Un-serialed LB Mk I

[enfield303t]

It will be interesting to see if more LB's like this surface after the Long Gun Registry ends in Canada. I believe there are tens of thousands of unregistered guns "hiding" all over the country. We can always hope as they make a great conversation piece.

Generally a firearm like this probably was liberated out the back door just like grey market products are today.

Registering this gun could prove to be very interesting. I think of the "discussions" I had with someone trying to tell me my Lee Enfield "must have a letter prefix" before the serial number...well it didn't and it went downhill from there. With the LG Registry about to take its last breath why bother trying to register it.

[boltaction]

Yes, it is odd. That one is on Gunnutz. Asking 950, which seems high for a rifle which is pictured without the front topwood and front sight "ears".

Ed

Actually, looking at the rifle again, it is also missing the end of the barrel and bayonet lugs. Most bizarre.

Ed

---------- Post added at 08:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 AM ----------

It will be interesting to see if more LB's like this surface after the Long Gun Registry ends in Canada. I believe there are tens of thousands of unregistered guns "hiding" all over the country. We can always hope as they make a great conversation piece.

Generally a firearm like probably was liberated out the back door just like grey market products are today.

Registering this gun could prove to be very interesting. I think of the "discussions" I had with someone trying to tell me my Lee Enfield "must have a letter prefix" before the serial number...well it didn't and it went downhill from there. With the LG Registry about to take its last breath why bother trying to register it.

It's already registered--just uses a FIN sticker. No different than a Ross. It certainly is possible it was a back door liberated piece--it would seem that if that was the case, the security at Long Branch must have been lax. I can see pistols and pistol parts leaving the Inglis factory, because the parts are small and easily concealed. However, a fully assembled rifle is a tougher proposition I would think. This rifle certianly didn't leave the factory as "parts"..............

I see you're in the Okanagan--so am I. Whereabouts?

Ed

Ed

[Peter Laidler]

The trouble, if there are so many un-numbered mint LB No4 rifles is in a few years, EVERY one could be a highly prized and valuable 'presentation piece' to........., well, anyone famous really! Just like my fictitious, recently engraved .38"revolver belonging to Montgomery! It's also a dubious double edged sword too for someone with a REAL famous and highly prized presentation piece.......

You have been warned.............. No paperwork of other documentation and you could very well be up the proverbial gum tree.
It also reminds me of the WW2 Jeep that started its life off as a gash hack used by the Guard room staff at an old RAF camp near to where I lived as a boy. Now it's the first one ashore on DDay carrying Ike and his staff no less, complete with flags and siren!

[Albayo]

The Long Branch with the missing front top wood and sight ears, appears to be missing a piece of the barrel which includes the bayonet lugs.
A Long Branch without a serial number isn't uncommon I have run across them over the years. I liked the pictures of the earlier Long Branch stock which the wood removed for a magazine cut off. The front sight assembly looks similar to a P14 & P17s.
That is a leeper.

[enfield303t]

It would be nice to have one without a serial number and how many exist will never be known.

The reasoning about it being liberated out the back door goes from years ago being able to get almost anything reasonable if I had the item the guy wanted in trade. I lived where there was a very active RCAF base and was involved in many trades.

Horse trading was part of the culture. I ended up with a USAF flight jacket (cold weather) for a fishing reel. The guy that had the jacket was in crash rescue. While stationed in Germany a Yank approached him needing red paint, the Canadians had lots the Yanks none and couldn't get it. Five gallons of red got the guy a case of flight jackets, said he thought he was only getting one.

Got a RCAF one in a similar trade, of course unissued. Life was simpler then.

[Bullseye4mkI*]

I believe this gun, because of it's late 'liberation' from Long Branch could probably be provenance-d through other means than through the family. I think there would likely be some note of disposition on this rifle somewhere, if indeed it came from a place so prominent as a lobby display case at LB. I found a reference to A.Sweeting in some production meeting minutes from August '64, and while not one of the 7 men physically present, he was the first of 15 or so to be cc'd on the minutes. The closing of the Arsenal was a big deal, and there should be something reflected somewhere in official documents. (my $0.02)
But all that speaks only to provenance and value...
What about the led slinger itself?

[smellie]

I have an unnumbered LB No. 4 Mark 1*, 1944, absolutely new and unfired. Wood and metal finish both are to the highest standard I have seen on any military-type rifle, wood is carefuly matched (obviously from the same blank). Odd thing is that it has the late "British" type safety, original to this rifle.

I was thinking possibly a display rifle for all those War Bonds drives. It certainly wasn't Andy McNaughton's rifle, carried ashore by his cute secretary at Juno Beach! You know: the one that took the breechblock out of the 88 just before it could land a round on Monty's half-track......

All joking aside, I DO have the rifle and it is absolutely the prettiest LE I have ever encountered.

I'm not a dealer of any kind, but I have seen and handled a lot of rifles. In just-short-of-50 years at this, I have encountered TWO LB Number 4s without numbers....... and the other was somewhat ratty (I am being polite).

But we will wait until the Registry goes. The unregistered firearms in Canada number in the millions, not in the thousands; of this I am certain.

As to mine, it is registered; they sent me one of those stupid little stickers for the thing, along with stickers for a dozen or so others..... and no way to tell which sticker goes on which rifle...... and 10 years in the old slammer if you get it wrong. Typical Canada: coddle the criminals and walk on the law-abiding suckers who won't shoot back.... and then they wonder why so many Canadians no longer feel any patriotism or loyalty. You can't beat people into loving their country.

But the rifles exist. I just don't think they are as common as some folks would like to think.

And the rifle shown in this thread is just SO perfect for a very-early rifle....
.

[boltaction]

I have an unnumbered LB No. 4 Mark 1*, 1944, absolutely new and unfired. Wood and metal finish both are to the highest standard I have seen on any military-type rifle, wood is carefuly matched (obviously from the same blank). Odd thing is that it has the late "British" type safety, original to this rifle.

I was thinking possibly a display rifle for all those War Bonds drives. It certainly wasn't Andy McNaughton's rifle, carried ashore by his cute secretary at Juno Beach! You know: the one that took the breechblock out of the 88 just before it could land a round on Monty's half-track......

All joking aside, I DO have the rifle and it is absolutely the prettiest LE I have ever encountered.

I'm not a dealer of any kind, but I have seen and handled a lot of rifles. In just-short-of-50 years at this, I have encountered TWO LB Number 4s without numbers....... and the other was somewhat ratty (I am being polite).

But we will wait until the Registry goes. The unregistered firearms in Canada number in the millions, not in the thousands; of this I am certain.

As to mine, it is registered; they sent me one of those stupid little stickers for the thing, along with stickers for a dozen or so others..... and no way to tell which sticker goes on which rifle...... and 10 years in the old slammer if you get it wrong. Typical Canada: coddle the criminals and walk on the law-abiding suckers who won't shoot back.... and then they wonder why so many Canadians no longer feel any patriotism or loyalty. You can't beat people into loving their country.

But the rifles exist. I just don't think they are as common as some folks would like to think.

And the rifle shown in this thread is just SO perfect for a very-early rifle....
.

Yes, it is a lovely example with all the nice early features. Pinning down the provenance would be nice, and I agree with Peter Laidler about the importance of that, but that is only if the inherent value of the item is the provenance. In this case, I don't really care about the provenance, although knowing its story would I think be interesting, and likely more than just a back door walk out. I really like the rifle, and if I ever find an equally nice serial numbered Mk I I'll certainly let this one go.........

As for faking up Monty's revolver, if I was going to do that, I'd choose someone more competent. Never thought much of Monty. Must be the Canadian in me.

Agree that the number of unreg'd firearms in Canada is in the millions. Back when Rock et al were planning C-68, my brother and I formed, along with 4 others, the Saskatchewan Responsible Firearms Owners, or SRFO. We lobbied against the bill, and did get the SK gov't on side. Canadian gun owners then were still too fragmented though, with the shotgunners saying who cares about the pistols, etc. Anyway, my brother and I did a cost estimate, which we presented in person to Rock and also did a billboard campaign about. The gov't at the time, along with Wendy Cukier of the Coalition for Gun Control were saying there were only a million or so long guns in Canada (I don't remember the exact number but it was ludicrous) and said the registry would cost 97 million. We estimated about 20 million guns, based on import numbers, production numbers of cooeys, etc, and costed it out based on the cost of registering a pistol at the time. We came up with a cost of 2 Billion, and Rock laughed in our faces. Now, several years later we've spent 2 1/2 billion and only maybe 40% of guns registered. GREAT system.

Ed

[enfield303t]

I remember Rock stating the registry would cost 2 million however know someone he confided to it would probably cost 20 million.

The best part of the registry is the Gov't kept lowering the estimate of firearms in Canada trying to convice the public there was a high percentage of compliance which we all know was incorrect.

I said tens of thousands not wanting to exaggerate however from the small circle I travel in dozens have been offered and when you multiply that by the number of gun owners in Canada the unregistered number is staggering.

I can hardly wait 'till it is gone as I expect closets will be emptied all over this country and hopefully some of the Lee Enfields I want will be available.

Had a call from the CPC looking for a donation, asked about the registry and was told it should be given third reading sometime in the next two weeks.

[Peter Laidler]

For the benefit of us foreigners, what is the Canadian long gun registry that uis the subject of so much dispute? Or is it toooooooo political for the forum.....