Parker Reactivating Potential?

[mooncoon]

But in a general sense, it's never going to be original, it's already well worn, and like as not, when it was welded up, it was just another 'old gun',
Mostly, I would suggest that if you are not able to do it yourself, it is not like to be worth the outlay, but you gotta decide for yourself.

While I would agree with Trevj on the practicality and economics of restoring the gun, if you can do the work yourself, sometimes the nostalgia of being able to shoot it justifies the time you take to rebuild an "old" gun

 

[maple_leaf_eh]

From the information provided, there is no yes/no information that the firearm was legally deactivated. If it was, there would be a papertrail from the gunsmith to the RCMP labs and to the owner. The cops don't like people breaking welds they've inspected and making guns live. It is the sort of thing that basement tinkerers and crooked gunsmiths do.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/bulletins/club/bulletin12-eng.htm

If the welds were done by Cousin Billy-Joe Sixpack and his $200 Princess Auto snot spitter, the effect is still the same. A firearm which was rendered safe for its owner is being rebuilt. The expectation seems to be that new owner would want to fire it. That means it will be reactivated. I don't have the references at hand, but making firearms is one of those activities layman should be cautious about. Not that I give a $hit about someone's engineering abilities, it is (IMHO) their actions expose them to charges of manufacturing firearms. The regs are there because of unprincipled handymen. Gouging out the plugs might seem easy, but bullet two of the reference, has language that puts the onus on the person doing things, "The new standards will not affect the status of firearms that have already been deemed to be deactivated unless there is evidence that the firearm has been, or could easily be, reactivated."

So, I'm the voice of caution that the new owner go through a properly papered gunsmith. Sure he might chose to be a rugged individualist, but stories of reactivated deactivated firearms don't look good on the hobby. Nor does ignorance of the letter and the spirit of the law.

 

[mooncoon]

for the purposes of the law, manufacturing firearms refers to manufacturing for sale; it does not refer to manufacturing for personal use. I can't even say that the regulations are there because of unprincipled handymen, at least to the extent that skill and knowledge of a gunsmith do not seem to be examined or specified. There is concern that firearms end up in the hands of unlicensed people but a licensed owner (PAL license) appears to be free to make guns of their choice, for themselves, as long as they are not prohibited guns and as long as they are registered in the case of restricted firearms. With the end of the long gun registry, re activating a non restricted long gun for personal use should not be a problem

cheers mooncoon

 

[weasel1]

for the purposes of the law, manufacturing firearms refers to manufacturing for sale; it does not refer to manufacturing for personal use. I can't even say that the regulations are there because of unprincipled handymen, at least to the extent that skill and knowledge of a gunsmith do not seem to be examined or specified. There is concern that firearms end up in the hands of unlicensed people but a licensed owner (PAL license) appears to be free to make guns of their choice, for themselves, as long as they are not prohibited guns and as long as they are registered in the case of restricted firearms. With the end of the long gun registry, re activating a non restricted long gun for personal use should not be a problem

cheers mooncoon

And if the firearm in question doesn't have a serial number, there would be a very short and very worthless paper trail attached to it. Assuming it was deactivated correctly.

 

[fingers284]

From the information provided, there is no yes/no information that the firearm was legally deactivated. If it was, there would be a papertrail from the gunsmith to the RCMP labs and to the owner. The cops don't like people breaking welds they've inspected and making guns live. It is the sort of thing that basement tinkerers and crooked gunsmiths do.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/bulletins/club/bulletin12-eng.htm

If the welds were done by Cousin Billy-Joe Sixpack and his $200 Princess Auto snot spitter, the effect is still the same. A firearm which was rendered safe for its owner is being rebuilt. The expectation seems to be that new owner would want to fire it. That means it will be reactivated. I don't have the references at hand, but making firearms is one of those activities layman should be cautious about. Not that I give a $hit about someone's engineering abilities, it is (IMHO) their actions expose them to charges of manufacturing firearms. The regs are there because of unprincipled handymen. Gouging out the plugs might seem easy, but bullet two of the reference, has language that puts the onus on the person doing things, "The new standards will not affect the status of firearms that have already been deemed to be deactivated unless there is evidence that the firearm has been, or could easily be, reactivated."

So, I'm the voice of caution that the new owner go through a properly papered gunsmith. Sure he might chose to be a rugged individualist, but stories of reactivated deactivated firearms don't look good on the hobby. Nor does ignorance of the letter and the spirit of the law.

You can be cautious all you want but the fact is that if the OP has a PAL he can repair or build any non-restricted gun he want on his kitchen table if so desired. it is plain that you have no knowledge on the subject, just an inherent "the sky is falling chicken little" that others may wrongly take "as gospel" so it starts another untrue misconception in this sport

 

[maple_leaf_eh]

You can be cautious all you want but the fact is that if the OP has a PAL he can repair or build any non-restricted gun he want on his kitchen table if so desired. it is plain that you have no knowledge on the subject, just an inherent "the sky is falling chicken little" that others may wrongly take "as gospel" so it starts another untrue misconception in this sport

Thanks for being the voice of irrationality. I prefer to keep myself within the law - as I understand it. When I read enough stories about gunsmiths and others get convicted for reactivating deactivated firearms, I feel obliged to speak up. If you read the full 3-page RCMP bulletin, you'll appreciate the matter is not all that simple.

 

[gaff]

1, replacement shotgun $300- $1000
2, possibly, having to go to court , Lawyers fees $10,000 , up to 7 years of your life on hold , angry wife etc,.

 

[marshall]

I don't think that deactivation would meet the standard, today anyway? The RCMP would not sign off on the plugs in the barrels the way they are, mind you , the rules keep changing.
If we knew when it was butchered, could make a difference, and it does look like a ejector gun alright.
Cost wise, would not pay if you had to hire it out , without getting into the legal issue

 

[Magellann]

The logical solution would be to hang over the fireplace, unless you have deep pockets and really want to get it working again. I think that you could get yourself a really nice working double for the same price.

 

[Meroh]

I don't think it would be particularly difficult to remove the plugs in the barrel. Cautious work with a Dremel tool might eliminate the weld. Keep in mind that the weld probably extends 1/8" into the chamber plug. If that does not work, mount the barrels on the cross feed of a lathe with a series of drills in the chuck and drill out most of the plug, then back to the Dremel or something similar. If the plug is hardened, with a bit of luck a carbide end mill in the lathe will penetrate it. If my memory is correct the firing pins on a Parker are part of the hammers and could be rebuilt

the more I think of it, an end mill in the lathe chuck might be the best route to remove the weld

cheers mooncoon

I believe that the penetration will be much less; it looks like the hack went at it with a stick welder, so no more than small gobs with not likely more than 1/32 or 1/16 penetration. More than that it would have blown out the side of the chamber.

That being said, if I saw a gun like that at a gunshow, and the guy would consider 25-50 bucks for it; considering the time to do more than a half-assed job; I would tackle it. If it was a run of the mill double, I would not take it home if they paid me 100 bucks.

Even when repaired well, it is still damaged goods, and will have no real value other than sentimental.

 

[fingers284]

Thanks for being the voice of irrationality. I prefer to keep myself within the law - as I understand it. When I read enough stories about gunsmiths and others get convicted for reactivating deactivated firearms, I feel obliged to speak up. If you read the full 3-page RCMP bulletin, you'll appreciate the matter is not all that simple.

Just a quick quote from said RCMP bulletin : "Reactivated firearms once again become subject to the licence and registration requirements of the firearms act"....it's a long gun so no registration paperwork required and my first post said plainly "if the OP has a PAL then the licencing requirement is a non issue

 

[mooncoon]

I believe that the penetration will be much less; it looks like the hack went at it with a stick welder, so no more than small gobs with not likely more than 1/32 or 1/16 penetration. More than that it would have blown out the side of the chamber.

That being said, if I saw a gun like that at a gunshow, and the guy would consider 25-50 bucks for it; considering the time to do more than a half-assed job; I would tackle it. If it was a run of the mill double, I would not take it home if they paid me 100 bucks.

Even when repaired well, it is still damaged goods, and will have no real value other than sentimental.

while I agree with the above, any damage to the chambers is back where the base wad or solid base of the shell is. As such, I doubt that it would be subject to much pressure. The bigger issue might be how tight the action is. Firing pins if ground off could be silver soldered back on the hammers. The economics however comes back to being able to do your own work. I have seen similar quality Parkers (apart from being disabled) in gunshows for $500 to $600, that you could shoot without any further work

cheers mooncoon

 

[Willen]

Thanks very much for the input everyone. This gun was never registered, nor officially deactivated, just ruined by some well meaning worrying old lady. There will be no lawsuits. This is all about righting a wrong, and the sentimental connection to a family heirloom. The owner wants to get into shooting and hunting, and has his Grandfather's Parker screwed to the wall (literally, but nicely done through the sling studs). So it's really a rescue of sorts, and maybe an interesting journey. I know it likely "isn't worth it" for just any old gun, but I also know how much I would pay to have several of my Grandfather's guns back.......so I'm going to help him see if it can be done, safely of course.

 

[quinnbrian]

Now that's some nice work!!
If your not going to fix it. Drop me a pm.... because I will!! I like old side by sides..
Your only in Milton...I'm in Kingston area..so not too long of a drive LOL

While I would agree with Trevj on the practicality and economics of restoring the gun, if you can do the work yourself, sometimes the nostalgia of being able to shoot it justifies the time you take to rebuild an "old" gun