....I do not perceive Registration as Larry's intent in favor of this nor is my objection to it based on this aspect....
Snip or no snip, I do not believe that was Larry's intent either. It does seem like you got my point though. Larry uses examples that have nothing to do with nor do they support the case for a mandatory proof house in America.
I see Larry's justifications as changing and evolving, the ends justify the means. Way back around the biggest of mulberry bushes, he was sure mandating British style proof marks on some guns was going to protect uninformed consumers. Now, there is a consumer education component to contend with. I see another huge problem here, as the the reason for a proof house was because the consumer could not be trusted to acquire the proper education on their own.
Buzz noted he would be the most disappointed of all if the imposition of a proof house was used for anything other than lofty ideals. Trouble is to me, I haven't noticed any possible safe guards against using a proof house to pursuit opposing agendas. The vehicle analogy may not fit completely, but I've noticed how it is much more expensive to drive something that isn't on some pc correct list.
As Ronald Reagan said in the debates (back when they were more interesting!): "Now there you go again!" Craig, do me the courtesy of sticking to reading what's ON the lines I write rather than imparting your bizarre spin to what you think you can find BETWEEN the lines. "Acquiring the proper education . . . " Oh, if it were only so easy. When I look at a gun, I can tell what length the chambers are, because I have a chamber gauge. I can measure bore and choke, because I have a bore and choke gauge. I can measure wall thickness, because I have a wall thickness gauge. So it ain't only education that's at issue, Craig, but also a whole kit full of tools--and knowing how to use them--as well as knowing what to look for. To those that don't have all those tools, we often say "Take it to a good gunsmith for an evaluation." Well, that's practical for me right now, because Mark Beasland doesn't live that far down the road. Hugh Lomas is a bit farther away. When I lived in Iowa (more densely populated area than the part of WI where I now live), I didn't have a single experienced doublegun smith anywhere near me. So, good advice, but it doesn't work for everyone. And not everyone who goes out to buy their first sxs is going to read this BB before doing so. So, once again . . . do I prefer the system that exists in England and other CIP countries to the nonsystem that exists here? Yes I do. Do I recognize that such a system would be difficult to create here? Again, yes. But I find it much more comforting to pick up my vintage Sauer and know from the proofmarks that the fact it's overbored does not mean it's been significantly tampered with (and is in fact "out of proof" due to bore diameter as a 20ga), but rather that it left the factory that way. As opposed to picking up a vintage whatever American gun, and not being sure whether it left the factory with 2 3/4" chambers (unless I can access the factory records) or whether Bubba decided it ought to be 2 3/4" so the owner can run down to WalMart for ammunition. To me, determining which of those is a preferable situation is a no-brainer.
