-free environments; ranges, etc.


PDA






James T Thomas
January 6, 2006, 01:53 PM
Concerning the "lead free ranges" in MD, VA, and others. How about CA?

This makes me suspicious. I'm sorry, but I have noticed on the State Game Land range where I do most of my shooting, that excavation of the backstop burms had been done this summer and earth removed off of the range.
When I inquired of the range master there, he knew of it, but had not been given any information as to the cause. Why would he not know?
The burms were regulation in dimentions, and did not need any maintenance.

Therefore, could it just be that the Second Amendment haters (no implication to posters from another same subject thread), have yet devised another method to attack our freedom? Could my own PA Game Commission board be harboring infiltrators who will cut off my freedom in the name of enviornmental disguise?

Are there any medical studies done with scientific control to be a reliable reference to just how much inhalable lead is present during firearm shooting?
And how much is leached into the ground from rain runoff?

That is, I would not be surprized to come to the range and find it closed by some federal agency due to lead contamination and metal leaching in the local water shed.

Enviornmental lead control is necessary for public health, but let us not permit it to be falsely claimed and used to control our liberty.
Contact your legislators before this springs up like a snake to bite us.

If you enjoyed reading about "-free environments; ranges, etc." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
K-Romulus
January 6, 2006, 02:36 PM
Are there any medical studies done with scientific control to be a reliable reference to just how much inhalable lead is present during firearm shooting?


There are quite a few that have measured lead levels during or soon after shooting (both the air and the shooter, indoors and out). The public health/injury prevention/medical journals have them in their archives, but you might have to pay to see some of the on-line copies (I get free access to many journals through work).

Here's an example from Am. Journal of Public Health:

American Journal of Public Health, Vol 81, Issue 6 753-755, Copyright © 1991 by American Public Health Association

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Lead exposure in outdoor firearm instructors
RK Tripathi, PC Sherertz, GC Llewellyn and CW Armstrong
Division of Health Hazards Control, Virginia State Department of Health, Richmond 23218.

This study was conducted to determine lead exposure of firearm instructors at an outdoor firing range, while cadets were firing nonjacketed and jacketed lead ammunitions. The breathing zone air for lead exceeded the Occupational Safety and Health Administration standard of 50 micrograms/m3 for two instructors during firing exercises using nonjacketed bullets. The use of totally copper-jacketed bullets reduced the breathing zone lead levels by 92 percent for instructor #1 and by 96 percent for instructor #2; subsequent blood lead levels showed a significant decline in both instructors.

And another:

American Journal of Public Health, Vol 79, Issue 8 1029-1032, Copyright © 1989 by American Public Health Association
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Lead absorption in indoor firing range users
SE Valway, JW Martyny, JR Miller, M Cook and EJ Mangione
Diabetes Program, Indian Health Service, Albuquerque, NM 87102.

To determine if users of indoor firing ranges may be at risk from lead exposure, we studied a law enforcement trainee class during three months of firearms instruction. Blood lead levels were obtained before training and at four-week intervals during training. Air lead levels were measured three times during instruction. Blood lead levels rose from a pre-training mean of 0.31 mumol/L to 2.47 mumol/L. Mean air lead levels were above 2,000 micrograms/m3, more than 40 times the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's standard of 50 micrograms/m3. Cumulative exposure to lead and the change in blood lead were positively correlated. Control measures need to be studied to determine their efficacy in decreasing or eliminating this health risk.


Some suggestions to browse:

http://ip.bmjjournals.com/

http://jama.ama-assn.org/

http://www.ajph.org/

hso
January 6, 2006, 05:57 PM
Enviornmental lead control is necessary for public health, but let us not permit it to be falsely claimed and used to control our liberty.
Contact your legislators before this springs up like a snake to bite us.

The limits on both exposure and environmental contaminats are objectively determined. The regulations on permissable limits for lead are not just applicable to the nearly economically trivial firing range industry, but to large industries with significant economic power and political influence and are hotly contensted by them and their industry groups. Should a homeowers or anti-gun group that wanted a range shut down attempt to play the "environmental card", as has been done in the past, the objective criteria of the regulations will still get applied. Such efforts to shut down well maintained ranges have failed in the past. Where ranges have been shut down for environmental violations the ranges have actually been guilty of poor environmental practices.

If you enjoyed reading about "-free environments; ranges, etc." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!