kallend 2,182 #26 June 28, 2012 Quote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #27 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote>Iowa did research Extensive Found no scientific reason to ban lead shot Well, I guess the Iowa Condor will not be going extinct any time soon, then. Well, since there is not such thing (that I know of) it will not be worried about"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wolfriverjoe 1,523 #28 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. I guess it would depend on the definition of "perfectly good." Tungsten and Bismuth are "good" as far as perfomance, but are very, very expensive. Steel is a vialble alternative, and has been used for years, but it's performance leaves a lot to be desired and it's very destructive to the guns (steel on steel). And these are alternatives to shot, not to bullets. There are only a couple usable alternatives to lead for bullets (either shotgun slugs or rifle bullets). Copper solids are used somewhat, and while their terminal (impact) performance is good, their ballistic (in flight) isn't so much. And they're very expensive. To take lead completely out of the firearms industry would cripple it. Badly. Don't think that the anti-gunners aren't aware of that. One of the more disturbing news stories I heard about this sort of thing was an environmentalist complaining that bald eagles in Wisconsin were being poisoned when they ate the lead shot out of the gut piles left behind by deer hunters. Sounds terrible, right? We should ban lead shot and/or deer hunting right? Well, the reality is that in Wisconsin, deer hunters are prohibited from using shot of any kind. They can't even have shotshells on them while deer hunting. Slugs are required. And a 1oz slug is a bit big for even a large bird to eat. But the anti-gunners have never let the facts get in the way of a good, emotional story. Edit for a typo"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #29 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,182 #30 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. Matt Disagree. It's just a silly argument. Scaremongers said the same thing over banning leaded gasoline. I haven't noticed cars disappearing from the roads.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #31 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. Matt Disagree. It's just a silly argument. Scaremongers said the same thing over banning leaded gasoline. I haven't noticed cars disappearing from the roads. But they argues for banning lead gas, only, not cars too. There are groups, anti-hunting and anti-gun, who are using the lead ban on bullets and guns argument to save the environment. It is a silly argument true, but they are making it. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,182 #32 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. Matt Disagree. It's just a silly argument. Scaremongers said the same thing over banning leaded gasoline. I haven't noticed cars disappearing from the roads. But they argues for banning lead gas, only, not cars too. There are groups, anti-hunting and anti-gun, who are using the lead ban on bullets and guns argument to save the environment. It is a silly argument true, but they are making it. Matt Just because some people are making it doesn't validate it. Getting lead out of bullets and shot is a far easier technical challenge than getting lead out of gasoline.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #33 June 28, 2012 I agree it is not a valid argument, but it is being made, which was my only point in clarifying. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #34 June 28, 2012 >But they argues for banning lead gas, only, not cars too. Not if you listened to the pro-leaded folks (and the car manufacturers, and oil companies) back then. To them, the threat was that cars themselves would become threatened. Valves would fail; additives would ruin fuel systems and the new gas would be far too expensive for US motorists. Proponents of lead-free gasoline - evil environmentalists, in other words - wanted all cars gone, not just those burning leaded gasoline. Sound familiar? The same themes re-emerge again and again. Product X (radium, leaded gasoline, leaded paint, cigarettes, lead shot) is perfectly safe. We can't live without it. There's no evidence that it's dangerous. Evil liberals just want to hurt Americans due to their XXXX agenda. List of myths in a 1980's era FAQ on lead: Lead poisoning is not a problem. Leaded gasoline does not cause lead poisoning. Some vehicles, especially older vehicles, require leaded gasoline. The only alternative to lead is benzene – a known carcinogen. Phasing out leaded gasoline costs too much. 1925 oil company press release: "So far as science knows at the present time, tetraethyl lead is the only material available which can bring about these [antiknock] results, which are of vital importance to the continued economic use by the general public of all automotive equipment, and unless a grave and inescapable hazard exists in the manufacture of tetraethyl lead, its abandonment cannot be justified. " 2001 blog: "Millions of perfectly good automobiles were junked because they weren't "environmentally correct", when in fact they were absolutely safe. The changeover to unleaded gasoline cost the American public billions of dollars and drove the entire nation into a deep recession. Even the enlightened Laffer Curve implementation of the Reagan Administration took a few years to put the economy back in the black. And why were we subjected to this madness? No reason at all, really. The liberals just thought it would be "good for us" to be trained to obey their absurd "environomentalist" hysteria. They thought it would be "good for us" to get used to closing our minds and opening our wallets, taking it on the chin for the good of their pathetic "Gaia" goddess, a deity in which even they don't believe." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #35 June 28, 2012 Regardless of the legality or illegality or other arguments being made: Lead is bad for the environment. Responsible sportsmen should switch to other alternatives, even if the law does not compel them to."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #36 June 28, 2012 QuoteRegardless of the legality or illegality or other arguments being made: Lead is bad for the environment. Where does lead come from before it's made into bullets? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #37 June 28, 2012 >Where does lead come from before it's made into bullets? In general, reclaimed lead from car batteries. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #38 June 28, 2012 Quote>Where does lead come from before it's made into bullets? In general, reclaimed lead from car batteries. And where does THAT lead come from? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #39 June 28, 2012 >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wolfriverjoe 1,523 #40 June 28, 2012 Quote >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? We really need a sarcasm font. Seriously, lead is pretty inert. There have been numerous studies at gun ranges that demonstrate once the lead there, it tends to stay there. It doesn't leach into the groundwater or migrate much. Personally I get lead from the shooting range. I pick up bullets and slugs, melt them down and recast them into new bullets. The problems with lead and animals is the waterfowl that eat gravel off the bottom of lakes and ponds (with lead shot mixed in) and scavengers eating the lead shot out of lost game (the condor problem)."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #41 June 28, 2012 Quote >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Yep. They are called recycling dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,182 #42 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Condors and waterfowl tend not to spend much time in lead mines.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #43 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,182 #44 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Yep, you should keep it all in your basements, seal it in, and never remove it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #45 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Yep, you should keep it all in your basements, seal it in, and never remove it. So we will be ready for the Zombies! MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #46 June 28, 2012 >Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, >gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the >environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be >thanking us for this public service. Why - you're right! We should move all that dangerous lead and arsenic from their deadly deposits and put it in your local water table where it will be safely flushed from the earth and filtered through biological filter systems. Bravo for volunteering to provide that valuable public service. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites christelsabine 1 #47 June 28, 2012 Quote Quote Quote >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Which before, they spread into the environment endlessly Oh man, do you ever read your own posts??? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #48 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Which before, they spread into the environment endlessly Oh man, do you ever read your own posts??? Do you ever stop to think about what you're saying before you say it? Let's say the amount of lead in natural deposits in the earth, where it can leach into water supplies, is x. Now, if shooters remove millions of tons, let's call that y, of that lead and store it safely in their basements where it cannot leach into water supplies, then that's a net reduction in dangerous lead. So the amount of potentially harmful lead is now x - y, or much less than before. Therefore, this is a beneficial effect. Even if they turn around and shoot many of those bullets, at any given time, a large amount remain in safe storage, reducing the total that is free in the environment. I suppose you dig your bullets out of all the animals you shoot and recycle them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,182 #49 June 29, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Which before, they spread into the environment endlessly Oh man, do you ever read your own posts??? Do you ever stop to think about what you're saying before you say it? Let's say the amount of lead in natural deposits in the earth, where it can leach into water supplies, is x. Now, if shooters remove millions of tons, let's call that y, of that lead and store it safely in their basements where it cannot leach into water supplies, then that's a net reduction in dangerous lead. So the amount of potentially harmful lead is now x - y, or much less than before. Therefore, this is a beneficial effect. Even if they turn around and shoot many of those bullets, at any given time, a large amount remain in safe storage, reducing the total that is free in the environment. I suppose you dig your bullets out of all the animals you shoot and recycle them? What makes you think that natural lead ore deposits (mostly galena) are leaching into the water supply at a rate higher than gun enthusiasts are putting it out there?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #50 June 29, 2012 QuoteWhat makes you think that natural lead ore deposits (mostly galena) are leaching into the water supply at a rate higher than gun enthusiasts are putting it out there? What makes you think that bullet lead is any more dangerous than natural lead deposits? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 2 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #28 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. I guess it would depend on the definition of "perfectly good." Tungsten and Bismuth are "good" as far as perfomance, but are very, very expensive. Steel is a vialble alternative, and has been used for years, but it's performance leaves a lot to be desired and it's very destructive to the guns (steel on steel). And these are alternatives to shot, not to bullets. There are only a couple usable alternatives to lead for bullets (either shotgun slugs or rifle bullets). Copper solids are used somewhat, and while their terminal (impact) performance is good, their ballistic (in flight) isn't so much. And they're very expensive. To take lead completely out of the firearms industry would cripple it. Badly. Don't think that the anti-gunners aren't aware of that. One of the more disturbing news stories I heard about this sort of thing was an environmentalist complaining that bald eagles in Wisconsin were being poisoned when they ate the lead shot out of the gut piles left behind by deer hunters. Sounds terrible, right? We should ban lead shot and/or deer hunting right? Well, the reality is that in Wisconsin, deer hunters are prohibited from using shot of any kind. They can't even have shotshells on them while deer hunting. Slugs are required. And a 1oz slug is a bit big for even a large bird to eat. But the anti-gunners have never let the facts get in the way of a good, emotional story. Edit for a typo"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #29 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #30 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. Matt Disagree. It's just a silly argument. Scaremongers said the same thing over banning leaded gasoline. I haven't noticed cars disappearing from the roads.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #31 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. Matt Disagree. It's just a silly argument. Scaremongers said the same thing over banning leaded gasoline. I haven't noticed cars disappearing from the roads. But they argues for banning lead gas, only, not cars too. There are groups, anti-hunting and anti-gun, who are using the lead ban on bullets and guns argument to save the environment. It is a silly argument true, but they are making it. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #32 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Think about it - using the EPA or other environmental organizations to ban guns by banning ammunition by banning lead. I'd never viewed that angle before. Silly argument - there are perfectly good alternatives to lead for ammo. But that is exactly what some groups are doing, arguing to ban bullets and, over lead. Stating it is for the environment now. Matt Disagree. It's just a silly argument. Scaremongers said the same thing over banning leaded gasoline. I haven't noticed cars disappearing from the roads. But they argues for banning lead gas, only, not cars too. There are groups, anti-hunting and anti-gun, who are using the lead ban on bullets and guns argument to save the environment. It is a silly argument true, but they are making it. Matt Just because some people are making it doesn't validate it. Getting lead out of bullets and shot is a far easier technical challenge than getting lead out of gasoline.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #33 June 28, 2012 I agree it is not a valid argument, but it is being made, which was my only point in clarifying. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #34 June 28, 2012 >But they argues for banning lead gas, only, not cars too. Not if you listened to the pro-leaded folks (and the car manufacturers, and oil companies) back then. To them, the threat was that cars themselves would become threatened. Valves would fail; additives would ruin fuel systems and the new gas would be far too expensive for US motorists. Proponents of lead-free gasoline - evil environmentalists, in other words - wanted all cars gone, not just those burning leaded gasoline. Sound familiar? The same themes re-emerge again and again. Product X (radium, leaded gasoline, leaded paint, cigarettes, lead shot) is perfectly safe. We can't live without it. There's no evidence that it's dangerous. Evil liberals just want to hurt Americans due to their XXXX agenda. List of myths in a 1980's era FAQ on lead: Lead poisoning is not a problem. Leaded gasoline does not cause lead poisoning. Some vehicles, especially older vehicles, require leaded gasoline. The only alternative to lead is benzene – a known carcinogen. Phasing out leaded gasoline costs too much. 1925 oil company press release: "So far as science knows at the present time, tetraethyl lead is the only material available which can bring about these [antiknock] results, which are of vital importance to the continued economic use by the general public of all automotive equipment, and unless a grave and inescapable hazard exists in the manufacture of tetraethyl lead, its abandonment cannot be justified. " 2001 blog: "Millions of perfectly good automobiles were junked because they weren't "environmentally correct", when in fact they were absolutely safe. The changeover to unleaded gasoline cost the American public billions of dollars and drove the entire nation into a deep recession. Even the enlightened Laffer Curve implementation of the Reagan Administration took a few years to put the economy back in the black. And why were we subjected to this madness? No reason at all, really. The liberals just thought it would be "good for us" to be trained to obey their absurd "environomentalist" hysteria. They thought it would be "good for us" to get used to closing our minds and opening our wallets, taking it on the chin for the good of their pathetic "Gaia" goddess, a deity in which even they don't believe." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #35 June 28, 2012 Regardless of the legality or illegality or other arguments being made: Lead is bad for the environment. Responsible sportsmen should switch to other alternatives, even if the law does not compel them to."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #36 June 28, 2012 QuoteRegardless of the legality or illegality or other arguments being made: Lead is bad for the environment. Where does lead come from before it's made into bullets? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #37 June 28, 2012 >Where does lead come from before it's made into bullets? In general, reclaimed lead from car batteries. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #38 June 28, 2012 Quote>Where does lead come from before it's made into bullets? In general, reclaimed lead from car batteries. And where does THAT lead come from? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #39 June 28, 2012 >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #40 June 28, 2012 Quote >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? We really need a sarcasm font. Seriously, lead is pretty inert. There have been numerous studies at gun ranges that demonstrate once the lead there, it tends to stay there. It doesn't leach into the groundwater or migrate much. Personally I get lead from the shooting range. I pick up bullets and slugs, melt them down and recast them into new bullets. The problems with lead and animals is the waterfowl that eat gravel off the bottom of lakes and ponds (with lead shot mixed in) and scavengers eating the lead shot out of lost game (the condor problem)."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #41 June 28, 2012 Quote >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Yep. They are called recycling dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #42 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Condors and waterfowl tend not to spend much time in lead mines.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #43 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #44 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Yep, you should keep it all in your basements, seal it in, and never remove it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #45 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Yep, you should keep it all in your basements, seal it in, and never remove it. So we will be ready for the Zombies! MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #46 June 28, 2012 >Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, >gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the >environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be >thanking us for this public service. Why - you're right! We should move all that dangerous lead and arsenic from their deadly deposits and put it in your local water table where it will be safely flushed from the earth and filtered through biological filter systems. Bravo for volunteering to provide that valuable public service. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #47 June 28, 2012 Quote Quote Quote >And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Which before, they spread into the environment endlessly Oh man, do you ever read your own posts??? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #48 June 28, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Which before, they spread into the environment endlessly Oh man, do you ever read your own posts??? Do you ever stop to think about what you're saying before you say it? Let's say the amount of lead in natural deposits in the earth, where it can leach into water supplies, is x. Now, if shooters remove millions of tons, let's call that y, of that lead and store it safely in their basements where it cannot leach into water supplies, then that's a net reduction in dangerous lead. So the amount of potentially harmful lead is now x - y, or much less than before. Therefore, this is a beneficial effect. Even if they turn around and shoot many of those bullets, at any given time, a large amount remain in safe storage, reducing the total that is free in the environment. I suppose you dig your bullets out of all the animals you shoot and recycle them? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,182 #49 June 29, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>And where does THAT lead come from? Eventually lead mines. Well, that lead is in the ground and in the environment. Mining it and extracting it must then be good for the environment. Right? Correct. Liberals like to make fun of gun-owner's for stock-piling ammunition, but the fact is, gun owner's are doing society a favor by removing millions of tons of lead from the environment and storing it safely where it can't harm anyone else. They should be thanking us for this public service. Which before, they spread into the environment endlessly Oh man, do you ever read your own posts??? Do you ever stop to think about what you're saying before you say it? Let's say the amount of lead in natural deposits in the earth, where it can leach into water supplies, is x. Now, if shooters remove millions of tons, let's call that y, of that lead and store it safely in their basements where it cannot leach into water supplies, then that's a net reduction in dangerous lead. So the amount of potentially harmful lead is now x - y, or much less than before. Therefore, this is a beneficial effect. Even if they turn around and shoot many of those bullets, at any given time, a large amount remain in safe storage, reducing the total that is free in the environment. I suppose you dig your bullets out of all the animals you shoot and recycle them? What makes you think that natural lead ore deposits (mostly galena) are leaching into the water supply at a rate higher than gun enthusiasts are putting it out there?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #50 June 29, 2012 QuoteWhat makes you think that natural lead ore deposits (mostly galena) are leaching into the water supply at a rate higher than gun enthusiasts are putting it out there? What makes you think that bullet lead is any more dangerous than natural lead deposits? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
