Efforts to ban lead shot -- tell me about it

24

Replies

  • Six-GunSix-Gun Senior Member Posts: 7,435 Senior Member
    Yep. Cherrypicking stats has always been a favorite tactic of the enviro-Nazi, ban [fill in the item] crowd. It's a shame becaue it creates immediate pushback when there are issues of legit concern.
    Accuracy: because white space between bullet holes drives me insane.
  • KENFU1911KENFU1911 Senior Member Posts: 1,052 Senior Member
    The simple solution to this.....seems to be......Kill off the Condors with enviro friendly non toxic shoot...... then no Condors will be harmed by lead shot..............Ken
    My idea of a warning shot is when the 2nd bad guy watches his 1st buddy go down....
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    As it turns out, the area they studied (and they knew this going in) had been an active clay pigeon shooting range for years and years before shutting down. So there had been thousands of people in one fairly small area shooting hundreds of times each over the course of 10/15/20? years.
    Great study....

    Now, you see, this is the sort of cherrypicking (thanks Six) that the opposition uses to mount a false case.

    But, per some other postings here, it does seem that lead shot may indeed be an environmental hazard. Understand, I really don't know whether this is true.

    We nevertheless have to be open minded to this possibility and if it is true, we can't be ostritches with heads in the sand. Instead we need to take the forefront and by doing so, remove that issue from the anti-2A crowd.

    If we think about TRUE conservation (as championed by ol' Teddy R), this is exactly the sort of correct-minded preservation of endangered species and protection of the environment that responsible hunters practice. The antis cannot understand how a hunter can be pro-conservation but they're the ones with the closed mindset.

    All I'm saying is that IF lead shot does indeed pose a hazard (as determined by truly impartial studies), then we as right-thinking gun owners need to accept this (ONLY if true) and find alternative shot. Anything we can do that removes power from the antis is good.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,965 Senior Member
    KENFU1911 wrote: »
    The simple solution to this.....seems to be......Kill off the Condors with enviro friendly non toxic shoot...... then no Condors will be harmed by lead shot..............Ken

    You laugh but this reminds me of a similar but true story. Y'all have heard me talk of Matagorda Island on here. It's one of the barrier islands along the Texas Gulf Coast, same as Galveston and Padre Islands. There is a family named Hawes who settled there back in the 1800s and my great uncle married one of them. She was born and raised on the Island and used to tell us kids all kind of stories about growing up there and the Native Americans there and all. The place was an ideal ranching area and is still to this day full of wild game. When the Air base was in operation there, many celebrities went there to hunt and fish such as John Wayne, Arthur Godfrey, and Andy Divine to name a few. Anyway, across San Antonio Bay from the Island there is the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge out of the village of Austwell. This is where a majority of Whooping Cranes in the wild spend their winters. As a kid the numbers of Whooping Cranes had gotten down as low as 20 or so, but conservation methods and hatchings in captivity increased, the number grew to 50 in the late 60s. As the numbers grew the birds expanded their nesting area across the Intercoastal Canal to the Island and the Whacko Bunny Huggers wanted to throw the Hawes family off the Island. The Hawes Family had been fighting the U.S. Government to keep their grazing rights there for years and Joe Hawes, the family Patriarch had made several trips to Washington to talk to congressional leaders and lobbie for the family. Anyway, once when the count of Whoopers in the wild was at 50 he was really at wits end and he got POed and made the statement that they should kill them all, stuff them and give one to each state. That would solve the problem once and for all!

    :jester:
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Now, you see, this is the sort of cherrypicking (thanks Six) that the opposition uses to mount a false case.

    But, per some other postings here, it does seem that lead shot may indeed be an environmental hazard. Understand, I really don't know whether this is true.

    We nevertheless have to be open minded to this possibility and if it is true, we can't be ostritches with heads in the sand. Instead we need to take the forefront and by doing so, remove that issue from the anti-2A crowd.

    If we think about TRUE conservation (as championed by ol' Teddy R), this is exactly the sort of correct-minded preservation of endangered species and protection of the environment that responsible hunters practice. The antis cannot understand how a hunter can be pro-conservation but they're the ones with the closed mindset.

    All I'm saying is that IF lead shot does indeed pose a hazard (as determined by truly impartial studies), then we as right-thinking gun owners need to accept this (ONLY if true) and find alternative shot. Anything we can do that removes power from the antis is good.

    ...so what's next on your list, Sam??? Farming??? Any time you disturb soil, you are causing a health hazard, the Malthusian Equation would probably be a reality right now if not for the Industrial Revolution & modern farming practices that use all kinds of icky stuff. Speaking of the Industrial Revolution, any type of smelting or refining produces waste materials, many which if mishandled are toxic. For that matter most modern medicine is toxic if misused. And how about doctors, doctors are responsible for thousands more accidental deaths than guns, not just lead poisoning from ammo. What about being gay, do we all have to become "gay" because there's a small vocal minority that thinks they are being put upon because of their lifestyle choices, or do we all have to become haters because there's another small vocal minority that thinks it's wrong. Is it wrong for me to say I don't care about your choices unless you try & take mine away??? Then there's always that persistent, pernicious solvent that kills hundreds every year...

    http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html#VIOLENCE

    ..."Life" comes w/ some risks, Sam, I, personally would prefer to live it, than have others force me to exist...
  • HAWKENHAWKEN Senior Member Posts: 1,689 Senior Member
    :jester:While the lead shot ban may have some basis in fact, and I don't agree, the lead bullet ban is total toro mearde'. In all of the critters I have shot, and there have been a lot, I can count on one hand the bullets that have been recovered. 99+ percent have been complete pass throughs........Robin
    I don't often talk to people that voted for Obama, but when I do I order large fries!
    Life member of the American Legion, the VFW, the NRA and the Masonic Lodge, retired LEO
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    wildgene wrote: »
    ...so what's next on your list, Sam??? Farming???
    ..."Life" comes w/ some risks, Sam, I, personally would prefer to live it, than have others force me to exist...

    Duh. Silly rebuttal, not that well augmented, wild. All I'm advocating is REASONABLE measures that effect SENSIBLE steps toward conservation. As I said, I don't know the scientific stats here and I really doubt whether a genuinely impartial study has ever been conducted. And Hawk, your personal anecdotes are invalid scientifically, too.

    All I'm asking for is genuine scientific proof either way. Then we should make a decision based on that.

    IF -- you know, "if" meaning not guaranteed, IF impartial studies show that lead shot is indeed a REAL environmental hazard, then maybe it should be banned. We quit dumping lead into the atmosphere from leaded gasoline, we quit using lead base paints for houses, and IF lead shot is a GENUINE hazard, yes it needs to be banned. Duh. "Tarzan does not stick head into lion's mouth" as the old saying goes.

    We have to care about our environment and exercise SMART and REASONABLE standards to protect things. IF the hazard from lead shot is minimal, then so be it. I made it clear that I really didn't know the facts and it may be that nobody else does either.

    I mean, we once put our kids into the open bed of pickup trucks like so much haulage and in an accident the kids went sailing into hard metal things that killed them. Now we're smarter and buckle up. Maybe you drive without a seatbelt and let others in your vehicle do the same, After all, life comes with some risks. Why take that naggy polio vaccine, right? Life has risks, so why do anything to limit them? Flip a coin and we're done?

    Genuine hazards need to be respected and taken care of. That's all I'm saying. If lead shot isn't a REAL hazard (statistically high enough to really affect the environment), fine. Same as taking out meteorite insurance on the roof. Too small a chance.

    I simply don't know whether lead shot is a real hazard, statistically significant.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,003 Senior Member
    REASONABLE measures that effect SENSIBLE steps

    I think I heard that before :yikes:
    A Veteran is someone that served in the Military, it does not matter where they served.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,235 Senior Member
    Well, Sam, if steel shot is so great and is used for all waterfowl hunting in regulated areas, riddle me this. Have you ever heard of iron toxicity? It's deadly when too much iron enters the digestive system of humans, and waterfowl and other birds would suffer the same or similar effects. Changing one poison for another is still poison.
    Some info on iron toxicity:
    http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/815213-overview#a0101

    Lead shot slowly sinks into the muddy bottom of marshes, gets an outer oxide coating, and is for all intents and purposes inert. It does not leach into the ecosystem unless the water and mud is either very high or low pH that keeps the oxide scale from forming and causes chemical reaction with the lead.

    About that bismuth shot being safer for birds. I..............don't.................think................so.
    http://www.lenntech.com/periodic/elements/bi.htm#Health%20effects%20of%20bismuth

    Swapping one supposed poison for another KNOWN poison is NOT a solution. But raising the price of ammunition by substituting one cheap supposed poison for one obscenely expensive known poison has only one real effect, and that is to ban hunting by making it too expensive a sport to pursue.
    If the U.S. Congress was put in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand in under six months.



  • KSU FirefighterKSU Firefighter Senior Member Posts: 3,248 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Swapping one supposed poison for another KNOWN poison is NOT a solution. But raising the price of ammunition by substituting one cheap supposed poison for one obscenely expensive known poison has only one real effect, and that is to ban hunting by making it too expensive a sport to pursue.

    :win: Kind of like doing away with "wasteful" incandescent light bulbs for the compact fluorescent.
    The fire service needs a "culture of extinguishment not safety" Ray McCormack FDNY
  • KENFU1911KENFU1911 Senior Member Posts: 1,052 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    But raising the price of ammunition by substituting one cheap supposed poison for one obscenely expensive known poison has only one real effect, and that is to ban hunting by making it too expensive a sport to pursue.

    Very true......I remember wanting to go hunting rabbits around the lake....A SRA in calif........but because it was a SRA......non toxic was required...........so even with my employee discount at the LGS..that trip was scrapped......I just couldn't afford the ammo for the 3 of Us.....knowing there would be lots of misses..............Ken
    My idea of a warning shot is when the 2nd bad guy watches his 1st buddy go down....
  • BigslugBigslug Senior Member Posts: 7,169 Senior Member
    KENFU1911 wrote: »
    The simple solution to this.....seems to be......Kill off the Condors with enviro friendly non toxic shoot...... then no Condors will be harmed by lead shot..............Ken

    I've got a better plan even than that. Since eco-maniac studies seem to indicate that the average 20-pound condor contains 36 pounds of lead, I will remove harmful lead from the environment by melting down live condors for my bullet alloy.
    WWJMBD?

    "Nothing is safe from stupid." - Zee
  • KENFU1911KENFU1911 Senior Member Posts: 1,052 Senior Member
    And you could render the fat out....for bullet lube...brilliant. Ken
    My idea of a warning shot is when the 2nd bad guy watches his 1st buddy go down....
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,965 Senior Member
    :win: Kind of like doing away with "wasteful" incandescent light bulbs for the compact fluorescent.

    I use those swirly new bulbs, but not because Al Gore told me to. They use a lot less juice. I don't think using incandescent will make or break the environment, but they can make or break my bank account.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Well, Sam, if steel shot is so great and is used for all waterfowl hunting in regulated areas, riddle me this. etc etc

    Swapping one supposed poison for another KNOWN poison is NOT a solution. etc

    I don't know what "riddle me this" means but at which point did I advocate using steel shot? I in fact said that maybe there's a special high density polymer that could be used in lieu of lead, and that maybe there's a terrific opportunity for some enterprising person to make a mint on this

    Of COURSE substituting one poison for another isn't good. Duh. What I'm saying, whew, getting tired typing the SAME thing over and over... IF and ONLY IF lead is impartially and scientifically determined to be a GENUINE environmental hazard, alternates need to be substituted. What's wrong with that?

    Let me take time now to MORE CAREFULLY describe my thoughts on this so everyone will FINALLY understand...
    1. I do NOT blindly advocate banning lead shot.
    2. I ONLY advocate banning lead shot IF and ONLY IF it's properly determined a hazard.
    3. I DO think that IF lead shot is banned due to #2 (read #2 above) THEN perhaps a high density polymer compound might be developed that wouldn't cause the problems on guns that steel shot does, and that maybe a smart ammo company would benefit -- What if, for example, Remington came up with a polymer shot that was only 20% more expensive and was non-toxic to the environment?
    4. I DO think that IF and ONLY IF lead shot is scientifically shown to be a hazard (read #2 above), responsible hunters need to accept this (IF and ONLY IF it's true) and get out in front with it, thereby removing any anti-2A "weapon" and taking charge.

    In what case am I wrong on these points?

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    KENFU1911 wrote: »
    Very true......I remember wanting to go hunting rabbits around the lake....A SRA in calif........but because it was a SRA......non toxic was required...........so even with my employee discount at the LGS..that trip was scrapped......I just couldn't afford the ammo for the 3 of Us.....knowing there would be lots of misses..............Ken

    How much would the difference have been, guesstimated?

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,965 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Now, you see, this is the sort of cherrypicking (thanks Six) that the opposition uses to mount a false case.

    But, per some other postings here, it does seem that lead shot may indeed be an environmental hazard. Understand, I really don't know whether this is true.

    We nevertheless have to be open minded to this possibility and if it is true, we can't be ostritches with heads in the sand. Instead we need to take the forefront and by doing so, remove that issue from the anti-2A crowd.

    If we think about TRUE conservation (as championed by ol' Teddy R), this is exactly the sort of correct-minded preservation of endangered species and protection of the environment that responsible hunters practice. The antis cannot understand how a hunter can be pro-conservation but they're the ones with the closed mindset.

    All I'm saying is that IF lead shot does indeed pose a hazard (as determined by truly impartial studies), then we as right-thinking gun owners need to accept this (ONLY if true) and find alternative shot. Anything we can do that removes power from the antis is good.

    I agree Sam. I'm sure lead isn't great for the environment. But is it as bad as the Left says? I put little stock in what they say because of their track record. And I think that it might be a moot point when compared to the wounded water fowl numbers. It would be nice if someone would do an unbiased study here. But that probably won't happen.

    Ya know, this reminds me of my thoughts on the Liberal Media. My question is why don't some wealthy conservatives (I'm sure that's how Fox was created) Invest in more networks or try and buy some of the main stream lame stream networks such as CBS, NBC, ABC, or CNN?
    More conservatives need to put their money where their mouth is and try and gain more control of the media.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,235 Senior Member
    Quick ammo search on Bing (hint, hint, Sam) reveals prices as follows:

    Remington low brass #6 lead shot: $6.99/box of 25
    Winchester low brass #6 lead shot: $7.19/box of 25
    Hevi Shot low brass #6 bismuth shot: $26.99/ box of 25
    Federal low brass #6 steel shot: $9.69/ box of 25

    Since steel is blatantly incompatible with older shotguns, and some people refuse to shoot it in even new shotguns because of the added stress and wear on barrels and chokes, among other things, bismuth is the only available option. And as you can see, bismuth is approximately 3X-4X higher than either steel or lead. That is unacceptable for some, and I completely understand both reasons for not using either steel or bismuth shot.

    And if you reload like I do, it's still a high dollar proposition. And by reloading bismuth, I've had some less than pleasant experiences with the 'Imperial Storm Troopers of the Empire', a.k.a. the TWRA officers, that WILL check your ammunition when duck hunting. I've had to cut and dump shot out of a few shotshells because they were reloads and the :cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss: idiot officer accused me of using lead shot even after he'd seen the 'funny looking' bismuth shot with the ring around it. Conversations with these effin' **** degenerated rapidly when that happened. I don't duck hunt on the lake anymore because I have had it with the storm troopers. The older I get, the less I suffer the idiotic highly educated TWRA fools with the people skills of a honey badger. But I still float hunt a few rivers where the idiots don't hang around because they can't launch or operate their $75,000-$100,000 tricked out huge center console boats bought with license fees. And I use my cheaper bismuth reloads when I do.
    If the U.S. Congress was put in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand in under six months.



  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,003 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Quick ammo search on Bing (hint, hint, Sam) reveals prices as follows:

    Remington low brass #6 lead shot: $6.99/box of 25
    Winchester low brass #6 lead shot: $7.19/box of 25
    Hevi Shot low brass #6 bismuth shot: $26.99/ box of 25
    Federal low brass #6 steel shot: $9.69/ box of 25

    Since steel is blatantly incompatible with older shotguns, and some people refuse to shoot it in even new shotguns because of the added stress and wear on barrels and chokes, among other things, bismuth is the only available option. And as you can see, bismuth is approximately 3X-4X higher than either steel or lead. That is unacceptable for some, and I completely understand both reasons for not using either steel or bismuth shot.

    And if you reload like I do, it's still a high dollar proposition. And by reloading bismuth, I've had some less than pleasant experiences with the 'Imperial Storm Troopers of the Empire', a.k.a. the TWRA officers, that WILL check your ammunition when duck hunting. I've had to cut and dump shot out of a few shotshells because they were reloads and the :cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss: idiot officer accused me of using lead shot even after he'd seen the 'funny looking' bismuth shot with the ring around it. Conversations with these effin' **** degenerated rapidly when that happened. I don't duck hunt on the lake anymore because I have had it with the storm troopers. The older I get, the less I suffer the idiotic highly educated TWRA fools with the people skills of a honey badger. But I still float hunt a few rivers where the idiots don't hang around because they can't launch or operate their $75,000-$100,000 tricked out huge center console boats bought with license fees. And I use my cheaper bismuth reloads when I do.

    Those officers must be from a different age; they should have that battery operated box that a shotshell is inserted in and it determines is the properties of the shell is lead or not.
    A Veteran is someone that served in the Military, it does not matter where they served.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,235 Senior Member
    NN wrote: »
    Those officers must be from a different age; they should have that battery operated box that a shotshell is inserted in and it determines is the properties of the shell is lead or not.

    There might be one of those machines in TN. But the high tech knotheads just carry a magnet with them. If the shotshells are steel, or obviously factory bismuth(heat sealed crimp), no problem. BUT................if they are reloads and the magnet does not attract then they fall into the accusations and overbearing know-it-all-you're-using-lead shot-and-I-know-it crap even after seeing the bismuth shot with the 'Saturn ring' around the middle of the pellets and the tiny plastic buffer pellets. Best way for them to get me sideways is accuse me of something I know is wrong, and they do it EVERY TIME with boring regularity.

    The two we have in my county now have rubbed my fur the wrong direction numerous times the past few years; one of them is male and the other female(I think). They both personify the attributes of arrogance, accusatory attitude, overbearing government prefect, and general anus chapeau. If either one were drowning I'd try to find a big rock to throw them for use as a live preserver.
    If the U.S. Congress was put in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand in under six months.



  • snake284snake284 Senior Member Posts: 21,965 Senior Member
    samzhere wrote: »
    Duh. Silly rebuttal, not that well augmented, wild. All I'm advocating is REASONABLE measures that effect SENSIBLE steps toward conservation. As I said, I don't know the scientific stats here and I really doubt whether a genuinely impartial study has ever been conducted. And Hawk, your personal anecdotes are invalid scientifically, too.

    All I'm asking for is genuine scientific proof either way. Then we should make a decision based on that.

    IF -- you know, "if" meaning not guaranteed, IF impartial studies show that lead shot is indeed a REAL environmental hazard, then maybe it should be banned. We quit dumping lead into the atmosphere from leaded gasoline, we quit using lead base paints for houses, and IF lead shot is a GENUINE hazard, yes it needs to be banned. Duh. "Tarzan does not stick head into lion's mouth" as the old saying goes.

    We have to care about our environment and exercise SMART and REASONABLE standards to protect things. IF the hazard from lead shot is minimal, then so be it. I made it clear that I really didn't know the facts and it may be that nobody else does either.

    I mean, we once put our kids into the open bed of pickup trucks like so much haulage and in an accident the kids went sailing into hard metal things that killed them. Now we're smarter and buckle up. Maybe you drive without a seatbelt and let others in your vehicle do the same, After all, life comes with some risks. Why take that naggy polio vaccine, right? Life has risks, so why do anything to limit them? Flip a coin and we're done?

    Genuine hazards need to be respected and taken care of. That's all I'm saying. If lead shot isn't a REAL hazard (statistically high enough to really affect the environment), fine. Same as taking out meteorite insurance on the roof. Too small a chance.

    I simply don't know whether lead shot is a real hazard, statistically significant.

    Well, I don't know for sure whether the lead shot argument is really a valid concern or just about pushing an agenda. I don't know for sure. But my personal gut feeling is that it's a crock of excrement. However, I do know one thing; unless things change radically in this country, it's a moot point because lead shot has been illegal for use on Federally regulated water fowl for nearly 40 years now. The question now is will the Whacko Environs score another victory by outlawing ALL lead projectiles. And that argument is much clearer to me as being a crock.
    Daddy, what's an enabler?
    Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
  • 10 AC10 AC Member Posts: 309 Member
    KENFU1911 wrote: »
    The simple solution to this.....seems to be......Kill off the Condors with enviro friendly non toxic shoot...... then no Condors will be harmed by lead shot..............Ken

    I like this Ken, good idea. lol
    Teach
    If you don't have a C&R FFL,you really need to consider getting one----it's a license to spend money, though.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 26,235 Senior Member
    Bigslug wrote: »
    I've got a better plan even than that. Since eco-maniac studies seem to indicate that the average 20-pound condor contains 36 pounds of lead, I will remove harmful lead from the environment by melting down live condors for my bullet alloy.

    Any carrion eating bird that can't find enough to eat out there with all the highways and attendant road kill should be extinct. They must be blind in one eye, can't see out of the other, and their sinuses must be stopped up something fierce.
    If the U.S. Congress was put in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand in under six months.



  • NNNN Senior Member Posts: 24,003 Senior Member
    Shooting at flying ducks for the most part is not a issue with lead as the pattern spreads out so much before falling to the ground.

    Shooting a cripple on the water is another matter because the pattern remains dense as it hits the water and since we hunt where ducks want to be
    to feed it can be a problem after a while..

    Everybody knew that.
    A Veteran is someone that served in the Military, it does not matter where they served.
  • BAMAAKBAMAAK Senior Member Posts: 4,339 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    There might be one of those machines in TN. But the high tech knotheads just carry a magnet with them. If the shotshells are steel, or obviously factory bismuth(heat sealed crimp), no problem. BUT................if they are reloads and the magnet does not attract then they fall into the accusations and overbearing know-it-all-you're-using-lead shot-and-I-know-it crap even after seeing the bismuth shot with the 'Saturn ring' around the middle of the pellets and the tiny plastic buffer pellets. Best way for them to get me sideways is accuse me of something I know is wrong, and they do it EVERY TIME with boring regularity.

    The two we have in my county now have rubbed my fur the wrong direction numerous times the past few years; one of them is male and the other female(I think). They both personify the attributes of arrogance, accusatory attitude, overbearing government prefect, and general anus chapeau. If either one were drowning I'd try to find a big rock to throw them for use as a live preserver.

    Must be something in the water in TN. I've had run ins with the water nazis on Tims Ford Lake that made just not go there an more and it's one of the nicest lakes around. At least when all the Nashville twice a summer weekend boaters aren't clogging it up.
    "He only earns his freedom and his life Who takes them every day by storm."

    -- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    How can it be that someone who hasn't hunted in years, if ever, is suddenly an authority on shotgun shot, non-toxic or otherwise? Could it be our buddy Sam is just on another of his frequent pot-stirring missions?
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Teach wrote: »
    How can it be that someone who hasn't hunted in years, if ever, is suddenly an authority on shotgun shot, non-toxic or otherwise? Could it be our buddy Sam is just on another of his frequent pot-stirring missions?
    Jerry

    Er, Teach, I know you're recuperating but I have ZERO authority and I said over and over and over and over and over that I did NOT KNOW NOT NOT NOT know the facts!

    I've TRIED to make my points carefully and S..l...o...w...l...y so everyone could understand. But I've apparently failed due to my inability to state what I was asking so I'll put them here AGAIN and so that people who think that I'm an "authority" can slooooowly begin to understand them:

    1: I DO NOT NOT NOT know whether lead shot is an environmental hazard.

    2: SEE #1 and READ READ READ #1 slowly and carefully.

    3: I DO NOT NOT NOT know whether lead shot is an environmental hazard.

    4: IF AND ONLY IF lead IS SCIENTIFICALLY and IMPARTIALLY proven to be an environmental hazard, then safe alternatives need to be found.

    5: READ #1, #3, and #4 again and again and again until they are clearly understood.

    Are we okay on this?

    Now, IF AND ONLY IF #4 above is TRUE, maybe an alternative to lead shot might be some sort of exotic high-density polymer that won't degrade the barrel as steel shot seems to.

    Finally, I am NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT an authority on hunting.
    I do NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT know the facts.

    I started this thread so that I could learn the facts and it appears that there are really no reliable impartial and scientific studies that indicate the truth. Or if there are such studies, they haven't come to light as yet.

    So will someone PLEASE READ READ READ my post and then tell me what I said that was wrong?

    Whew!

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    snake284 wrote: »
    I agree Sam. I'm sure lead isn't great for the environment. But is it as bad as the Left says? I put little stock in what they say because of their track record.

    Thanks, snake, this is the point I was trying to make! I know that the anti-2A crowd use lies and scare tactics and any nefarious means they have to push an agenda.

    I guess that there's really no genuinely impartial and scientific study at all about this question. Or if one has been conducted, it's not known about.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • samzheresamzhere Banned Posts: 10,923 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Quick ammo search on Bing (hint, hint, Sam) reveals prices as follows:

    Remington low brass #6 lead shot: $6.99/box of 25
    Winchester low brass #6 lead shot: $7.19/box of 25
    Hevi Shot low brass #6 bismuth shot: $26.99/ box of 25
    Federal low brass #6 steel shot: $9.69/ box of 25

    Since steel is blatantly incompatible with older shotguns, and some people refuse to shoot it in even new shotguns because of the added stress and wear on barrels and chokes, among other things, bismuth is the only available option. etc.

    I see that bismuth is a lot more expensive, thanks.

    What I continue to say and apparently nobody seems to have understood is whether there may be some type of high density polymer compound that would be less expensive. Bismuth is of course just another metal.

    And of course, the essential point that apparently has not yet been scientifically and impartially determined is whether lead shot is indeed a significant environmental hazard. It may not be, or it may actually be. Nobody seems to know for sure.

    Maybe the NRA should sponsor a legitimate study on this? Or some other pro-hunting association?

    Get the actual, true, and scientifically impartial facts FIRST and then take it from there.

    But tenn, regarding the price, seeing a box of the bismuth ammo is about $27 for 25, were I taking all the time and expenditures to go on a couple days of fowl hunting, roughly calculating 2 boxes of bismuth vs lead, the price difference for 50 rounds (quite a lot of shooting, really, during an actual hunt) would be 40 bucks.

    And IF (and ONLY IF) I thought that lead shot was indeed a hazard (about which I DO NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT know the truth, Teach and others take note) then I'd be okay to spring for an extra 40-50 bucks for the whole hunting trip, no biggie.

    Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
  • wildgenewildgene Senior Member Posts: 1,036 Senior Member
    ...well, Sam, in that case, lead shot is indeed a hazard. So are meteorites, & the chance that you, anyone you know, anyone you don't know will be killed by lead poisoning as a result of lead shot or being struck by & killed by a meteorite run about the same, fairly close to infinitesimal, but it could happen. If you know a guy who's second cousin's uncle knows a guy who's stepbrother's buddy was drilled right square thru the ferhead by a meteorite, then you should be out on the street corner w/ a sign demanding all lead ammo & meteorites be banned...
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.