Armory Sponsor
.
| this reminds me of a few years ago when the liberal nutcase politicians claimed that it took 100 acres of rainforrest destroyed for every mc donalds burger. when challenged by RUSH to prove their claim they backed off and admitted it was a made up stat. i'd like to see the official autopsy report on all 75 eagles that died by eating a fishing weight. they probably gagged to death on a thrown away liberal newspaper. in any case maybe WW prices will go down now. |
|
Quoted:
If they can't ban anything that is excise taxed (ammo) then why is lead shot banned for certain migratory game bird hunting. Out here you must use something other than lead for waterfowl. Lead is ok for dove and quail. I think it must have something to do with lead contaminating the water. |
|
Lead was banned from waterfowl use due to the waste.
Guys were shooting at things they couldn't kill at excess ranges and just wounding the birds. The pellets would then cause lead poisoning in the bird. Steel will still wound, but will not poison. It was a double win for the tree huggers. Got some lead out of the environment and saved a few birds too. |
|
Quoted:
''We're not trying to ban handgun ammunition''. Yeah, right 
Glad they lost, the slimey pinko a**holes Okay, I know how sensitive we all are when something threatens our American rights, but I think sometimes like in this case some of you take things out of proportion. From the sounds of it, they seemed most concerned about lead shot and fishing tackle then "handgun ammunition". Which makes sense since a shot gun just sprays lead shot all over the place vs. a bullet which is obviously much more controlled. I do however think that their statistics they state are completely B.S. I am all for using a lead alternative in my ammo, but not until they can do it without increasing the cost to produce ammo. I do agree however for fishing equipment that they can and SHOULD use lead alternatives. I say it all the time at the store when I'm buying new tackle, "Why are they still using lead?". There is just no reason for it. Unfortunately I think the bigger problem is that lead is cheap and easy for the manufactures of ammo and thus without any kind of regulation they will not even try to come up with a cheap non-lead alternative. Why would they? Nothing to motivate them to. Deep down we all know that lead is not good for the environment, people, or animals. I don't care how diehard of a sportsman/hunter you are, I guarantee you still enjoy animals, fish, lakes, etc and should still care about their futures as well as our future generations. My point is that while allot of us are stubborn and set in our ways, sometimes we need to embrace change, especially when it impacts our environment and our future and the future of our next generations. While the way the government and other organizations go about things is definitely not the right way, that doesn't mean that the rest of us shouldn't support what is right as long as it's done the right way. I think the Ammo manufactures SHOULD be developing more offerings that don't use lead, the manufactures need to be pushed to start developing same cost lead alternatives, and because we all know they WON'T do it unless they are given a reason, which is either by regulation requirements or customer demand. I think that if we as the customers don't embrace and push the change, then sooner or later regulation will and we all know how that works! (We all get screwed then!) Just my $0.02. -Masta |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The problem with banning lead core ammo is that the ATF has ruled other cores to be "armor piercing" and thus illegal. In effect, a lead ban is an ammo ban. Even uranium / tungsten? Yes both of those materials are considered AP under the ATF. Even a solid copper bullet is considered AP under the ATF laws. You have to get a special "for hunting use" exemption to make them (ie. Barnes). Have you ever priced Tungsten though? It's about $40/lb vs $1/lb for lead. Lead has been used as an ammunition source for CENTURIES and the birds haven't been falling out of the sky sick and, last time I counted, I only had one "third leg". These hippies are just making up solutions for problems that do not exist. LEAD is a NATURAL substance - it comes from the EARTH!!! It's not like we are interjecting a man made bi-product into the environment. Yes - the high levels of lead in the dirt at the shooting range is not good for you, but HELL even too much sugar is bad for you too. People need to learn to use some common sense ... lead fishing washers are not for consumption .... putting it on a fishing line is not going to poison the water! It doesn't dissolve like the purple cool-aid that those guys are drinking. There is more damage from salt water spills from the drilling around here than lead will ever cause. Not that I am against drilling - just putting it in perspective. Stupid uneducated idiot unpatriotic progressive hippie bureaucrats. Sarg |
|
The Environmental Protection Agency has denied a petition filed by environmental activists seeking to ban lead in ammunition, saying such regulation is beyond the agency's authority.
I would be for filing a petition seeking to ban environmentalists, who are mentally challenged from America. That would be about 98% of them. |
|
I would estimate that well over 95% of all handgun launched lead is reclaimable. Almost all rounds fired end up in a backstop somewhere. Large ranges routinely have this stuff "mined" for the money it generates. Even homeowners have a back stop of some sort, usually a hill they fire into.
Shotgunning, in particular waterfoul hunters end up peppering the waterways. These animals are relatively dumb and will eat just about anything that hits the water, fish included. I think the original bans were an attempt to keep the stuff out of the food chain, ours and theirs. I know most lead will get recycled if if it's easily reclaimed. Even if that means making it back into bullets. The shooting sports and reloading in particular is about the most waste free endeavor I know of. Everything gets reused until it can't be used anymore, then it gets melted down and recycled. Pretty good outcomes all around. I think we should be proud of the job we are doing in that regard. |
Anyone that thinks its a no big deal try buying all copper bullets, they will cost you 7-8 times as much and be so much longer they don't work for many loads. If they passed such a law, I would do everything in my power to not comply. The threat from lead is one of the most over blown things the Envirofascists blow up, that's saying a lot with the way they make things up saying a non-polluting, life-essential gas that you and I exhale is a world threatening pollutant. 
Not too long ago the un American Envirofascists were shutting down motorcycle dealers because there was lead paint on the wheels and they were afraid children would lick the paint and become poisoned.  These mentally ill freaks need to be mocked, ridiculed, be-littled, harassed and we can never allow such delusional nuts to every hold any power over anything important, ever.
|
|
Quoted:
Lead was banned from waterfowl use due to the waste. Guys were shooting at things they couldn't kill at excess ranges and just wounding the birds. The pellets would then cause lead poisoning in the bird. Steel will still wound, but will not poison. It was a double win for the tree huggers. Got some lead out of the environment and saved a few birds too. The lead poisoning was from ingesting it, not being wounded by it. The 'problem' was in areas of high waterfowl hunting pressure, the spent shot was ingested by the birds (for their gizzard). They normally eat very small rocks for this, but obviously couldn't tell the difference between a #6 lead pellet and a rock. They were then getting lead poisoning from the ingested lead in their gizzard. That's the story as I understand it. Not really sure if the science is junk like the DDT stuff, or real. Hard to know with so many agendas out there and no one worried about the truth, which ever way that may fall. Gizzard info for the city boys! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lead ban, brought to you by the "global warming" hoax crowd. Not buying any of that. Glad they decided not to ban, but those people will be back with more lies. Didn't you here. Global warming doesn't exist. Now it's climate change. The liars changed the name of their hoax, so what. It pisses them off to call it by their first name, so I do. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lead ban, brought to you by the "global warming" hoax crowd. Not buying any of that. Glad they decided not to ban, but those people will be back with more lies. Didn't you here. Global warming doesn't exist. Now it's climate change. The liars changed the name of their hoax, so what. It pisses them off to call it by their first name, so I do.
Always fun. I laughed at all the liberals when I was skiing in record snowfall in Steamboat Colorado two years ago
|
|
According to the petitioners, who include the Center for Biological Diversity and the American Bird Conservancy, up to 20 million birds and other animals are killed each year due to lead poisoning in the United States
Killed by lead poisoning. lol Thats what happends when you shoot them. |
|
Here is their 100 page petition:
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/get_the_lead_out/pdfs/Final_TSCA_lead_ban_petition_8-3-10.pdf It's really well written/documented. This won't be the end of their efforts. A. Authority to Regulate Lead Shot and Bullets
Lead used in shot, bullets and sinkers is a “chemical substance” falling within the scope of the Act (15 U.S.C. § 2602(2)(A)).1 Although certain substances are excluded from the definition of “chemical substances,” these exclusions do not apply to lead shot or bullets (15 U.S.C. § 2602(B)). Section 2602(B)(v) excludes from Act regulation “any article the sale of which is subject to the tax imposed by section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.” Section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code taxes firearms, shells, and cartridges (26 U.S.C. § 4181). However, shot and bullets are not subject to this tax. In fact, a 1968 Revenue Ruling states, “The manufacturers excise tax imposed upon sales of shells and cartridges by section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 does not apply to sales of separate parts of ammunition such as cartridge cases, primers, bullets, and powder” (Rev. Rul. 68-463, 1968-2 C.B. 507 (emphasis added)). This ruling has been confirmed by subsequent administrative decisions (See, for example, Fed. Tax Coordinator ¶ W-2911(2d.)). Because shot and bullets, as separate parts of ammunition, are not taxed under section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code, the section 2602(B)(v) exception of TSCA does not apply. Thus, lead shot and bullets are properly classified as “chemical substances” subject to TSCA regulation. ^this addresses the EPA's rejection. We're not done here folks. This was just a quick "shut them up until November" action forced upon the EPA. Also: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/get_the_lead_out/pdfs/Lead_ban_FAQ_8-3-10.pdf What about bullets for shooting ranges, the police and military, and for personal
handguns? The petitioners support exceptions to allow continued use of lead pistol ammunition for home defense and non-hunting activities. This petition will not affect law enforcement or the military. The petition does not address the use of lead at either indoor or outdoor shooting ranges. Indoor and outdoor shooting ranges are already regulated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and State agencies. This petition addresses lead issues that impact wildlife. They're blatantly lying. They want to ban ALL lead based bullets, and they claim this won't affect shooting at shooting ranges. |
|
Lead, after being discharged and introduced to the environment, very soon accquires an oxidized coating which basically prevents the lead object from affecting the environment. From that point on, the lead-oxide coated object is basically inert unless disturbed to the extent that its lead oxide coating is removed.
This anti-lead business is based on bad science, for the advancement of another agenda. What a shock. |
|
Quoted:
Lead, after being discharged and introduced to the environemt, very soon accquires an oxidized coating which basically prevents the lead object from affecting the enviroment. From that point on, the lead-oxide coated object is basically inert unless disturbed to the extent that its lead oxide coating is removed. This anti-lead business is based on bad science, for the advancement of another agenda. What a shock. Makes sense ... all of it. |
Armory Sponsor