Well lagopus, whatever about just who is bringing the criminal complaint in British law, it will be the government that will enforce the conclusion. I'm sure you will agree. To do otherwise is splitting hairs. And that's just what gun owners in the USA don't want. Government interference in gun ownership means only one thing; more restrictions. Legislation covering the fineness of precious metals is a whole other ball game. There one can be fairly certain that the law is really designed to protect the consumer. Not so with gun laws. No gun law has ever been all about protection of the gun owner or buyer. Not even the establishment of the proof houses in Britain. They were primarily for the protection and advancement of the better known gun makers.
However, your last paragraph/question deserves an answer because it's very pertinent. While I can't speak for anyone else, I certainly would not buy an English gun that was not correctly proofed. I'm also sure that you are right about price being affected by it's lack of correct proof. It's not uncommon to see British guns with chambers punched from 2 1/2" to 2 3/4", particularly 16 gauge guns for some reason, here in the US without reproof. Such guns will not command the same price as one done in England and reproofed. But even so, I still do not want a proof house here. I only have to read "The Field" or "Shooting Times" to see what the Government has done to shooters in Britain. They are reduced to forming "advisory committees" to tell the minister just exactly how they want to be f##ked. I'd prefer to avoid that kind of love if I can. Americans have a different attitude to politicians. We don't trust them. We know 'em to be lying, sleazy, two faced, thieving, conniving, have I left anything out? bastards.
nial
