This lead ammo ban, especially the European one, is a thinly veiled attempt at blocking guns ownership, which somewhat failed two years back. Lead ammo is already prohibited in wetlands in Yurop (at least in Finland it is) and the EU ammo ban would have banned lead ammo pretty much everywhere even though lead does not enter the wildlife from a shooting range.
Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
21–30 of 34 posts
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#22This lead ammo ban, especially the European one, is a thinly veiled attempt at blocking guns ownership, which somewhat failed two years back. Lead ammo is already prohibited in wetlands in Yurop (at least in Finland it is) and the EU ammo ban would have banned lead ammo pretty much everywhere even though lead does not enter the wildlife from a shooting range.
One Big Topic -> IS A <- Second Bigger Topic .. typically is a logical fallacy.. no substantiation given, check.
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#23It seems questionable to me that the article doesn't discuss differences in performance or other drawbacks of non-lead bullets. I'm not an expert, but a quick Google search suggests that they may be more expensive, less easy to find, and more likely to pass through targets. I found at least one article that claimed they may have greater stopping power since they do not break up in the target as easily. However, I hav…
Hunter here. For big game like deer and moose, I actually prefer copper ammo. With lead shot, if I hit the shoulders or haunches and my family or I eat that meat, there's a very good chance we're eating bits of lead. Most Lead bullets disintegrate on impact, while copper bullets rarely fragment and penetrate deeper. If I wasn't eating the meat, I could see the argument for lead, but it's a weak one at best. In my own…
> For big game like deer and moose, I actually prefer copper ammo.
Surely you mean copper-jacketed lead, right? I don’t think that solid copper bullets would travel very far or carry much of a punch …
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#24This lead ammo ban, especially the European one, is a thinly veiled attempt at blocking guns ownership, which somewhat failed two years back. Lead ammo is already prohibited in wetlands in Yurop (at least in Finland it is) and the EU ammo ban would have banned lead ammo pretty much everywhere even though lead does not enter the wildlife from a shooting range.
There's more than wildlife.
In Finland, shooting ranges are among the most common activities causing soil contamination. According to our study based on questionnaires and previous regional surveys, the total number of Finnish outdoor shooting ranges is between 2000 and 2500. Most of the ranges are small and only ca. 5% exceed 20 ha. Almost a third of the ranges can cause a groundwater pollution risk, while only few cause an immediate health risk. In the first instance, 50-60 shooting ranges identified as being high-risk areas should be investigated in detail. At present, the risk management options at Finnish shooting ranges are very limited. Hence, soil excavation combined with disposal is the most common remediation technique. Some of the remediation methods used in other countries have been proven unsuitable in Finnish conditions. Therefore, new, feasible, cost-effective and economical remediation technologies are needed. To exclude future contamination, a total ban of lead shot would be the most effective way.
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#25Gun owners love condors too. But we fear this issue will be used as political cover to restrict our rights.
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#26Lead or "non toxic" ammunition is a big problem. I only do shotgunning, but for these the empirical evidence is that the lead is a better tool to "kill humanely" than for example, steel. Steel doesn't have that "stopping power" that lead has, and requires a lot more, and bigger, shots, and will also have a shorter range than lead... Also, one of the biggest improvement in hunting cartridges are the 'wads' which used…
This whole argument is pretty weaksauce. Learn to use the non-toxic stuff or stop doing it and just buy your meat. Either way don't go spraying a bunch of toxic heavy metal all over the show just because it's "humane" - lead poisoning is pretty inhumane.
There's also no practical reason you can't have biodegradable plastic cups for steel shot.
I grew up hunting, mostly bigger animals, I never bought meat until I moved away from home. We didn't use shotguns at all, mostly because it's been clear that lead is bad news for ages, and you couldn't really get steel shot where we were. And a bonus of hunting bigger animals is that if you do it right the projectile doesn't exit. The whole post above just sounds like a bunch of entitled whiny "I want to have my cake and eat it too" bullshit.
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#27Lead or "non toxic" ammunition is a big problem. I only do shotgunning, but for these the empirical evidence is that the lead is a better tool to "kill humanely" than for example, steel. Steel doesn't have that "stopping power" that lead has, and requires a lot more, and bigger, shots, and will also have a shorter range than lead... Also, one of the biggest improvement in hunting cartridges are the 'wads' which used…
This whole argument is pretty weaksauce. Learn to use the non-toxic stuff or stop doing it and just buy your meat. Either way don't go spraying a bunch of toxic heavy metal all over the show just because it's "humane" - lead poisoning is pretty inhumane. There's also no practical reason you can't have biodegradable plastic cups for steel shot. I grew up hunting, mostly bigger animals, I never bought meat until I move…
There are no biodegradable plastic cups -- ask McDonalds.
No need to respond to the rest of your post, as you didn't bother reading mine anyway. Go back to hunting stationary target with 50mm rounds, it's perfect, you'll never find the carcass anyway.
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#28Lead or "non toxic" ammunition is a big problem. I only do shotgunning, but for these the empirical evidence is that the lead is a better tool to "kill humanely" than for example, steel. Steel doesn't have that "stopping power" that lead has, and requires a lot more, and bigger, shots, and will also have a shorter range than lead... Also, one of the biggest improvement in hunting cartridges are the 'wads' which used…
Bismuth and Tungsten are non-toxic alternatives with better performance than steel, though definitely more expensive. Stopping the use of lead would is a modest performance trade-off with a potential increase in cost
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hunter here. For big game like deer and moose, I actually prefer copper ammo. With lead shot, if I hit the shoulders or haunches and my family or I eat that meat, there's a very good chance we're eating bits of lead. Most Lead bullets disintegrate on impact, while copper bullets rarely fragment and penetrate deeper. If I wasn't eating the meat, I could see the argument for lead, but it's a weak one at best. In my own…
> For big game like deer and moose, I actually prefer copper ammo. Surely you mean copper-jacketed lead , right? I don’t think that solid copper bullets would travel very far or carry much of a punch …
Given his concerns about feeding lead to his family, almost definitely he means solid copper. Modern lead-free solid copper bullets work quite well for many animals. Here's a sample article comparing them against traditional copper jacketed lead: https://www.guns.com/news/2017/03/18/do-copper-bullets-offer...
Re: Condors or Lead Ammunition? (2015)
#30If you live in the California condor range, and are concerned about the cost of non-lead ammunition, you might want to know about this program: https://www.ventanaws.org/ammunition.html.
They offer residents in the area with one free 20-cartridge box of condor safe ammunition per year.