Combining a DP Enfield, a Shooter and a Gunsmith ended up with catastrophic failure!

[smellie]

Oh, my!

WHAT a mess!

First off, glad the injury was no worse, Old Joe, and do hope you make a speedy recovery. Lee-Enfield rifles are such fun; it's terrible to hear of something going amiss.

Part of the reason everyone is so very curious is that accidents of this magnitude with Lee-Enfields are just so VERY rare. The only one I can think of offhand which would compare with your experience was the accident which occurred around a fellow in rural Newfoundland when I was running a newspaper out there. His son fired a Number 4 with the BOLT-HEAD MISSING, this on the theory that the firing-pin should support the cartridge in the chamber. The wonderful surgeons at the James Paton Memorial Hospital in Gander got all the brass bits out of his son's eye and actually saved the eyesight. He brought the bolt to me to see if I had a new firing-pin for the thing, so I unscrewed the fired case from the bolt body, determined that the bolt body was split for nearly 2 inches and told him where to find another bolt. But that was the ONLY other accident of this type which I have encountered personally. Generally, the Lee-Enfield is among the very safest of rifles, this due in part to a simple and rugged design and in part to the exertions of responsible Armourers and Inspectors of the type which abound here on this forum, but are so rare anywhere else. They do their jobs well, adding to the near-incredible safety record of a truly marvellous piece of engineering.

Captain Laidler has good points in his argument, as does Alan de Enfield. The legal principle involved, that of selling known-defective equipment, goes back so far in the Common Law that it already was in the realm of folklore before the year 1000. That said, a certain amount of personal responsibility must also become involved. On Old Joe's side is the fact that, had the rifle been a Mauser, it would have been (marginally) safe to fire with those great holes in that precise location. What Old Joe does have going for him is that fact that he, personally, was new to the Lee Rifle. The SELLER has no such "out". He bought the rifle(s) knowing full well that they had been condemned, solicited their rebuilding into firing condition and then sold them. Old Joe now is paying the price for the SELLER's greed and cupidity.

Likely the gunsmith who did the work (at the Seller's behest) has been punished enough already. The vast majority of gunsmiths live in apprehension that THEY will ever become involved in such a mess and, when one does occur, they ARE affected by it, often very deeply. Nevertheless, he will have to be "named" in a suit, but the person who should be gone after, and most thoroughly, is the Seller.

Just my ha'pennyworth.

Again, my sympathies.

I do hope that Old Joe can find a GOOD Lee-Enfield to play with in the future. They are just TOO much fun to avoid.
.