Rattler

I don't know where these propaganda rags think they are going with this stuff. If you look at reality today, California is almost bankrupt. These rags are claiming it will get better. That's a huge laugh. Can California residents sue them when they are proven wrong a couple of years from now? In other words, they have no skin in the game and can print whatever B.S. their Leftist handlers tell them to. Remember it's an election year and everything is rosy.

Well, they haven't been smart enough to come up with a solution so far, so if that's it, any other solution falls short, doesn't it? The solutions offered so far would cripple the economies of the world and set civilization back about 200 years. I think most humans would prefer death to forced economic slavery and enviromental tyranny.

If they get their way and outlaw bullets that can penetrate a cops body armor, all rifle bullets will be banned. But if they are forced to compromise, like so many people believe solves problems, Teflon coated and copper bullets may be the ones to go. Just a heads up for you guys.

Observing climate change is easy enough to do. Proving the cause and proposing an effective solution are harder to do. Why not just say all humans effect climate change, so all humans must be eliminated? Leave a breeding pair alive to report on the effectiveness of that solution too.

Well here's a new development regarding copper bullets. Anti-gun groups are starting to push their anti cop killer bullet campaign again. Guess what bullets are being added to the list of bullets that must be banned? Copper rifle bullets. Imagine if they were the only bullets being made today.

When you look at the "solution", you really have to question the entire climate change assumption. Why do all the "scientific" studies suggest humans cause it, then support the US government instituting a major confiscatory tax program that amounts to wealth distribution from the world's rich countries to the world's poor countries? Why is the US the only country that is willing to go along with the plan? That's not a scientific solution to a real climate problem. That's a political ideology being forced on free societies against their will. That's the main reason most analytical people do not support the climate change prophets.

P.S. I forgot to mention, Liberalism is a mental disorder.

They're Democrats because they are Progressives. They ignore all of the violations of law and applaud all of the social issue mandates you mentioned and then some. These people used to be anti-establishment in the 60's, but have come to love leftist administrations since then, and now feel the government is on their side, like a big brother they can turn to when they want to beat up their opponents. They should be called "Police State Progressives" rather than Democrats, for they are in fact advocating for a police state, especially in the area of gun control and Rule of Law. When someone tells me they are a Democrat and support Obama and Progressive agendas, it tells me they are not interested in liberty, freedom, the constitution, rule of law, equality or limited government. I believe any of the founders would slap the crap out of them if they were alive today to do it.

The Barnes bullets are a great choice, but remember to go lighter with copper bullets. Copper bullets of equal weight to lead ones will be longer and may not shoot as well in your rifle. I use 140 grain Winchester Supreme Ballistic Silvertips in a 7mm-08, but will drop down to 120 grain Barnes bullets when I reload them. The accuracy is the same but I get higher velocity and a flatter trajectory with the copper loads. Comparing both bullets side by side shows they are of equal length too.

Are there any restrictions on buying reloading supplies like powder and primers online?

I've heard of problems with copper bullets expanding at long range. They need high velocity to expand, and at long distances the velocity isn't enough to make them expand well. Never heard of issues at close range until now. I'm sure different copper bullets work differently, just as lead ones do. Guess it takes some testing to be sure what will work. The point here is, you can't assume switching to copper will be a great leap forward.

It's a cartridge of choice. Caliber is just a measurement. There are many 7mm rounds for deer. You can shoot 7x57 Mauser, 7mm-08, .280 Rem., 7mm Mag, 7mm WSM, etc. Personally, unless you are shooting these 7mm bullets at deer beyond 300 yards, I don't feel you need more than a 7mm-08. Looking at a ballistics table will show you how effective a 140 grain 7mm bullet can be without shooting it out of a magnum case. Whitetail deer at reasonable range, do not need the velocity and energy produced by a magnum round to be killed. If you want to use it, it will kill deer, but it produces more recoil, muzzle blast and meat damage, than the slower 7mm's will, and it costs more to shoot. I know people will say that wasn't the question. To answer the question, I would use a downloaded 7mm Mag round that mimics the velocity of a 7mm-08 for deer.

The main drawback to the Adirondack is trying to hold it steady when you have your heart rate and breathing up. The light weight and short barrel do nothing to help compensate for those issues. And those are often issues when hunting in the mountains. It also has a fluted bolt, which makes it's bolt travel sort of choppy as the ejector rides in the flutes as you move it back and forth. Not a real problem, but if you like a smooth action, it's not smooth. The price is also an issue IMO. The 84M Montana is far less costly and offers light weight with a 22" barrel and smooth action. I think it is a better value than the Adirondack. In my opinion, the 84M Classic Select model is the best of the Kimbers. It's light enough, looks beautiful, has matte finished metal and all the other match features of the others, plus a magazine floor plate. It's what real custom rifles used to be, but costs far less than they did way back in their day. Do you really need Kevlar and stainless steel? If not, look at the 84M Classic Select. BTW, these rifles are always lightest when chambered in 308 Win. It has the largest bore diameter, so it has the lightest barrel weight and lightest overall weight as well. It will also hunt any game animal as well as any of the other chambers offered.

If you extrapolate into the future where this lead ammo concern is going, you can't deny eventually all lead ammo, shot shells with bird shot, even when used for small game, as well as rifle bullets down to the .22LR, will all be questioned and eventually all be attacked until banned. I have serious concerns with this, especially when you understand this will be on the NATIONAL level, as was steel ammo for migratory bird hunting. Imagine how this will impact ammo suppliers and ammo supplies in general. I don't think manufacturers would be capable of meeting the demand in the beginning and that may last for years. Supply and demand affects cost to buyers too. This would be a huge change to current ammo production and would have ripple effects throughout the entire shooting world, including military and law enforcement. I don't like making these type of sweeping changes without knowing what the effects will be until it's too late. Nobody wants bald eagles to die and we are all looking to prevent that, but at what cost?

That's my main concern. You claim it's just education, but don't seem to realize you are also educating those who wish to attack hunting and firearms ownership. You shouldn't be surprised when people who love firearms and hunting resist your educating anti's, especially when the only solution offered seems to be a ban on lead ammo.

You didn't mention the waterfowl lead ban, but someone else here did. Maybe some hunters don't know about lead ammo issues, but most non-hunters know even less. Posting what you did on YouTube will be used as more fodder for the anti-gun, as well as anti-hunting crowd. You're helping their cause. You are not advocating any regulation, but you are priming the pump for it, and I suspect you know that. You want the information out there in the general public so people will get involved and do your regulatory demands for you. I'm not angry at all. Just looking to expose the end game you are obviously looking to accomplish. Have you given any consideration to what a lead ammo ban, on the national level, might do to all ammo production, producers, costs, employees of ammo makers, military defense supplies, gun control, anti-hunting gains or anything outside of the ammo affecting raptors? I'm concerned about the unintended consequences of someone's single minded zeal. How about just posting your info where hunters will see it and keeping it out of the realm of people who hate all firearms and hunting? How about pushing hunters using lead ammo to bury the gut pile? Better yet, only shoot deer in the neck or head if using lead ammo? I have a real aversion to anything, anyone wants to add to the "Ban" wagon in this country. So far, every ban I've seen has created as many issues as it has solved. It just puts the burden of the issues on someone else. Sorry if this sounds angry. It's grave concern you're reading, not vitriol.

This is where I see denial and arrogance in those who promote non-lead ammo. When someone uses the lead ban for waterfowl hunting to defend the elimination of lead rifle bullets, they spin it as voluntary, but want it to be mandatory. And that would be mandatory with all of the government imposed penalties that come with it. Also, implying that most hunters are not aware of the issue and cannot make informed choices is really calling them stupid, mainly because they don't want to go along with the program for whatever reason. Finally, saying they will make better choices when they have more information is a sign of a superiority complex, believing you know the only right answer to the problem and do not question your own choices. Yes, lead is bad, deer bullets using lead may be affecting raptors, (but so are many other things) they may even be contaminating some venison for consumption if not properly butchered. But do we want the government telling us it is now making the choices in this area for us by force, because they make better decisions than we do? Do we want to hand over freedom of choice here, like we did for waterfowl, without being absolutely sure the actual effects claimed are caused by deer bullets? If you believe it's harming you, choose not to use lead bullets. But do not think you have the authority, or even moral high ground, to tell others what to do. If you can't sway hunter's opinion on lead ammo with information, unless you are a total statist, you cannot use that same information to pass a law effecting others against their will. That's where America is going on many issues these days. It is completely against the original concept of freedom of choice and liberty this country was founded on.

You can preach all about the disadvantages of lead ammo and try to persuade people to use non-lead bullets, like a missionary trying to convert native Americans, and you will not get much push back. However, if you cross over the line and start pushing a law banning lead ammo, or even supporting one, you should expect to get a lot of push back. There any many reasons this will happen and people have a right to object. Once you partner with the government against people's individual freedom of choice, especially without a consensus, you will be viewed as subversive. I like Barnes X bullets, but do not want anyone telling me I cannot use anything else if I choose to.

That's only because we only get to choose between two viable candidates. Therefore we hold our noses and pick the one who will be the lesser threat to out liberty and our future.

Hillary's making Stalin proud.

More than likely they decided not to hear the case because they have a deadlocked court. It will come up again with another state that has a semi auto ban. Hopefully it will be after Trump wins and appoints TWO conservatives to the court!

I find it telling none of these Trump haters ever say anything about Hillary. I guess they feel she's a saint, that never lies, cheats, steals, or tries to get wealthy through power. If you bash Trump, but not Hillary, you are a total tool of the Left and need a lobotomy.

The fact that these people used to call it "Global Warming" and are now calling it "Climate Change" proves they are all full of crap. The climate has been changing since the beginning on this earth. Why do you think they call it "Man Made Climate Change"? Because they made it all up. It's a global wealth distribution scheme, not any type of climate repair policy. Every country in the world could spend hundreds of billions, and destroy all of their economic prospects for the future, and the climate wouldn't improve enough to make even the smallest impact. That's more of a threat to mankind's future than anything the climate will ever do.

You really are a salesman's dream Buzz.

Good video