And true, but it'd require proofing if the owner wanted to sell it. That said, who would actually know?
and that is the key question. we all go on about proof etc, but who would know, and more to the point, who would care?
I'm sure if I rang up the police to report a 'crime' of selling a gun out of proof, despite all the laws in place etc, they wouldn't care. even if i went to my FEO i'm not sure they'd care, especially if seller was not in their area. If in their area I suppose it may go towards character etc, and if an RFD lead to a chat, but I doubt more than that, and I doubt with any urgency.
a lot of shooters live in fear of the dreaded 'in proof' but we are probably the only ones to care.
I can assure you they very much do care. I know of someone who is feeling the full wraith of the FLD/Police force for mistakenly doing just that, even the though the sale didn't even end up happening.
And true, but it'd require proofing if the owner wanted to sell it. That said, who would actually know?
and that is the key question. we all go on about proof etc, but who would know, and more to the point, who would care?
I'm sure if I rang up the police to report a 'crime' of selling a gun out of proof, despite all the laws in place etc, they wouldn't care. even if i went to my FEO i'm not sure they'd care, especially if seller was not in their area. If in their area I suppose it may go towards character etc, and if an RFD lead to a chat, but I doubt more than that, and I doubt with any urgency.
a lot of shooters live in fear of the dreaded 'in proof' but we are probably the only ones to care.
I agree. I believe proofing is a bit of a racket now. Back in the days of sub-quality metallurgy, it absolutely did matter that your sidearm wasn't really a grenade in waiting.
With the quality of steel and materials we enjoy now, the proof marks are irrelevant. The Americans don't foist it on their guns.
Indeed, there is an argument to be made that overcharging a load well beyond what the manufacturer intended should put that new gun out of warranty.
I also find myself wondering "OK, the gun survived THAT but what stress damage may now be lurking within?"
"I don't like my job and I don't think I'm gonna go anymore."
I also find myself wondering "OK, the gun survived THAT but what stress damage may now be lurking within?"
That has also crossed my mind, because now it will have to be applied again to my rifles, and if they fail who's fault will that be...........not the Proof House that's for sure.
Never argue with an idiot, he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
One thing to remember, which a lot of gun shops seem to forget as well, a warranty is in addition to your consumer rights and does not replace them.
Search CRA 2015 and you'll see what your legal rights are. These also apply to second hand goods as well as new.
Over a year old you'll (probably) need to get an independent report, but if the report says the failure is inherent i.e. not wear and tear, poor handling, deliberate mis-use etc. then the RETAILER should either repair for free, replace or refund - if a refund then a 'reasonable' amount can be deducted for the amount of use you have had out of the product.
While not strictly legally accurate, the CRA can be used for up to 6 years after purchase (to be accurate you can sue under the CRA for as long as you like, but any judgement can only be enforced 6 years after purchase).
Remember the important first rule: it's the product RETALER you have to go after, you don't have any 'contract' under the CRA with the manufacturer, importer, wholesaler etc. only who you paid the purchase price to. If you don't get anywhere with he retailer, the it's a Letter Before Action and then MCOL against the retailer.
And for goodness sake, do not let anyone tell you (as I had once after a new firearm malfunctioned badly after the first couple of range days), "if it's been shot then you've accepted it and you don't have any right of return"! This isn't only 100% rubbish, it's possibly an offense under the CRA to deny / misrepresent your rights.
Were it a case of a component failing that prevented me from shooting it then I would be all over this as, as you rightly say, the vendor is the person with a contractual obligation.
However, it's a cosmetic issue of no consequence, indeed it's one less thing to have to dry out following cleaning. I actually prefer the look, too.
Also, the last time I took a firearm back to the vendor for a warranty repair it came back with a slight bulge in the muzzle which I then had to dress with a file and then recrown myself. It was clear it had slipped in the bench vice and impacted the slide. As ever ... it's often better to just sort it oneself.
"I don't like my job and I don't think I'm gonna go anymore."
