Import Marks

[Peter Laidler]

Just as a matter of interest, what would happen or what would be the consequences if, say, you cleaned up, bead blasted, phosphated and painted your imported No4 and the marks disappeared?

I ask because there was a bit of a hoo-ha in England recently when nobody really knew what to do, say or think (in typical authority fashion......) when a dewat (or deactivated ex-firearm) was subject to the same process and the extremely small and sometimes illegible certification marks were obliterated during the process. The only reason I was approached was to offer an expert opinion. I gave one but but only as an opinion and not an 'expert' opinion

Any answers

[Brian Dick]

It's illegal here in the USA to remove the marks and since they have a requirement for depth and size, it would be difficult to make them disappear without removing quite a bit of metal. Certainly more than a bead blaster would do. Of course, everything's OK until you get caught. That always seems to hold true.

[emmagee1917]

I disagree . The marks are there as required by law on the importers. Most of them were on the barrel . Change barrels , and the marks go bye-bye. No law that that can't be done and no law that you have to remark them.
Now , there is a new law about changing or adding any marks to a reciever , so that would apply to any import marks on a reciever .
Chris

[Brian Dick]

emmagee1917, I don't see anything in my reply to Peter about changing a barrel with import marks present. Peter's question was about physically removing the markings so I don't see what there is to disagree about. I do know that if you physically remove them with a file or grinder, you're in violation of the law. I sometimes wonder if these laws are even enforceable with the resources at hand but it only takes one perceived violation to put the spotlight on and ruin your day. Being a licensed importer and exporter. I know that I don't want to find out by being stupid.

[emmagee1917]

Can't remove them with a file or grinder , but can remove them with a barrel wrench . Hummm...good point . These laws are so convoluted noone can understand them. I would agree that the marks left removing them would look worse than the marks themselves , so that was my assumption on why you don't see it done .
Quick question , do you know the particulars on the new " can't mark the reciever unless you're the original maker " law . Is that just lettering or any engraving on the reciever ?
Thanks , Chris

[jamie5070]

I think the collectors that are looking for the perfect example will have a problem with the marks but then they have deeper pockets than I do.
I think the average collector who knows what he is looking for is going to be more interested in the rest of the gun than the few marks the importer stamped on them. I have two U.S. 1917 enfields that have marks on them, descreetly on the underside of the barrel. They are two of the best 1917's that I have ever found.
john

[enfield303t]

I would rather not have import marks however I think I would not hesitate if It were one I really needed. The marks being discreet would be the deciding factor for me.

The Lee Enfield 2A or 2A1 is a perfect example. Plentiful in the US but not so in Canda. If you want one you might have no option but to take one with a import mark.

[Peter Laidler]

Thanks for those answers chaps.

[Brian Dick]

Chris, I've never heard of that law. If I import a firearm, I'm bound by law to mark it on the barrel, frame or receiver with my business name, city-state, caliber and country of origin. New manufacture firearms also must have these markings.

[Capt Mil Coll]

Some import marks also carry the official serial number as required by law. Not the original serial number but the one that ATF requires to be able to import it. To remove that number is a Felony. Also to change a barrel on a firearm just to remove the import mark is also against ATF rules. However as stated as long as your not in the business of changing barrels to remove import marks who would know?.