Dilemma proof or not to proof

[Mesarya 2]

Hi

 

Just wanted to have second opinion please.

 

I have a PH .308 rifle and T8 mod, spoken to my local gunsmith to have it screw cut and fitted.

He said yes no problem but do you want it proofed or not proofed.He has explained the difference but

from my point of view didn't see 100% necessity of getting it proof. He didn't say something you must. What would you do or what would you recommend?

Also there is a big difference in cost. Many thanks

[brno17 5]

if you plan to keep the rifle long term i wouldnt bother with proofing mate, its not a legal requirement. only becomes

a legal issue if you try and sell it as you would be selling a gun which is out of proof.

 

atb

alan.

[matt_hooks 188]

Opinions differ on this one.

 

It is illegal to sell a barrel that is "out of proof".

 

Whether screw cutting alters the strength of the barrel sufficiently to invalidate the proof is debatable. The proof houses will try and say that it does, but I have seen a legal opinion that states that screw threading, and even shortening, does not constitute a significant weakening of the barrel, and hence does not require re-proofing.

 

Personally I wouldn't re-proof. I am an engineer and understand something of the dynamics. The loading at the muzzle end of a rifle is pretty low, the bullet has attained most of it's velocity long before it gets there (unless the barrel is VERY short) and so the pressure is far lower than at the breach. Therefore the required strength, and risk of rupture, is much lower.

 

I'll have a look and see if I can dig out the legal opinion. I hasten to add that this is just my opinion, and the legal opinion is just that. Until it's been tested in court and precedent set, nobody can say whether it is illegal or not.

 

Edited to add, found the opinion, link below, from the Jackson Rifles website. They paid for the opinion as they make and sell moderators, only fair to give them a nod.

proofing-counsels opinion PDF

Edited February 17, 2011 by matt_hooks

[halamrose 24]

You can always proof it later when you come to sell, better that than be without the rifle now when you want to use it.

[SNAP SHOT 194]

i'd say if you were keeping it long term its up to you, but i proofed mine when i got the custom job done,

 

just leaves everything in order. And if there ever is issue with ammo, or injury at a stage, then you will have no legal comback if anything happens, As the barrel is outta proof

 

 

 

Snap.

[coldweld 65]

Don't waste your cash on proof.

I bet if you look in local gunshops at threaded rifles for sale most will NOT have a proof stamp near the thread !

So the question is how do the unaware know if it was threaded before the barrel was proofed or after ? As far as i am aware no case has been brought to court regarding this silly law

Edited February 17, 2011 by coldweld

[matt_hooks 188]

i'd say if you were keeping it long term its up to you, but i proofed mine when i got the custom job done,

 

just leaves everything in order. And if there ever is issue with ammo, or injury at a stage, then you will have no legal comback if anything happens, As the barrel is outta proof

 

 

 

Snap.

 

I don't agree. There is no offence of failing to prove. The only offence is "selling, exchanging or pawning, or exposing an out of proof gun for sale exchange or pawn."

The opinion I attached above suggests that, unless the barrel strength is "unduly reduced" then no re-proof is required.

 

Also, they have to prove that you had the threading done. If you buy a rifle with a screwcut end, you have no way of telling if it was proved with the screwcut or without, so you can then not be committing an offence by selling it on.

[SNAP SHOT 194]

if someone is shooting your gun and gets injured during an accident then there will be legal implications if the gun is NOT in proof,

 

i know the odds are very very slim, but i'd always error on the side of caution,

[dadioles 68]

if someone is shooting your gun and gets injured during an accident then there will be legal implications if the gun is NOT in proof,

 

i know the odds are very very slim, but i'd always error on the side of caution,

 

If there were to be an accident the issue of whether or not the gun had been proved since cut down or threaded would only be of significance if the accident was caused by or directly related to the modification that had been carried out and furthermore shown to have unduly weakened the barrel.

The barrel could explode and split if, for example, a second round was chambered and fired while the previous round was still jammed in the barrel after a misfire or perhaps a wrongly aligned or misfitted moderator was preventing the passage of the bullet but to be prosecuted you will have to be shown to have been negligent.

 

Logic suggests that shortening a barrel could actually have a strengthening effect as the pressure will be released sooner.

 

Incidentally, I understand that factory's such as Anschutz and CZ etc. manufacture their rifles with a standard barrel length for any particular model. In the case of my Anschutz 1517 HMR it has a "factory shortened" 14 inch barrel but the standard length is 23 inches.

I wonder at what point it was shortened?

Was it proofed before or after shortening?

Do they get shortened here in UK by the importer or the manufacturer?

Was it proofed at the factory in Germany or after import to UK?

 

It is surprising what you don't know until someone asks the right question.

Edited February 17, 2011 by dadioles