Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Gwar! wrote:

heacy hitter wrote:Wait so they want to ban lead bullets because they are toxic, but does that matter if the animal is dead?

It's more a case of when the bullet misses and it gets into ground water.

Yeah, cause that missed round is going to pollute the ground water SO much.

jp400 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

heacy hitter wrote:Wait so they want to ban lead bullets because they are toxic, but does that matter if the animal is dead?

It's more a case of when the bullet misses and it gets into ground water.

Yeah, cause that missed round is going to pollute the ground water SO much.

1 Bullet, no.
1 bajillion bullets? Maybe.

Gwar! wrote:

jp400 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

heacy hitter wrote:Wait so they want to ban lead bullets because they are toxic, but does that matter if the animal is dead?

It's more a case of when the bullet misses and it gets into ground water.

Yeah, cause that missed round is going to pollute the ground water SO much.

1 Bullet, no.
1 bajillion bullets? Maybe.

Try again.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041104005801.htm

I like how two different stories contradict each other on that page you linked jp. The first makes more sense to me though as it explains that weathered lead has a coating that builds up on the outside of the bullet that is found similar to that on civil war bullets dug from the ground.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:We have 'environmental bullet traps' at shooting ranges here in Oz.
We haven't gone so far as to ban lead bullets, but handguns, semi-automatic rifles and most fancy shotguns are illegal here with the exception of for military, police and licensed security work (that latter generally only being allowed the use of handguns).

Hey Frazz, am I still on ignore too?

AFAIK pitsols arent illegal to own here, but you do need to have a reason for having them (ie: Tournament shooting etc), and be a member of a club.
Its also possible that they have to be kept at a gun club or something, but I'm not sure on that.

Gwar! wrote:

heacy hitter wrote:Wait so they want to ban lead bullets because they are toxic, but does that matter if the animal is dead?

It's more a case of when the bullet misses and it gets into ground water.

Don't miss.

In the 1920's the Navy's Lake Denmark ammunition sotrage facility blew up, which at the time housed $8 million in Navy Ordanace. Both exploded and unexploded ammunition was scattered for miles, much of it being lead based rounds. The standard method of cleanup for the time was to bury it under a few inches of top soil. Skip forward to the present day, there is now a large Army facility built on the property, the exploded and unexploded ammuntion is still buried in the ground, however the well pumped drinking water throughout the base is safe to drink, and you can eat the fish in the lake. If lead that was buried in the ground was a real problem, I think it would have showen itself here.

There are basically two types of alternitives to lead, those that behave like lead, and those that dont. Those that behave like lead, tend to be complicated alloys that during the manufacturing process actually utilizes much more damageing elements then lead. Alternitives that dont behave like lead are things such as Copper, Steel, Tungstun. Alot of older or more specilized firearms tend to have a problem with these alternatives, anything from increased barrel wear due to harder rounds, or catastrophic failure due to increased barrel pressure.

There are alternitives out there, they each have their advantages and disadvantages. However I have yet to see a gun that wont happily fire a lead bullet.

Today they try and ban lead, what are they going to try for tommorrow? Aluminum?

Catyrpelius wrote:In the 1920's the Navy's Lake Denmark ammunition sotrage facility blew up, which at the time housed $8 million in Navy Ordanace. Both exploded and unexploded ammunition was scattered for miles, much of it being lead based rounds. The standard method of cleanup for the time was to bury it under a few inches of top soil. Skip forward to the present day, there is now a large Army facility built on the property, the exploded and unexploded ammuntion is still buried in the ground, however the well pumped drinking water throughout the base is safe to drink, and you can eat the fish in the lake. If lead that was buried in the ground was a real problem, I think it would have showen itself here.

There are basically two types of alternitives to lead, those that behave like lead, and those that dont. Those that behave like lead, tend to be complicated alloys that during the manufacturing process actually utilizes much more damageing elements then lead. Alternitives that dont behave like lead are things such as Copper, Steel, Tungstun. Alot of older or more specilized firearms tend to have a problem with these alternatives, anything from increased barrel wear due to harder rounds, or catastrophic failure due to increased barrel pressure.

There are alternitives out there, they each have their advantages and disadvantages. However I have yet to see a gun that wont happily fire a lead bullet.

Today they try and ban lead, what are they going to try for tommorrow? Aluminum?

Dead on Was about too point that out

An update to a story we told you about Friday -- the Environmental Protection Agency has shot down a petition from environmental groups to ban the use of lead in bullets and shotgun shells. The EPA says it "does not have the legal authority to regulate this product under the toxic substances control act -- nor is the agency seeking such authority."

Gun rights groups thought the ban was a thinly veiled attempt to undermine Second Amendment rights. NRA chief lobbyist Chris Cox said, "It's outrageous that this petition even went this far... we applaud the EPA for it's understanding of the law and its common-sense in this situation -- both of which were totally missing in the petition filed by these extreme anti-gun and anti-hunting groups."

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/transcript/epa-shoots-down-lead-ammunition-ban

Refreshing to see a government agency not trying to overstep it's powers.

The system does work...sometimes

Only when the proper pressure is applied, as was done in this case.

djones520 wrote:http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report/transcript/epa-shoots-down-lead-ammunition-ban

Refreshing to see a government agency not trying to overstep it's powers.

Are we still talking about the EPA?

The system was applied, and it worked.

What a shocking indictment of the decay of civic life in the USA!

Kilkrazy wrote:The system was applied, and it worked.

What a shocking indictment of the decay of civic life in the USA!

I know. Things are working so bad and we live under such a totalitarian regime that we need to overthrow the government.....