Old farrier Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 Hi Sorry my link isn't very good and sorry you think I think its law I don't However I do feel as its such a grey area and for my piece of mind it is best policy to submit a gun for re proof after work has been done Hope this clarifies my thoughts All the best Of Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 Hi Sorry my link isn't very good and sorry you think I think its law My apologies; I never meant to infer you think it is law, I was merely pointing out the fact it isn't just in case some misinterpreted your post. I don't However I do feel as its such a grey area and for my piece of mind it is best policy to submit a gun for re proof after work has been done That's entirely fair enough. I have no problem with freedom of choice, merely those who insist something is law, when it isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old farrier Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 Hi Sorry my link isn't very good and sorry you think I think its law My apologies; I never meant to infer you think it is law, I was merely pointing out the fact it isn't just in case some misinterpreted your post. I don't However I do feel as its such a grey area and for my piece of mind it is best policy to submit a gun for re proof after work has been done That's entirely fair enough. I have no problem with freedom of choice, merely those who insist something is law, when it isn't. Not a problem Thanks for your reply All the best Of Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesj Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 try this one. section 111 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/Vict/31-32/113 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 try this one. section 111 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/Vict/31-32/113 Section 111 deems said barrel to be unproved, nothing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesj Posted February 15, 2015 Report Share Posted February 15, 2015 Section 111 deems said barrel to be unproved, nothing more. Yes, so what is your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 16, 2015 Report Share Posted February 16, 2015 (edited) Yes, so what is your point? We're going round in circles. It's like Kent never went away.......... Why, simply because I refuse to perpetuate this myth? I don't mind being proved wrong. Everytime this topic comes up for conversation there are those who insist it is against the law not to have it reproofed, it just isn't. I can understand perfectly why some RFD's may insist on it if their insurers stipulate it, and I can understand why some with money as an incentive such as the proof house and dishonest RFD's who by perpetuating this myth is to their advantage, but that doesn't make it law. On the point of unscrupulous RFD's, the one my mate used charged 75 quid to have the job done, and was going to charge another 100 to have it reproofed until mate told him it wasn't necessary. We subsequently found out in conversation with someone that the bloke he used to do the work, charged 35 quid; the dealer was charging 40 quid just to hand over the gun to a gunsmith; he didn't even have to deliver it, the gunsmith came round to collect them ! If anyone wants to have their rifle barrel reproofed following screw cut, then by all means have it done, it's their choice, but for some to insist IT IS THE LAW, is just wrong. Edited February 16, 2015 by Scully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.