know something about the system in the UK would prefer to see. As opposed to--for example--guns and ammunition regulated by OSHA.

For those that have never heard of unobstructed guns failing for one reason or another, you just haven't been around long enough, or haven't been paying attention. Used to be a guy named Greg Tag who hung around here. He was into Ithacas, and one of his interests was keeping track of frame failures on Flues models, especially the light 20's. He had a few of those documented. Then there are the Bell tests, reported in DGJ. Yes, he used extreme overloads--but the barrels were not obstructed, and they did blow.

And Craig . . . no, I didn't stick 2 3/4" shells in a gun with 2 1/2" chambers. My first introduction to a firearm was my dad's Eastern Arms .410 single shot, which I still have. (Front bead gone, forend taped to the barrel.) It started life as a 2 1/2" gun. When the 3" shells appeared, what was the solution? Some gunsmith lengthened the chamber to 3", and voila. I had the same "surgery" performed on a pre-war Sauer 16. That was long before the existence of doublegunshop, even predated Al Gore's invention of the Internet. AND IT STILL HAPPENS--in spite of our best efforts here (and some of us, like myself, in print publications) to keep it from happening.

Gunsmiths that go to the doublegun school run by Dennis Potter and other experienced doublegun smiths know darned well that you don't punch chambers on short-chambered guns. Unfortunately, that is but a small % of the people in this country who hang out their shingle as a gunsmith. And only a small % of the people who own doubles read this website, or DGJ, or Shooting Sportsman, or other places where they're likely to get good information rather than copious amounts of BS.

But hey, if you want to leave everything in the hands of trial lawyers . . . yeah right. Like that's a rock solid, conservative position.

Larry you think a proof house is some kind of guarantee ?

Jeez Lagopus - we had a good anti-government rant going here and you go and start injecting facts into the discussion . . .

Here are a couple practical points to add to this discussion:

1. With the exception of CSMC (who I believe has their own proof system), no shotguns are made in the US, so all(?) new shotguns sold in the US have been proofed abroad.

2. If that is the case, what we would really be talking about is proofing used guns that that have been modified in the US and not re-proofed by the original proof house or that were never initially proofed.

3. jOe's point about the effects of proofing, particularly on older guns, needs to be addressed. Is there another way to prove guns safe without attemtpting to blow them up?

4. Conceptually, accepting more responsibility for safe use of your gun is a very legitimate point. As a practical matter, however, many of these questions do not have clear answers, often because the industry won't provide useful information. For instance, look how often the question comes about whether it is safe to shoot 2/34" shells in 21/2" chambers. The consensus seems to be that it is safe as long as it is a "light" load. But there are people whose opinions I respect who don't agree with that conclusion.

How about the question shooting steel shot in older guns? The makers will not provide a definitive answer to this question, particularly on the question of potential barrel damage. For isntance, Perazzi offers nothing official on the subject but buried deep in Karl Lippard's book is a passing reference pointing out that chokes with a certain threading are steel-proofed while chokes with a slightly different threading are not. I have the supposedly steel-proof chokes but there are not markings on them and nothing in the owner's manual. And this for a gun that was made only 10 years ago. Is it reasonable for me to rely on what Lippard says?

I totally agree that we do not need any more government regulation of guns (saying that as MA resident who had to get a license to own a long gun). But to circle back to Lagopus' point, the gun industry could do a whole lot better job helping gun owners understand what is and is not safe.

Several things should be noted here I think. Now I am not recommending that anyone with a short chambered gun Rush out & get the chambers lengthened, "BUT", doing so does not automatically turn it into a "Dangerous" gun. Many bbls have adequate wall thickness to allow the longer chamber.
Proofing does not automatically guarantee a gun will never burst. Essentially there are three conditions which will cause a barrel to burst, A flaw in the bbl, An overload or an obstruction.
Proofing will catch some, but not all, flaws while having virtually no affect on the other two. As Larry pointed out from Bell's tests it took a tremendous overload to burst a barrel. Obstructions are still far & away the most commoncause of a burst bbl. Flaws have surfaced afyer much use & burst some bbls, many of which had been proofed.
It should also be noted that "MOST" of the cheap guns the Brit gunmakers were trying to remove from the market "PASSED" proof.
While it has been noted the British proof laws were mandated by the gunmakers, it is also noted they are not voluntary, but mandated. I am not totally familiar with how they are set up, but to emulate them in the US would require an "Act of Congress". The gun companies themselves could not make them legally binding.
Friends "WE Don't Want That to Happen Here" Period.

Doverham,

Where do you think Ruger, Remington, Ithaca, Mossberg and Kolar shotguns are made?

www.americansworking.com/guns.html

SRH

guys: seems like if you have a gun that you would like proofed, then pay a reputable gunsmith to proof the gun and mark it as such, or provide you with a dated certificate of proof and the load used? the gunsmith i use proofs guns with winchester proof loads and either marks the gun or provides a certificate...seems like a simple solution to what appears to be a problem made complex here...

I agree 100%. I have e-mail friend in England who, like me, likes the great M12 pump- he was looking at one for sale there- and in our discussions, if he were to visit the USA and buy one here, he would have to have it proofed in England, and not only that- those here who know the M12 know you don't normally remove the magazine cap to add or remove the three shot plug mandated by a 1935 Act for migratory bird shooting-- But that is NOT sufficient for the Brits-their regs mandate all repeaters have the magazine tune CRIMPED" TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF SHELLS- NOT PLUGGED WITH A REMOVEABLE PLUG- AS IS LEGAL HERE- Boy Howdy- we already have a BATF(E) staffed by Holder, with the brain trust of an African pygmy and the reactions of a member of the Hitler Youth- re: fast and Furious FUBAR in mexico- so now we enable the POTUS (read anti-2nd. Amendment loud and clear) and other Eric Holder/Sarah Brady Bill Bunch &^%$#s-- to set up a proof house-

Are you gonna send your GrandDad's leFever Optomist Grade off to the Disney Land on the Potomac to have it checked over by some Civil Service schmucks? I don't think so- be verrrrry careful what you wish for on this Proof business- verrrrry careful indeed!!!

I appreciate that facts were injected here.

So let me understand, a non government industry organization has the power to prosecute and legally require destruction of a firearm. Are there any facts available on how often the proof houses have accepted liability for gun damage or injury after a gun passes proof.

Very interesting, hands up, how many folks would voluntarily participate. I would bet an optional US proof house would get exactly the same use as those folks who're sending guns to the UK for optional proofing at this time.

Remember, my comment was just my opinion. I believe if you substitute the updated information, my thought remains the same. Isn't it a far stretch to mandate proof houses because your favorite smithing school doesn't like lengthened chambers or to protect the public from over pressure testing.

I'm still curious, what liability have UK proof houses assumed for damage or injury after passing proof.

Thanks Stan. Kolar I overlooked, but the rest I thought had sent all their manufacturing overseas (Turkey?). Glad to hear I was wrong about that.