For all those who think the gun was 'off face' when submitted for proof, please read Shotgunjones' post on page one. I thought you would all know how the proof test worked by now.
What was I saying about ill-informed opinion...?
What exactly is "ill informed" about the realization by several of us, that it may not be wise to stress things like old guns or old wooden bridges well above their intended design limits? It seems to be common knowledge that the Birmingham Proof House is testing to some higher standard, which is apparently causing guns to fail that likely would have came though unscathed in the past. If you loan me one of your shotguns and I fire a super-hot and inappropriate handload that sends the barrels flying several yards down-range, would you be upset if I returned the shattered pieces to you and said, "This thing's off face!"
Only one person questioned whether the gun was off-face when submitted for proof, but he quickly said he'd bet you thought it would pass proof, i.e., he assumed you did your own educated and informed visual examination prior to the Proof House doing the same. Sorry about your luck, but when you posted this for discussion, you might have guessed that not everyone would agree with your decision to let someone destroy your gun.
