Wow. We've jumped from whether proof is or isn't a good idea to a suggestion that having a proofhouse, even if it's SAAMI--which happens to be VOLUNTARY, although as far as I know all American arms and ammo makers subscribe to its guidelines--would end up with our guns somehow being taken away. Get out the tinfoil hats, boys . . . the aliens are about to invade.
First of all, here's what OUGHT to happen: two or three of those shade tree gunsmiths, who lengthen short chambers and advise the owners of said modified guns to "just go ahead and shoot anything you want" ought to be on the receiving end of what's fired from those guns themselves. Then maybe, just maybe, the word would get out that that's not only an unwise practice, but downright dangerous--both to the gun and, potentially, to the guy who owns it.
Second of all, unfortunately, your average buyer of a gun--any gun--won't go anywhere near taking the steps that Mark takes (measuring barrel wall thickness etc) when he buys a gun. There are a whole lot of places that deal in at least some vintage guns where the people selling the guns don't really know how to use a bore and choke gauge, let alone a wall thickness gauge. So, again unfortunately, we have a whole lot of altered and potentially unsafe guns foisted upon an uneducated buying public. And the concept of proof is bad, because it lessens the possibility that someone might end up with an unsafe gun? As lagopus pointed out, if you want to keep a gun and modify it however you want, all well and good. However, if you want to sell it . . . then the game should change. At the very least, you should provide "full disclosure" of your modifications to the buyer. There are "lemon laws" that regulate car dealers. Are they a bad idea? And if not, why not apply them to gun dealers--who are, after all, already licensed by THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT?
If OSHA were to ever get around to examining the gun business, they'd probably go nuts. And if they ever got to the point where they could regulate it, I can guarantee that we would not like the results. Proof laws exist virtually everywhere else, and proof already exists on a voluntary basis here, on new guns and on ammunition. Personally, as some have suggested above, I like the idea of being able to look at the proof markings on a British (or other European) gun and tell that it's been modified--and reproofed with those modifications. In contrast, I pick up a Fox 12ga with 2 3/4" chambers, and if it's from say the early 20's, I'm never quite sure whether that gun started life with those chambers or with short chambers. I like the former concept better. Others can pick their poison. It is, after all, a free country.
There it is. Create an agency for a
POTENTIAL problem. Sound familiar?
SRH
