....this is how proof laws/houses work as trade barriers....
....England has been infamous for this kind of trade chicanery for generations.
Anyone old enough to remember when England tried to discredit guns from foreign countries that passed English proof? For the young fellows, England required all foreign made firearms to be marked “Not English Make” (i.e. “Made By Wogs”). Here is an example, a Czech made .22 target pistol that was imported into England during that period:....
Very interesting example. Correct me if I'm wrong, the significant requirement for any firearm to be in proof is to be lawfully registered and subject to ownership, possession and transfer laws. I hope the British gunsmiths can figure this issue out, rather than give up.
This depends on the country and to some degree the proof house.
At a minimum, to pass proof a firearm must:
1) have a chamber and bore that is dimensionally compliant with whatever standard the proof house follows,
2) pass the final (i.e. definitive) firing proof compliant with whatever standard the proof house follows, and
3) be observed to be in safe operating condition and operate properly.
Proof may lapse if the firearm is significantly altered (by intent, usage, or accident) such that any of the above three requirements may have been adversely affected.
At a basic level proof houses are interested in the ownership of a firearm submitted to proof only to the extent it affects being able to identify, bill, and return the firearm to the owner or his agent.
National governments may levy proof houses with additional requirements, or not.
