California just outlawed lead ammo!

page: 3
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockerchic4God
 


Let me guess, the bullets will now be made of tofu or granola.




posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 10:50 PM
link   

openminded2011
reply to post by Rockerchic4God
 


Let me guess, the bullets will now be made of tofu or granola.
Could work self defense weapons for environmentalists can i use this.
Only problem i have is lead is everywhere in the environment all ready all dirt vegatables and animals all ways has been its a naturally occurring substance. Only in high quantities is it dangerous more specifically a gas form . As far as meat contamination like everything else in life to much of anything is hazardous to your health. What i find the funniest though is the rush for countries to find alternatives to lead are making even more hazardous rounds the norwegians switched over to a new green ammo and found out it was making soldiers sick after firing the new rifles. Symptoms included headaches, fever and joint pain.Sound familiar the culprit heavy metal poisoning The new rounds were made of copper and zinc and the fumes from the riffle were making them ill.

Now i guess people are not aware of this but most metals are indeed toxic heavy metal poisoning breaks down into sub categories they are :
Aluminum Poisoning
Antimony Poisoning
Arsenic Poisoning
Cadmium Poisoning
Chromium Poisoning
Cobalt Poisoning
Copper Poisoning
Lead Poisoning
Lithium Poisoning
Manganese Poisoning
Mercury Poisoning
Silver Poisoning
Zinc Poisoning
Barium Poisoning
Bismuth Poisoning
Gold Poisoning
Iron Poisoning
Selenium Poisoning
Phosphorous Poisoning
Platinum Poisoning
Tin Poisoning
Nickel Poisoning
Thallium Poisoning

Very long list so i guess we need to ban all metals period and go to plastic? Though im willing to bet they would say it doesnt bio degrade and therefore harmful to the environment.



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 10:58 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Only in high quantities is it dangerous more specifically a gas form .
Is eating 11.5 grams of lead OK? That's the weight of a 180 grain 30.06 bullet.
Intoxication from an Accidentally Ingested Lead Shot Retained in the Gastrointestinal Tract
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Very long list so i guess we need to ban all metals period and go to plastic?

Lead based paint is banned. So are lead water pipes.
edit on 10/14/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Only in high quantities is it dangerous more specifically a gas form .
Is eating 11.5 grams of lead OK? That's the weight of a 180 grain 30.06 bullet.
Intoxication from an Accidentally Ingested Lead Shot Retained in the Gastrointestinal Tract
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


Very long list so i guess we need to ban all metals period and go to plastic?

Lead based paint is banned. So are lead water pipes.
edit on 10/14/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Missing the point is swallowing zinc any better?(reason i chose zinc is that becoming a substitute) If it gets stuck in the intestinal tract then doesnt really matter what heavy metal it is does it? If it passes through exposure will not be harmfull. Now we can play the what if game all day long truth is people have eaten lead shot since america was founded did ocasionally something go wrong probably but they all ready had bigger problems then lead poisoning such as polyps in he intestines etc. You are aware everyone intakes lead every day in there food all ready every life form on the planet has to deal with lead. You can eat lead paint if you like not until it builds up to toxic levels is this a problem. The reason it was banned was because they figured kids would peel the paint off the walls and keep eating it until it did build up to a toxic level. Lead toys were far more dangerous with that a baby could put it in its mouth ans suck on it for hours every day. After a year or two you would probably reach toxic levels. The biggest danger is inhalation burning of lead paint for example then yes could become toxic quickly and they would get sick.
edit on 10/15/13 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Yah, leads dangerous. Its been banned from paint and gasoline, might as well ban it from bullets too. Wouldn't want any one to be harmed by bullets with lead in them.

Our government is dangerous too. Maybe we should ban them instead?



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Missing the point is swallowing zinc any better?
Well, yes. It's a lot less dangerous than lead. People take zinc as a dietary supplement, don't see many people taking lead pills.

But you seem to be missing the point. This is about hunters not being able to use lead bullets while hunting. The point is to protect scavengers which consume animals which were wounded and unable to be recovered. Or are you saying that this poses no risk to wildlife? Are you saying that hunters that have voluntarily stopped using lead ammunition are just bleeding heart, environmentalist, tree hugging, freaks?

All lead-responsive parameters were affected, and regurgitation of dosed shot occurred only once. The response of the Andean condors appeared to mimic California condors, suggesting that once exposed to lead, the possibility of survival is poor. This is consistent with observations in the wild, where otherwise healthy birds exposed to metallic lead quickly succumb.

www.huntingwithnonlead.org...

Meh. Plenty of lead everywhere already. What's the big deal about spreading more of it around?
edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Phage
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Missing the point is swallowing zinc any better?
Well, yes. It's a lot less dangerous than lead. People take zinc as a dietary supplement, don't see many people taking lead pills.

But you seem to be missing the point. This is about hunters not being able to use lead bullets while hunting. The point is to protect scavengers which consume animals which were wounded and unable to be recovered. Or are you saying that this poses no risk to wildlife? Are you saying that hunters that have voluntarily stopped using lead ammunition are just bleeding heart, environmentalist, tree hugging, freaks?
www.huntingwithnonlead.org...

Meh. Plenty of lead everywhere already. What's the big deal about spreading more of it around?
edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

No im saying how is wildlife going to eat the animal in the first place point of hunting is to take it home not leave it in the woods. Wats really the point then there isnt one is there? As far as hunters doing this you can easily convice people things are deadly and of course it stops its called public relations. But the whole point is lead bullets have all most 0 impact on the environment the real dangers are chemical plants and coal fired plants those release lead in to the atmosphere to be inhaled. Bullets yeah they kill wildlife but thats the point isnt it bullets kill.And please show me a hunter that goes in to the woods shoots an animal and leaves it there i never heard of that have you?



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


No im saying how is wildlife going to eat the animal in the first place point of hunting is to take it home not leave it in the woods.
Yes. If you can find it. If you are responsible enough to take the time it can take to find a wounded animal. Are you a hunter? It's not always easy to do and there are a lot of irresponsible hunters out there. readingeagle.com...


And please show me a hunter that goes in to the woods shoots an animal and leaves it there i never heard of that have you?
Yes. When I did hunt I came across rotted carcasses of wounded animals. I also left the guts of animals I killed behind after gutting them. Guts that in all likelihood contained lead fragments.


edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Phage
reply to post by dragonridr
 


No im saying how is wildlife going to eat the animal in the first place point of hunting is to take it home not leave it in the woods.
Yes. If you can find it. If you are responsible enough to take the time it can take to find a wounded animal. Are you a hunter? It's not always easy to do and there are a lot of irresponsible hunters out there.


And please show me a hunter that goes in to the woods shoots an animal and leaves it there i never heard of that have you?
Yes. When I did hunt I came across rotted carcasses of wounded animals. I also left the guts of animals I killed behind after dressing them out. Guts that in all likelihood contained lead fragments.

edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Now your being silly yes i have and sometime do go hunting. And if your dressing out a deer and you shot him in the gut you have no business hunting so im not sure why dressing an animal has anything to do with it. And i can guarantee if a hunter shot a quirl it isnt going far and if they shoot a deer damn right there going to track it not hard to follow a blood trail. If you winged it the bullet grazed the animal and probably embedded in a tree.Now if you out hunting and come across a dead carcass they werent shot happened all the time usually old age or disease.As i said bullets are not the problem it is a simple way to have gun control making rounds more expensive. Remember in politics all ways look for the real reason as star jones said and i quote:




"And if you're not going to reduce the volume of guns, make the ammunition expensive so that every time you point a gun at somebody and you're going to pull the trigger, think, is that life worth $5,000 for a bullet?"


This isnt for the environment if it were they would go after the real polluters in California like silicon valley but they dont want to hurt industry so of course nothing.



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


And if your dressing out a deer and you shot him in the gut you have no business hunting so im not sure why dressing an animal has anything to do with it.
The heart is "guts". The lungs are "guts". Lead bullets fragment on impact. Particularly when they hit bone. If you don't know that I don't think you've done much hunting.

Ninety-four percent of samples of deer killed with lead-based bullets contained fragments, and 90% of 20 offal piles showed fragments: 5 with 0–9 fragments, 5 with 10–100, 5 with 100–199, and 5 showing >200 fragments.
www.bioone.org...:BFIDRI%5D2.0.CO%3B2


As i said bullets are not the problem it is a simple way to have gun control making rounds more expensive.
Right. Lead bullets are not a problem.
scholar.google.com...

A reasonably good hunter does not use a lot of ammunition when hunting. How much difference in cost do you calculate there is between say, 5 lead bullets and 5 copper bullets? I don't recall ever taking even 5 shots on an outing.
edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Phage
reply to post by dragonridr
 


And if your dressing out a deer and you shot him in the gut you have no business hunting so im not sure why dressing an animal has anything to do with it.
The heart is "guts". The lungs are "guts". Lead bullets fragment on impact. Particularly when they hit bone. If you don't know that I don't think you've done much hunting.


As i said bullets are not the problem it is a simple way to have gun control making rounds more expensive.
Right. Lead bullets are not a problem.
scholar.google.com...

A reasonably good hunter does not use a lot of ammunition when hunting. How much difference in cost do you calculate there is between say, 5 lead bullets and 5 copper bullets? I don't recall ever taking even 5 shots on an outing.
edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Wow again so when you hit a deer with a slug it just fractures all over the place huh? Who hasnt gone hunting before the reason lead is preferred in a slug it exactly that it doesnt splinter being malleable and all. It impacts bone and well stop i know dug enough slugs out of deers and why would you aim for there lungs in the first place???? What i hated was using a 30 aut 6 and having the copper bullet fracture now thats a pain the butt. As far as cost it starts out small but lets look at the big picture you ban lead bullets natural replacement copper and zinc. Now this causes prices to rise in a free market as demand increases eventually a copper round will be 10 dollars a piece. Government thinks long term as i said if they were truly concerned with lead there barking up the wrong tree. As you yourself just said how many bullets does a hunter use? I know your not blind you have to realize theres more to it then worrying about a condor swallowing a bullet really you believe the California legislature there doing this to protect condors?



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 01:01 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Wow again so when you hit a deer with a slug it just fractures all over the place huh? Who hasnt gone hunting before the reason lead is preferred in a slug it exactly that it doesnt splinter being malleable and all.
Wrong. Copper bullets have equal knockdown power and fragment less.
www.huntingwithnonlead.org...

Ninety-four percent of samples of deer killed with lead-based bullets contained fragments, and 90% of 20 offal piles showed fragments: 5 with 0–9 fragments, 5 with 10–100, 5 with 100–199, and 5 showing >200 fragments.
source


Now this causes prices to rise in a free market as demand increases eventually a copper round will be 10 dollars a piece.
Probably not, that's a pretty steep increase in cost for 11 grams of material. But this only applies to ammunition used while hunting, remember? One box of non-lead ammo a season will probably do it for the majority of hunters. If it doesn't they need more time on the practice range (with lead bullets).


you believe the California legislature there doing this to protect condors?
Yes. Primarily.

edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


See fragments are misleading when lead fragments its while entering the flesh it doesnt shoot off it will be in the entry wound. While copper well penetrate alot deeper into the deer and if it fractures goes everywhere. No one argues a copper round has the same impact its wound is just alot deeper in to the flesh same kennetic energy is expended so that silly. Have you bought ammo lately why is it so expensive now could it be because the government started buying ammunition making the demand out pace the supply? What do you think is going to happen with copper bullets as the demand increases? Come on this is economics 101. Let me ask you a question how much lead does a condor actually get from ingesting a bullet did they do autopsies? what was the part per million? See wildlife rangers stuck on this in the 80s as a cause for the same reason they wanted to stop hunting. Look condors are far more likely to die running in to power lines a wind farm. Another major problem was cyanide set out to kill coyotes still done in fact. Im not going to say condors havnt died from lead poisoning but i will say thats the least of there problems people tend to shoot them as well people dont like buzzards what can i say.

So did the government do a study on the impact of lead bullets to the condor or was this something they all just knew was a problem? Now think when does the government do anything without an impact study? The only thing that was done was from an environmental toxicologist from santa cruz this was given to the law makers. And surprise a toxicologist told them that if condors eat lead bullets it could kill them. Problem is there was no study to see how often this actually happens? Funny that the law makers didnt ask either why bother it wasnt a concern as i said republicans couldnt seem like they didnt care about the environment especially in california and democrats can say look we got something with guns banned. Win win for everybody no body cared about the condors.

As i said first of many restrictions on hunting there will be more as it progresses all good bans take time. If you cant directly ban it just make it so expensive people wont do it. Where you aware in california you have to take a test and a course to get a hunting licence? Why would they make it so hard and expensive i wonder?



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


See wildlife rangers stuck on this in the 80s as a cause for the same reason they wanted to stop hunting.
Really? They wanted to stop hunting? Are you sure? Stopping hunting is a really bad idea for a few reasons. It would surprise me if wildlife officials wanted a blanket ban on hunting.
 


Look condors are far more likely to die running in to power lines a wind farm.
I'm sure you have data to support that claim. But sure, lots of things kill 'em. Nothing we can do about any of it, right?
 


Another major problem was cyanide set out to kill coyotes still done in fact.
Not in California, not legally.

Toxicants or poisons used to control coyotes are illegal, with the exception of fumigant cartridges available only to predator control specialists to asphyxiate coyote pups in their dens. No chemical repellents are registered for use in repelling coyotes from property or from livestock.

www.ipm.ucdavis.edu...
 


So did the government do a study on the impact of lead bullets to the condor or was this something they all just knew was a problem?
I have posted a number of links.
 


The only thing that was done was from an environmental toxicologist from santa cruz this was given to the law makers.
You're sure about that?
 


Why would they make it so hard and expensive i wonder?
Because stupid hunters kill people, including themselves? Because ignorant hunters tend to abandon wounded animals because it's too hard to track them? Because stupid hunters are a blight? Because a quarter of a million untrained people wandering around the woods with weapons is a scary idea?


edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2013 @ 04:22 AM
link   
many shotgun barrels are lead shot only.

also, many people end up using their sidearm more than their rifle. which will probably be more than 5 shots.

i know out here when we go deer hunting we usually see more hogs than deer. i dont know if this is the case in Califonria...



posted on Oct, 22 2013 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Just curious. Did you ever bowhunt?
Purely off topic as I am only curious.



posted on Oct, 22 2013 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by RothchildRancor
 

I never did.
My hunting days were over before compound bows were common.



posted on Oct, 23 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   
I am very pro-gun. I however see no issues with this law. As Phage pointed out there isn't anything restricting the sell or its use for target practice that I have seen. You only need a few rounds to take game anyhow. If you need a machine gun to bring down a deer you should probably start raising your own food because you're completely blind. I wouldn't mind seeing this everywhere. I actually read over everything though. I can see how others looking at the headline would just see that and get mad.

Well actually do your research. This is only for taking game and there's nothing wrong with protecting the environment and animal life. You don't need that much ammo unless you're out their mass murdering and or poaching. You shouldn't own a gun in that case. I was raised that if you kill it you eat it. That should be self explanatory. You don't need lead bullets to hunt your food.





top topics
 
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join