Glock Talk banner

anyone worried about epa lead ammo ruling?

7K views 99 replies 32 participants last post by  fredj338 
#1 · (Edited)
their was a short lived thread on this in general non glocking. but the enviromental protection agency has ninety days to rule on a petition filed by some anti hunting groups who want a nationwide ban on all lead ammo and fishing tackle. boy i sure hope this doesn't happen. i cant find any info at all if this has a chance of becoming law, or if the congress or courts must be involved? i'm worried

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...-lead-ammunition-fishing-tackle-99870914.html
 
#3 ·
Should be a big worry. If all they were after is hunting bullets, they would ban lead bullets for hunting purposes. No, they want to take all lead bullets out, pushing the cost of ammo sky high, so that people cant afford it. Its almost like the Chris Rock routine of sell all the guns you want, but make the bullets cost 5K apiece.
 
#5 ·
Forget the wife's birthday, forget your anniversary, forget the kid's birthdays, forget to feed the dog... don't forget November 2nd.


Jack
 
#6 · (Edited)
Should be a big worry. If all they were after is hunting bullets, they would ban lead bullets for hunting purposes. No, they want to take all lead bullets out, pushing the cost of ammo sky high, so that people cant afford it. Its almost like the Chris Rock routine of sell all the guns you want, but make the bullets cost 5K apiece.
It is an end around to gun bans. It's finally taken them all theses years to figure out they can ban or regulate ammo & then your guns are almost worthless. It would not apply to private land use but hunting on Federal land would change. It's already been done here in Kommiefornia, you must use non lead bullets for hunting on public lnad & many private land leases have also followed the directive.
How to push back? If you are a Democrat, change parties, all they offer you is abortion protection & union support. Keep in mind that NOTHING liberal Dems have ever come up with has ultimately been good for the people of the USA.:steamed: Start by voting good Reb. into office in Nov.
 
#8 · (Edited)
I'm not worried at all because lead sinkers were banned for fishing in many places long before most of the guys on Glock Talk were even born. Then they banned lead buck shot for duck hunting in certain waters when most of you were still crapping in diapers too, so I'll tell you what you're not old enough to remember.

When it happened, there was of course a big paranoid outcry about how "they" were trying to stop "us" from fishing & hunting, and it was all a part of an effort to totally ban it forever. This was over 30 years ago, but it never happened. All "they" accomplished was stopping a little lead pollution, and of the hunters & fishermen I know, none have had their fun negatively affected at all, nor did their hobby become a lot more expensive because of it, nor did any one I ever heard of actually "quit" hunting or fishing because of a small increase in cost, when EVERYTHING else associated with it was going up in cost anyway. Most guys I knew figured that if getting rid of the lead would help the populations of fish & ducks to thrive better, then it was in the self interest of hunters to protect the animals from the lead, and the small cost was worth it, and it has been.

After reading up on the performance of the new lead free projectiles available, (they really are a better hunting bullet with better expansion & weight retention BY FAR) I would have planned to switch over to lead free hunting ammo anyway. With the overall expense of hunting what it already is, the next time gas prices jump just a little, it will affect your hunting trip expenses more than a few copper bullets did.

You'll still be able to shoot lead for almost all of your non hunting purposes on shooting ranges. Only on a small number of them will anyone find any reason to limit lead pollution on a designated range.

This is just another one of the knee jerk political reactions that are typical of Glock Talk. Now while some of you bite your fingernails off out of fear that our country will totally ban hunting or fishing during you or your great grandchildren's lifetimes, I'm going to get back to planning my trip to go kill an elk with a copper bullet BECAUSE THEY WORK BETTER, and keep lead out of the meat I eat.

Before this thread ends, somebody is going to deny the scientific evidence that the Earth is round, and then demand to see Obama's birth certificate.
 
#9 · (Edited)
This is just another one of the knee jerk political reactions that are typical of Glock Talk. Now while some of you bite your fingernails off out of fear that our country will totally ban hunting or fishing during you or your great grandchildren's lifetimes, I'm going to get back to planning my trip to go kill an elk with a copper bullet BECAUSE THEY WORK BETTER, and keep lead out of the meat I eat.
Wow, you actually buy into the crap of lead contamination in meat from hunting bullets.
You are truely hiding your head in the sand thinking that this is about the enviroment. So little lead is left anywhere after big game hunting. It's not like waterfowl, where dozens of shots are taken by 1000s of hunters in a small area.
It's only about gun control, believing anything else is idealistic BS. It isn't even so much about cost, but inconvenience. The harder they make it to hunt & shoot, the fewer people will get involved. It's gun control/ban by attrition. Just look at Kommifornia's gun laws. That is what the liberal Dems bring to the table. I live it, I know.
 
#10 ·
We should indeed be scared, the anti gunners will stop at nothing, and they have not been doing so well lately, and honestly I am surprised it took this long, but it is not the first attempt,IIRC. If it fails it certainly will not be the last. As things become more "green" expect the antis to use this strategy more and more, and don't be surprised if it is something tacked on a bill at the last minute, especially something that would benefit gunners. For the youngsters around there was the firearms owners protection act, 1986, yup, under Regan, allowed all sorts of things forbidden by the 1968 law, like buying ammo and components through the mail, importation of surplus military arms, the youngsters do not know what it was like. As nice as that law was, during an act of last minute poltroonery and subterfuge further machine gun production for civilians was banned. This meant only the rich will be able to afford machine guns, especially as time goes by.

It will be much easier to convince the public to ban lead than to ban guns, they hopefully would never go for that, but ban lead, didn't they take that out of gasoline and paint? Gosh, without lead, babies will be safe the world over...... So, outfits like Barnes and others(notice how many lead free bullets are now being made by companies that never used to..) would get rich, and shooting would become a rich mans game. With lead banned, they would go after hand loaders, who are sick enough to have to make their own ammunition(I heard Feinstein or Metzembaum or Kerry, Kennedy- one of those creeps actually said this) and would easily circumvent the law-banned. In some countries reloading by an individual used to carry the death penalty, but this was a while ago, now I don't know(think it might have been during the '70s when Rhodesia was falling apart, the Continent was/is in turmoil).

I hope it does not happen, but it could be an administrative thing that gets us, then Congress will have to overcome it's considerable inertia to do something, how likely is that to come about quickly. Sigh...
 
#11 ·
Before this thread ends, somebody is going to deny the scientific evidence that the Earth is round, and then demand to see Obama's birth certificate.
Amen to that. Sad really that GTR is getting more like the rest of GT than the other way around.

You're right Bro. and fortunately there is a rational though silent majority.
Hang in there. We craped out the big turds, now were going to wipe off the rest of the clingers this election.:tongueout:
 
#12 ·
I'm not worried at all because lead sinkers were banned for fishing in many places long before most of the guys on Glock Talk were even born. Then they banned lead buck shot for duck hunting in certain waters when most of you were still crapping in diapers too, so I'll tell you what you're not old enough to remember.

When it happened, there was of course a big paranoid outcry about how "they" were trying to stop "us" from fishing & hunting, and it was all a part of an effort to totally ban it forever. This was over 30 years ago, but it never happened. All "they" accomplished was stopping a little lead pollution, and of the hunters & fishermen I know, none have had their fun negatively affected at all, nor did their hobby become a lot more expensive because of it, nor did any one I ever heard of actually "quit" hunting or fishing because of a small increase in cost, when EVERYTHING else associated with it was going up in cost anyway. Most guys I knew figured that if getting rid of the lead would help the populations of fish & ducks to thrive better, then it was in the self interest of hunters to protect the animals from the lead, and the small cost was worth it, and it has been.

After reading up on the performance of the new lead free projectiles available, (they really are a better hunting bullet with better expansion & weight retention BY FAR) I would have planned to switch over to lead free hunting ammo anyway. With the overall expense of hunting what it already is, the next time gas prices jump just a little, it will affect your hunting trip expenses more than a few copper bullets did.

You'll still be able to shoot lead for almost all of your non hunting purposes on shooting ranges. Only on a small number of them will anyone find any reason to limit lead pollution on a designated range.

This is just another one of the knee jerk political reactions that are typical of Glock Talk. Now while some of you bite your fingernails off out of fear that our country will totally ban hunting or fishing during you or your great grandchildren's lifetimes, I'm going to get back to planning my trip to go kill an elk with a copper bullet BECAUSE THEY WORK BETTER, and keep lead out of the meat I eat.

Before this thread ends, somebody is going to deny the scientific evidence that the Earth is round, and then demand to see Obama's birth certificate.
It appears you hunt a lot but shoot very little. I guess a lead bullet ban would affect you very little. I am just the opposite; I shoot A LOT but only hunt occasionally. A lead bullet ban would inconvenience me greatly.
 
#15 · (Edited)
....I actually would kind of like to see that birth certificate, seems almost no one else has. :supergrin:
Yeah, I used to think all the birthers were nut jobs. After seeing what PBO is doing to the country though, makes ya wonder? PBO asks; "do you want to go back to the Bush years"? Let's see, only a $400B deficite & less than 6% unemployment, yeah, beam me back Scotty!:tongueout: His majesty will make Carter look inviting in 2012.
 
#17 ·
I'm not worried at all because lead sinkers were banned for fishing in many places long before most of the guys on Glock Talk were even born. Then they banned lead buck shot for duck hunting in certain waters when most of you were still crapping in diapers too, so I'll tell you what you're not old enough to remember.

When it happened, there was of course a big paranoid outcry about how "they" were trying to stop "us" from fishing & hunting, and it was all a part of an effort to totally ban it forever. This was over 30 years ago, but it never happened. All "they" accomplished was stopping a little lead pollution, and of the hunters & fishermen I know, none have had their fun negatively affected at all, nor did their hobby become a lot more expensive because of it, nor did any one I ever heard of actually "quit" hunting or fishing because of a small increase in cost, when EVERYTHING else associated with it was going up in cost anyway. Most guys I knew figured that if getting rid of the lead would help the populations of fish & ducks to thrive better, then it was in the self interest of hunters to protect the animals from the lead, and the small cost was worth it, and it has been.

After reading up on the performance of the new lead free projectiles available, (they really are a better hunting bullet with better expansion & weight retention BY FAR) I would have planned to switch over to lead free hunting ammo anyway. With the overall expense of hunting what it already is, the next time gas prices jump just a little, it will affect your hunting trip expenses more than a few copper bullets did.

You'll still be able to shoot lead for almost all of your non hunting purposes on shooting ranges. Only on a small number of them will anyone find any reason to limit lead pollution on a designated range.

This is just another one of the knee jerk political reactions that are typical of Glock Talk. Now while some of you bite your fingernails off out of fear that our country will totally ban hunting or fishing during you or your great grandchildren's lifetimes, I'm going to get back to planning my trip to go kill an elk with a copper bullet BECAUSE THEY WORK BETTER, and keep lead out of the meat I eat.

Before this thread ends, somebody is going to deny the scientific evidence that the Earth is round, and then demand to see Obama's birth certificate.
The problem, my most liberal friend, is that they wont stop at "hunting" ammunition.

Looks like GTR is going the way of GNG. Sad, because this is about the only decent forum left on here.
 
#18 ·
The problem, my most liberal friend, is that they wont stop at "hunting" ammunition.

Looks like GTR is going the way of GNG. Sad, because this is about the only decent forum left on here.
Eh... Even here on GTR, you gotta weed through nonsense.. this is simply one of them. This is probably the best place here on GT.
 
#19 ·
in 2004 a bill passed both houses of illinois congress that would bar homeowners from prosecution on gun charges if they used a gun in defense of their home. it was vetoed by rod blagojavich. they actually had the votes to overide his veto! one man who dissented both times? you guessed it, barry o he also voted to ban all handguns
 
#20 ·
It is an end around to gun bans. It's finally taken them all theses years to figure out they can ban or regulate ammo & then your guns are almost worthless. It would not apply to private land use but hunting on Federal land would change. It's already been done here in Kommiefornia, you must use non lead bullets for hunting on public lnad & many private land leases have also followed the directive.
How to push back? If you are a Democrat, change parties, all they offer you is abortion protection & union support. Keep in mind that NOTHING liberal Dems have ever come up with has ultimately been good for the people of the USA.:steamed: Start by voting good Reb. into office in Nov.

Bravo! Fred for President in 2012!
 
#21 ·
Bravo! Fred for President in 2012!

Fred isn't eligible... if you voted for the first president you're not allowed to be elected the 45th. :whistling:


Jack
 
#23 ·
It is an end around to gun bans. It's finally taken them all theses years to figure out they can ban or regulate ammo & then your guns are almost worthless. It would not apply to private land use but hunting on Federal land would change. It's already been done here in Kommiefornia, you must use non lead bullets for hunting on public lnad & many private land leases have also followed the directive.
How to push back? If you are a Democrat, change parties, all they offer you is abortion protection & union support. Keep in mind that NOTHING liberal Dems have ever come up with has ultimately been good for the people of the USA.:steamed: Start by voting good Reb. into office in Nov.
Wow, you actually buy into the crap of lead contamination in meat from hunting bullets.
You are truely hiding your head in the sand thinking that this is about the enviroment. So little lead is left anywhere after big game hunting. It's not like waterfowl, where dozens of shots are taken by 1000s of hunters in a small area.
It's only about gun control, believing anything else is idealistic BS. It isn't even so much about cost, but inconvenience. The harder they make it to hunt & shoot, the fewer people will get involved. It's gun control/ban by attrition. Just look at Kommifornia's gun laws. That is what the liberal Dems bring to the table. I live it, I know.
Yeah, I used to think all the birthers were nut jobs. After seeing what PBO is doing to the country though, makes ya wonder? PBO asks; "do you want to go back to the Bush years"? Let's see, only a $400B deficite & less than 6% unemployment, yeah, beam me back Scotty!:tongueout: His majesty will make Carter look inviting in 2012.

Fred I am with you 100%. Here in NY we are following everything you see in Cali. I swear if it works or not and Cali did it NY wants it now. I think you are dead on in these posts. Be scared, they can and will use anything they find to make it harder for us all to enjoy this hobby. After all it is for the children.:faint:

By the way can anyone at all tell me where in the world lead came from? Was it something cooked up in a lab? Did we find it on Mars? I wonder where oh where on EARTH it came from. :whistling:
 
#24 · (Edited)
Fred isn't eligible... if you voted for the first president you're not allowed to be elected the 45th. :whistling:

Jack
If only I could! The problem, some antigun liberal whacko would shoot me for taking away his cushy union or govt. job & make them all work for a living (yes, I have worked both govt & union jobs so no sob stories please, I've seen how they work)! Plus, I am sadly not a born US citizen.:crying: And Jack, we all know you voted for GW in the first election & I don't mean Bush. BTW, I didn't vote until Lincoln.:supergrin:
 
#25 ·
I find it hard to believe this will happen. Dems are scared enough already. Plus, they haven't managed to do crap with their supposed super majority. Now with out that they have even less chance of getting anything done. Never mind on a issue like gun/bullet control. Not all elected dems are anti gun. Just like not all rep. are pro gun. Our goverment is paralyzed with bickering and stupid crap. We all ***** and complain about the current president. Reality is they are all a huge disappointment recently. The world is not all about "gun control". We have important things to deal with but instead we argue about stupid crap.
 
#26 ·
I find it hard to believe this will happen. Dems are scared enough already. Plus, they haven't managed to do crap with their supposed super majority. Now with out that they have even less chance of getting anything done. Never mind on a issue like gun/bullet control. Not all elected dems are anti gun. Just like not all rep. are pro gun. Our goverment is paralyzed with bickering and stupid crap. We all ***** and complain about the current president. Reality is they are all a huge disappointment recently. The world is not all about "gun control". We have important things to deal with but instead we argue about stupid crap.
+1 Instead of dealing with important stuff, they will get all worked up about some ballplayer who lied to them about drug use.

Congress is running scared that the rest of the country doesn't just LOVE them for the way they've done their job (which in the real world would have gotten them fired as incompetents - that applies to all of them). If they'd gotten the love they expected, you'd see lots of other things passing. Now they are stalled. Lame ducks before the election.

I'm almost ready to bet that if Islamic terrorists bombed DC, many of us would applaud.

However, all that said, one should remember that the opposition can be also be determined. Sarah Brady and her ilk, will just keep picking at the edges, so one must always be vigilant. It's about ideology; has nothing to do with right/wrong, legal/illegal, etc.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top