CA attempt to ban lead ammunition?

[flatrock]

thorn726,

There have been a lot of studies about lead and outdoor shooting ranges, and the consistent result is that they do not contribute significantly to lead in the water table.

The lead that can be a bit of a problem is the small amount that is airborn due to lead in primers, and that which gets split in to tiny peices on impact.

Even in public ranges it doesn't amount to significant environmental polution. The airborn lead can be a problem if you're shooting in a poorly ventalated area.

Ohio state law already forbids the use of lead shot on waterfowl. I don't know if that was the result of evidence of a problem, or if it's merely the environmentalists forcing regulations because the perceive there might be a problem.

Tungston isn't a reasonable replacement for lead. It is dense, but it's in much shorter supply, which makes is cost prohibitive. It alse doesn't deform as easily, which means it ends up having armor piercing qualities.

This is not a solution to an environmental problem. The environmental issues have been studied many times and found to be a nonexistent factor. This is a political issue, using an environmental smokescreen to push an agenda. The facts do not support their proposal.

That doesn't mean that they won't dig up some obscure study that came up with it's results based on preconceived conclusions rather than science and use it as justification. At the same time they'll demonize anyone who points to real studies as trying to poison our childern and dangerous people who are more concerned about being able to kill than to protect people from being posioned.

 

[flatrock]

"the other way lead gets at people is places like back in LI i believe shot must be steel, because people shoot at ducks over the water, shot ends up in water.
lead was being found in the blood of ducks and fish supposedly.
you can say all this is total BS all you want, i find it hard to believe throwing thousands of lead pellets into lakes and bays is safe."

Ohio already bans hunting waterfowl with lead shot. I'd be very surprised if CA didn't do the same already. I've also heard the argument that fish eat the lead. I don't know if that argument is valid or not. Lead in a solid form does not significantly leach into groudwater. However maybe being digested by a fish does result in higher concentrations of lead in the fish before the fish passes the lead shot.

"how are the livers in your deer kills guys???? especially if anyone got one from northeast canada? are they all healthy ?"

The deer aren't eating the lead. The lead isn't getting absorbed into the dear's system. It's usually ripping a hole in the deer and blood loss is killing the deer.

"OK= I hear you guys , i was noticing the tungsten may be AP .
and i Hear you , this is in great part about taking away arms."

It's pretty much completely about taking arms away. It's addressing no significant issues that aren't easily addressed already.

"well i still do not like the lead. i love how people are so quick to say "there is no danger""

Fine you can dislike lead all you like, but show me evidence of a danger rather than unfounded fears that much of the environmental legislation in our country is based on these days.

"for 50 years no one thought cigarettes were bad at all."

Complete bull. My mother quit smoking 40 years ago before having my older brother because it was widespread knowledge that smoking was harmful not only to her but her unborn child.

I don't know of a single person that smokes that would try and say they couldn't figure out for themselves that smoking is harmful to them. They all know it.

"anyway, yeah , it's frustrating. I guess as an environmentalist, i have the hope something usuable and safer than lead could be developed rapidly enough to use, so we COUld use this to our advantage."

What's the point. You're suggesting we should find a solution to something that isn't really a problem. It's not going to work for our advantage because it's just going to drive up costs for shooters to appease people who are pushing a perceived problem with the intended purpose of driving up costs of shooting.

"REally= the army is at least in part switching away from lead becasue of the dangers.."

They're switching away from led on indoor ranges because of splashback problems when shooting at steel targets. They also avoid exposed lead on indoor ranges to reduce airborn lead because the small amounts can build up in the systems of their range officers that spend every day on the range. It's only the extended exposure that makes it a problem even for them.

They still tend to use lead ammo, they just use ranges like ones built by this company to reduce airborn lead.

http://www.range-systems.com/

"but if there is no CA legal alternative to lead bullets, and this is put on the ballot, i will vote against it.
(ugh? what CAn i do about this anyway?, i dont get to vote on it?)"

SEE= this is why i am here. i am in a very weird position being a CA wacko who likes guns but fears conservatives. heheh"

How about this. As an environmentalist, educate yourself on the subject. Then educate your fellow environmentalists. That way we'll only have to fight those who are anti-gun rather than those who think this is really and environmental issue.

 

[thorn726]

There is plenty of evidence in wetlands duck hunting. The observations are there, and mechanisms are well understood. Diving ducks do pickup lead. The lead is taken up by the ducks - lead pellets in crops/gizzards do get passed on.

Notice that this applies only to diving ducks not to deer. The mechanism includes a lot of small pellets in the feeding environment - bottom feeding ducks. The mechanism is not related to lead as shot from the gun but to lead as spend pellets in a particular place in the environment - part of the ecosystem not part of the background noise.

i was pretty sure that was correct, but i hear you guys on the rest of the spots

, so this is pretty much what i am talking about.
SO= do you guys accept a ban on shooting lead over water at least?

I totally hear you guys on the deer thing, that is senseless, no way the amount of lead fired at deer in the woods would do much of anything, and if ranges are on top of it, No problem!

Anyway what the heck do i do now. ????

PS- how are the livers in your deer kills guys???? especially if anyone got one from northeast canada? are they all healthy ?"

"The deer aren't eating the lead. The lead isn't getting absorbed into the dear's system. It's usually ripping a hole in the deer and blood loss is killing the deer."

that was about the environmetn in general, sorry, not menaing to infer the lead is the cause, it is other things

and the cigs comment , come on guys you know what i mean, not the best example i guess

 

[thorn726]

ok but here is where i have a problem=

They're switching away from led on indoor ranges because of splashback problems when shooting at steel targets. They also avoid exposed lead on indoor ranges to reduce airborn lead because the small amounts can build up in the systems of their range officers that spend every day on the range. It's only the extended exposure that makes it a problem even for them.

"it's only the extended exposure"

with all the pollution everywhere, all the excuses for why a little more is ok, a little of this in your system wont hurt, a little of that is ok.
especially if you figure most of us would be pumping out lead all day long if we could.

i still ultimately find you guys are correct about just about all of this, i just wish you were a tiny bit concerned about the lead

 

[ClarkEMyers]

A ban on shooting over water is too broad

Herewith one of my prime anger points - a way over broad attack on the shooting sports. There is a considerable difference between say shooting clay birds off the fantail in blue water country and littering a marsh. There is a general ban on hunting with lead shot where over water where migratory birds feed in the water - that does not mean there should be no shooting over sewage lagoons say nor does it mean that the presence of every little creek and ripple should keep people from throwing clay birds or shooting lead bullet .22 rimfires where it is otherwise safe.