Get the Lead Out of Bullets - NY Times Op-Ed

[Curmudgeon]

Yes, I'm still alive.

It's good to see some major media attention.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/01/opinion/get-the-lead-out-of-bullets.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Lead in gut pile -

Lead Poisoned Eagle near Cannonsville Reservoir -

 

Edited November 2, 2018 by Curmudgeon
mistake

[BowmanMike]

That's a good article.

[Marion]

I agree with the article being well written. But I do not agree with inviting in more government overreach. No thank you. I shoot Barnes TSX full copper because I like the way they shoot out of my gun, not because I am forced to. That's the way it should remain

 

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

[Billdogge]

I'm fond of the Barnes for many reasons. This being one. 

 

[Rattler]

First, The New York Times is a leftist rag that supports bigger, more invasive and oppressive government any chance it gets.  It's writers believe the government is the solution to whatever ails America.  This article is a prime example of a one sided propaganda piece that gives no space to any counter point and passes opinion off as unquestionable fact.  Notice how it calls for an outright ban as if it has the right to pontificate on the matter with authority, without offering any other solution.  That's a totalitarian mindset.

Second, there are major disadvantages to non-lead bullets when compared to conventional lead bullets.  Price is just one factor.  They do not expand well at low velocity.  They foul rifle barrels faster.  Copper barrels are much harder to un-foul.  When used in smaller, lower velocity rounds like the .38 Special or other pistol cartridges used in rifles, they do not expand well when striking the game animal.  There are currently no .22 LR or other .22 rimfire non-lead rounds that I'm aware of, or they are not common in the market.  Available copper ammo suppliers are not currently capable of meeting the demands of hunters for even one season, if conventional ammo was suddenly banned.  If mandated by law, supply and demand rules of economics would wreck havoc on the price of ammo for years.

Third, though it is true Bald Eagles will die if they ingest lead fragments, there is no actual evidence they are dying from eating animal gut piles, or dead animals shot with lead ammo and not recovered by hunters.  More likely they are eating lead in scraps thrown in dumpsters behind deer processing facilities that are not required to cover their dumpsters to prevent it.  Also, in areas where lead ammo has been banned, such as the region of the California Condor, the death rate of these birds due to lead poisoning has not changed, indicating the problem lies not with hunter's bullets, but somewhere else.  

Finally, the Federal government actually provides permits to windmill farms, to legally kill hundreds of raptors, including bald eagles, every year, considering them collateral damage in the quest to support "green energy" from wind sources.  Choosing to ban lead ammo for hunters, places the burden of raptor relief squarely at the feet of those who have the least ability to fight back with a powerful lobby.  There is also the well known desire of the government, to infringe on the 2nd Amendment rights of it's citizens in every way it possibly can, to minimize the ability, or the desire of it's people, to engage in lawful firearm ownership.  Banning lead ammo gives it one more way to impose oppression on the public regarding it's ability to exercise a Constitutional right.

I think we should all be concerned with raptor deaths and doing our part to minimize it, but it would be much less oppressive to educate hunters using lead ammo, to bury gut piles, or not gut animals in the field.  Any law should only be directed at pressuring "for profit" processing facilities, to take measures to prevent problems.

It always bothers me when public entities, with little understanding of an issue, choose to scream for "simple", "common sense" solutions to problems, that are actually quite complicated.  Like the adage says, "If you think the problems the government creates are bad, just wait until you see their solutions."

[BowmanMike]

On 11/3/2018 at 2:39 AM, Rattler said:

First, The New York Times is a leftist rag that supports bigger, more invasive and oppressive government any chance it gets.  It's writers believe the government is the solution to whatever ails America.  This article is a prime example of a one sided propaganda piece that gives no space to any counter point and passes opinion off as unquestionable fact.  Notice how it calls for an outright ban as if it has the right to pontificate on the matter with authority, without offering any other solution.  That's a totalitarian mindset.

Second, there are major disadvantages to non-lead bullets when compared to conventional lead bullets.  Price is just one factor.  They do not expand well at low velocity.  They foul rifle barrels faster.  Copper barrels are much harder to un-foul.  When used in smaller, lower velocity rounds like the .38 Special or other pistol cartridges used in rifles, they do not expand well when striking the game animal.  There are currently no .22 LR or other .22 rimfire non-lead rounds that I'm aware of, or they are not common in the market.  Available copper ammo suppliers are not currently capable of meeting the demands of hunters for even one season, if conventional ammo was suddenly banned.  If mandated by law, supply and demand rules of economics would wreck havoc on the price of ammo for years.

Third, though it is true Bald Eagles will die if they ingest lead fragments, there is no actual evidence they are dying from eating animal gut piles, or dead animals shot with lead ammo and not recovered by hunters.  More likely they are eating lead in scraps thrown in dumpsters behind deer processing facilities that are not required to cover their dumpsters to prevent it.  Also, in areas where lead ammo has been banned, such as the region of the California Condor, the death rate of these birds due to lead poisoning has not changed, indicating the problem lies not with hunter's bullets, but somewhere else.  

Finally, the Federal government actually provides permits to windmill farms, to legally kill hundreds of raptors, including bald eagles, every year, considering them collateral damage in the quest to support "green energy" from wind sources.  Choosing to ban lead ammo for hunters, places the burden of raptor relief squarely at the feet of those who have the least ability to fight back with a powerful lobby.  There is also the well known desire of the government, to infringe on the 2nd Amendment rights of it's citizens in every way it possibly can, to minimize the ability, or the desire of it's people, to engage in lawful firearm ownership.  Banning lead ammo gives it one more way to impose oppression on the public regarding it's ability to exercise a Constitutional right.

I think we should all be concerned with raptor deaths and doing our part to minimize it, but it would be much less oppressive to educate hunters using lead ammo, to bury gut piles, or not gut animals in the field.  Any law should only be directed at pressuring "for profit" processing facilities, to take measures to prevent problems.

It always bothers me when public entities, with little understanding of an issue, choose to scream for "simple", "common sense" solutions to problems, that are actually quite complicated.  Like the adage says, "If you think the problems the government creates are bad, just wait until you see their solutions."

I think education is never a bad idea,but burying gut piles or gutting at home? How would that ever get enforced.

Seems it would be easiest to keep the lead out of the carcass in the first place.

[Marion]

Pretty sure wind farms kill far more birds than lead does

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Rattler]

31 minutes ago, BowmanMike said:

I think education is never a bad idea,but burying gut piles or gutting at home? How would that ever get enforced.

Seems it would be easiest to keep the lead out of the carcass in the first place.

There wouldn't be a law saying it would have to be done.  The point being we already have far too many oppressive regulations now.  Using copper bullets should be a free choice, considering the jury is still out on this case.  Any law regarding remains would be aimed at deer processing facilities that draw raptors to their waste dumps.

It's always legally easiest to cut with a broad sword if you're not at all concerned with the hack job you wind up with.  That's why tyranny is so objectionable.

Raptors are currently doing better than they have been in decades.  Everyone wants to see any harm to them limited.  Everyone wants to remain free too.  In a free country, you don't ban anything, especially when the government has no Constitutional authority to ban anything in the first place.  If you want things changed, you inform and persuade the populace to make the right choices.  Free people have freedom of choice.  More and more hunters ARE using copper ammo every year, but shouldn't that be a choice they get to make, as opposed to a mandate from the government?

Edited November 4, 2018 by Rattler

[Hunter007]

Lead bullet  hunting goes  back over 500 years .

 We are all still here and the animals to .

[Curmudgeon]

34 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

Lead bullet  hunting goes  back over 500 years .

 We are all still here and the animals to .

Conservationists hunt with non-lead bullets.

Yes Storm, we are still here, but lead affect IQ, and may explain some of what shows up on these posts. Present company excepted of course.

[airedale]

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2018 at 2:39 AM, Rattler said:

First, The New York Times is a leftist rag that supports bigger, more invasive and oppressive government any chance it gets.  It's writers believe the government is the solution to whatever ails America.  This article is a prime example of a one sided propaganda piece that gives no space to any counter point and passes opinion off as unquestionable fact.  Notice how it calls for an outright ban as if it has the right to pontificate on the matter with authority, without offering any other solution.  That's a totalitarian mindset.

ENUFF SAID!!

Al

[Hunter007]

30 minutes ago, Curmudgeon said:

Conservationists hunt with non-lead bullets.

Yes Storm, we are still here, but lead affect IQ, and may explain some of what shows up on these posts. Present company excepted of course.

You really think insulting people like that is going to  make them change there mind? .

We have 500 years of data that shows it has no real impact on animals or humans to go back on,  sorry if it does not fit into your narrow minded  view of things that are actually important. 

Yea you care more then me about the environment  because you use a different  bullet shzzz .

Unreal  

Edited November 4, 2018 by Storm914

[Hunter007]

If the New York times said we should use silver bullets because the deer would turn into vampires  if we didn't would you believe that to .

 

[Marion]

If the New York times said we should use silver bullets because the deer would turn into vampires  if we didn't would you believe that to .
 

Hell if there were vampire deer maybe I'd see more

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[Hunter007]

44 minutes ago, airedale said:

ENUFF SAID!!

Al

Yea How many hunters you think work at the new york times  lol 

They sit around all day long figureing out how then can write storys that will manipulate the masses  to do what ever they want .

This is just another example of that  .  

Its  Just another sneaky way to try  to get around the 2end amendment and ban guns bullets  as much as they can get away with . 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2018 by Storm914

[Rattler]

The future may well see lots of non-lead ammo being the norm, rather than the exception.  However, all copper may prove to be one of the least desirable types of non-lead ammo choices.  One of the problems with legislation requiring non-lead ammo, like those in California, is little to no research has been conducted on any side effects or consequences associated with requiring copper to be used in hunting.  The only info released is promoting the positive aspects, while completely ignoring any negative aspects, which are currently unknown.

When lead was removed from gasoline, other harmful additives were added to it, (MTBE & MMT) that have turned out to be worse for the environment than the lead was.  The government made a bad call, but went with the simple solution.

There are new non-lead bullets being developed as we discuss this.  Many may prove to be better than all copper.  But the governments of states requiring non-lead need to approve their use first, and that creates delay and opens up the possibility for corruption.

ARX bullets are getting a lot of attention lately.

https://www.inceptorammo.com/inceptor-product/preferred-hunting/

[Dinsdale]

1 hour ago, Curmudgeon said:

Conservationists hunt with non-lead bullets.

Yes Storm, we are still here, but lead affect IQ, and may explain some of what shows up on these posts. Present company excepted of course.

Mike Rossi play book.....way to influence your target audience.

[Hunter007]

On 11/2/2018 at 8:43 AM, Curmudgeon said:

Yes, I'm still alive.

It's good to see some major media attention.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/01/opinion/get-the-lead-out-of-bullets.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

Lead in gut pile -

Lead Poisoned Eagle near Cannonsville Reservoir -

 

And how do we know this is not just more fake news Junk  science made by people with a  aganda ?

California lol 

Yea there not known for that  right

 

 

 

 

Edited November 4, 2018 by Storm914

[Billdogge]

1 hour ago, Curmudgeon said:

Conservationists hunt with non-lead bullets.

Yes Storm, we are still here, but lead affect IQ, and may explain some of what shows up on these posts. Present company excepted of course.

Not great way to be man.

Edited November 4, 2018 by Billdogge

[Rattler]

15 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

And how do we know this is not just more fake news Junk  science made by people with a  aganda ?

California lol 

Yea there not known for that  right

Storm, that's a dead Eagle in NY by the Cannonsville Reservoir.  But when was it found, and where did it eat lead is the question that needs be answered.

[BowmanMike]

So is the jury still out on climate change too?

And can someone explain to me who would benefit from pushing the climate change idea?

[Hunter007]

10 minutes ago, Rattler said:

Storm, that's a dead Eagle in NY by the Cannonsville Reservoir.  But when was it found, and where did it eat lead is the question that needs be answered.

I mentioned California because of this part of the article. 

 

In California, hunters have been required to use non-lead bulletsfor the past 10 years in territory frequented by the critically endangered California condor, which faced a significant threatfrom lead poisoning that continues. Next July, California will become the first state to ban the use of lead bullets to hunt wildlife

[Hunter007]

Scientists can be bought off corrupted just like any other organization or occupation. 

Be leery of anything that targets things that the left is know to hate .

Think about the source of this and who founded this .

 

[Hunter007]

26 minutes ago, BowmanMike said:

So is the jury still out on climate change too?

And can someone explain to me who would benefit from pushing the climate change idea?

Governments politicians scientist themselves  make money from it , No money in it if they say its natural climate change . They are getting paid to find a problem  with man made climate change  if its just natural climate change  no money in that see what I mean . No motive to tell us the truth  if it is they will loose there founding .

 

Edited November 4, 2018 by Storm914

[Rattler]

35 minutes ago, BowmanMike said:

So is the jury still out on climate change too?

And can someone explain to me who would benefit from pushing the climate change idea?

Let's not derail this already divisive thread with another divisive subject.  Best to start an entirely new one in the Political forum if you want to go into this.