Chopping a shotgun

[Scully]

I know this has been done before ( and quite recently I think ) and I've done a search but can't find it. I wouldn't mind but mate had this done some years ago and he can't remember how much it cost nor if Teague insisted on it being reproofed. Am playing with the idea of having my auto barrel chopped and then Teagued, but only if I don't have to have it reproofed because I resent having to fork out money for something if it isn't necessary. 

I know it is illegal to knowingly sell an unproved or out of proof firearm, but he wouldn't be selling me the gun, nor even gifting it as it's already mine. Can a dealer INSIST on reproofing? 

 

[JJsDad]

Yes, if you see the extract below he can insist. I think you will find `He` commits an offence if he modifies your barrels and returns them to you without re-proof.

 

The Proof Acts require a gun to be re-proofed if it has been “materially weakened” by repair work such as reboring or weld/brazing of the action. Equally, the screw-cutting of a barrel for a sound moderator, the installation of new screw-in chokes and fitting a muzzle-brake require a re-proof.
Read more at https://www.shootinguk.co.uk/guns/proof-marks-and-re-proofing-a-gun-2272#baeCPB6lZo8ci5Q3.99

[walshie]

No he can't as it's not a legal requirement if you're keeping it. He might try though. 

Oops. Just read the above but I stand by what I said. Last gun I had chopped and screwcut wasn't reproofed I wasn't even asked if I wanted it to be.

Edited April 12, 2019 by walshie

[JJsDad]

9 minutes ago, walshie said:

He might try though. 

Have a look at Teague`s website. I wouldnt think he would risk ruining his reputation to save someone the cost of re-proof.

[JJsDad]

8 hours ago, walshie said:

Just read the above but I stand by what I said.

OOOps !! 😉

http://www.gunproof.com/Proof_Memoranda/RULESOFP.PDF

 

6.—If a barrel of one sort is converted into a barrel of another sort, (for example a short barrel into a longer barrel or a barrel into a sound moderated barrel or from a fixed choke to an interchangeable choke,) the barrel shall be deemed out of proof from the time when the conversion is begun. (See sections 115 and 130 of the Principal Act, as amended.)

Edited April 13, 2019 by JJsDad

[Walker570]

Proofing was never an expensive thing compared to the work done.  Personally I would accept that it be done. Having said that, I have a side by side 410 which I modified, shortened the barrel to just on the legal limit for use as a squirrel dispatcher, but of course I could not sell it as such.

[welshwarrior]

Fitting of multichokes does require reproof.  You fitting a construction inside the barrel having removed a large proportion of the metal.  

[walshie]

2 hours ago, JJsDad said:

OOOps !! 😉

http://www.gunproof.com/Proof_Memoranda/RULESOFP.PDF

 

6.—If a barrel of one sort is converted into a barrel of another sort, (for example a short barrel into a longer barrel or a barrel into a sound moderated barrel or from a fixed choke to an interchangeable choke,) the barrel shall be deemed out of proof from the time when the conversion is begun. (See sections 115 and 130 of the Principal Act, as amended.)

Yes, thank you. I can read English.

As I'm sure you can see, it states that once the work has begun, the barrel shall be deemed out of proof. I didn't say otherwise. Having an out of proof gun is not illegal. Selling it is. The OP clearly said he wasn't going to sell the gun. 

Edited April 13, 2019 by walshie

[Gunman]

Most reputable dealers take the attitude that in this day and age of litigation , that covering ones back is paramount .So if obeying the letter of the law is in their over all best interests they will do so rather than risk potential prosecutions and court cases . 

There is nothing wrong or illegal in owning and using an out of proof or unproved arm .So if  a customer insists that a gun has work that will take it out of proof done then there is no reason to have the gun reproofed provided the customer fully accepts responsibility for it .

That said the gunsmith is within his rights to either refuse to do so unless the gun has been submitted . In my working life I have done both but each depended on its specific case .

I would suspect Teague  , now owned by Westley Richards , who are on the board of Guardians of the Birmingham proof house will not take any risks and insist on the gun being proofed .

There are other companies who fit multi chokes who may be more flexible in this .

From a possible litigation point of view  ,supposing the barrels are shortened the chokes fitted , The gun is then in use and the ends of the barrels blow off ? If any injury occurs then there could be a case against the owner and in turn against the gunsmiths who did the work .From his point of view the gun being proofed would largely negate him of any responsibility of poor  or inappropriate work . 

 

[Scully]

Thanks all. I, like walshie, ( and several mates ) have a chopped and re-threaded .22rf that wasn't reproofed following the work, and have owned an unproved shotgun also, which is fine as long as they're not sold. I realise no laws would be broken by not having my gun reproofed following the work, I just wondered if a dealer CAN insist the work be done. I of course also realise he can refuse the work if I don't want to comply, which is fair enough, as the above post by Gunman makes plenty sense. 

I'll give them a call and if they insist, I'll see if I can get it done elsewhere, although I would prefer it done by Teague as I like their chokes. If no one else is willing to do it without sending it for reproof then I'll simply have to bite the bullet as it were. I'm not tight, I simply resent having to comply with and pay for something totally unnecessary and time consuming, but that's my problem. 

Thanks again all. 👍

[Gunman]

There is a big difference between threading a rifle and fitting multi chokes . 

 

 

[Scully]

30 minutes ago, Gunman said:

There is a big difference between threading a rifle and fitting multi chokes . 

 

 

Yes, I appreciate that, but not according to the proviso in the proof act, supplied by the post of JJsDad, regarding work which requires reproofing, which states the gun requires reproofing after fitting multi chokes, and also applies to rethreading ( screw cutting as they term it ) after chopping. 

I'm not looking for an argument as we've been down this road before, but I don't like being conned.  It irritates me to have to pay for work which is unneccesary; no one insisted I submit my rf for reproofing. 

I browsed Teagues website and it lists all those services which they claim require reproofing. I'll have to talk to them about it and if I want to stay with Teague then I may well have to stump up, but i'll be shopping around first. 

[Old farrier]

So how would you feel if you’re standing adjacent to a fellow sports man who has sawn a couple of inches off his gun threaded the end of the barrel fitted some home made chokes after he lapped out the barrel and altered the chamber length? 

The proof act is there to protect you and others 

this is a safety issue!!!! 

Would your insurance be valid if you have a issue with your out of proof gun ? 

We see enough issues with in proof guns 

just my thoughts 

of 

[Scully]

No one is suggesting a DIY job; the work would be carried out by professionals; it's the 'need' for reproofing I have the issue with. The gun in question is brand new and has already been proofed. I have owned and used guns which have never been proofed, and as said, mates and me have used chopped and rethreaded rifles for donkies years which haven't been reproofed and which haven't required reproofing. How do any of us know that the gun next to us is in proof? How many of the 'issues' you mention you see enough of with proven guns are anything to do with proof or indeed a lack of it?  

If it WAS a safety issue then we would have been required by law to have the work done on our rifles, but all the law requires is that we don't sell them in that state...to 'gift' or 'give' them is perfectly fine however. The authorities are obviously quite happy for out of proof and unproven guns to be in circulation. It's not a safety issue.

I could understand older guns being required to undergo some sort of MOT, but even that isn't required. 

The question of insurance is a valid and interesting one, but even they have to accept that the law doesn't require a gun 'has' to be in proof or proven before it is used. 

My gripe is having to pay for something that not even law requires is done, but rather at a dealers insistence. Like I said, I may have to bite the bullet but will have a good shop around first. 

[welshwarrior]

You’ll likely find the gunsmiths insurance will not cover him if the guns not reproofed therefore he won’t do the work with out reproofing (my insurance wouldn’t) 

gifting out of proof guns is also a grey area that I’m not getting involved in.  

Fitting mulitchokes is involved to get right so you’ll end up with a biggish company they won’t risk it for a couple of hundred quid and will say no proof no work. 

[Scully]

32 minutes ago, welshwarrior said:

You’ll likely find the gunsmiths insurance will not cover him if the guns not reproofed therefore he won’t do the work with out reproofing (my insurance wouldn’t) 

gifting out of proof guns is also a grey area that I’m not getting involved in.  

Fitting mulitchokes is involved to get right so you’ll end up with a biggish company they won’t risk it for a couple of hundred quid and will say no proof no work. 

Thanks, that sounds as I suspected and fair enough. Thanks again. 

[Dekers]

The debate rages about what really needs re proof, most RFD/Gunsmiths will insist on re proof if they do any barrel type work simply as an **** covering exercise!