Long Range Hunting Online Magazine


Go Back   Long Range Hunting Online Magazine > Chatting and General Stuff > General Discussion

General Discussion Must wear red or OD green socks to participate. I can't see your socks, please be honest.


View Poll Results: Should NON lead bullets be more widely used in hunting situations?
Yes 1 3.85%
No 24 92.31%
Maybe 1 3.85%
More research should be done 0 0%
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #8  
Old 10-16-2012, 07:51 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Northeast
Posts: 2,334
Re: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

I believe no viable case could be made for the negative impact from using lead core hunting bullets. The areas that outlaw them are result of an agenda of the anti's, environmental, and regulatory morons. The greater issue is the regulators imposing such strict regulatory controls for toxicity on the bullet makers that they get driven out of business, eliminate lead bullets, or costs go up substantially, then being passed on. Check out the cost of a 25# bag of lead shot!!!! I used to reload 3000+ shotshells/year for clay shooting. Not any more. Bryan Litz's book on Long Range Ballstics explains in detail why current non lead bullet designs are ballistically inferior for long range shooting compared to lead core bullets. +90% of the hunters probably wouldn't see any difference hunting with these bullets which would lead to indifference and no resistance. Long range hunters would get the shaft! We have to stay active on this topic!
__________________

"Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready"-T. Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-16-2012, 09:59 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: #50 on the all time best States to live in! :)
Posts: 355
Re: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

The anti's are using every tool they can conjure up to achieve their agenda and banning lead bullets is just one of them. Game harvested with a rifle AND properly dressed and prepared will not cause any harm.

Their methods started with trying to ban different types of guns and ammunition. In some areas they have succeeded ( NY city for example, just try to get a pistol permit there. And in the state of NJ, I believe hollow point bullets are not allowed at all.) while in many other places they have not, nor will they succede anytime soon. Since the anti's cannot advance their agenda State wide or nation wide, they do so indirectly. Case in point, I believe the current administration has not actively called for new gun control is because of the fear mongering of the past 4+ years and the way costs have been driven up by it. The big "O" might have been the "Gun salesman of the year" for the last 4 years but at what price? Think hard on that one.

Since economics won't completely process their agendas, the next steps are imposing limits. Limits on what you can do, what you are allowed to own, when and where you can carry and shoot, and so on. The non-lead vs. lead bullet debate is just another facet in this stage of their equation. The fact that some people in the gun community are even considering the notion seriously has me believing they just gained a bit more traction. And they will continue until they either succede or discover another distraction.

My take on the question at the beginning of this thread is this. At gun safety and/or hunter safety classes, perhaps there should be a segment on properly dressing game and preparation for consumption, but not much more.

I'm a firm believer of the substance in the quotes below. I'm not an alarmist running around believing the sky will fall but I do respect the ability of the anti's to continually pound away until they get their way.

I'm done ranting. Thank you.
__________________
“The US Constitution does not guarantee happiness; only the pursuit of it. You have to catch it yourself.” ~ Ben Franklin, attributed.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-17-2012, 12:16 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: greenwood, IN
Posts: 3,604
Re: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southernfryedyankee View Post
I have been watching different vids today and I came across these 3 videos which I found rather interesting. I always wondered about bullet fragmentation and the effects of lead and lead poisoning. I personally shoot copper bullets NOT because lead was ever a health concern but because my rifles shot them very accurately. My kids eat venison, I eat venison, my GF (whos pregnant) eats venison and I personally feel more at ease using a lead free bullet especially after watching these vids. I am NOT an advocate for ANY of the copper bullet manufacturers but I am a concerned father and hunter.

YouTube - Copper vs Lead Bullet Study pt 1

YouTube - Copper vs Lead Bullet Fragmentation Study pt 2

YouTube - Copper vs Lead Bullet Fragmentation Study pt 3
now this is a serious can of worms!!!
gary
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-17-2012, 04:26 PM
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 173
Re: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

Here's what little I know about lead exposure. But my background is only 30+ years in th safet field, so I'm sure I don't know it all.

Lead is a hazard to kids growing up if they are exposed to significant amounts either airborne or ingested or touched and can cause severe neurological problems. But you can't say that as a blanket statement because not ALL kids develop problems.

As an adult, significant (read constant) exposure to high lelvels in our water can casue problems, and is treatable with drugs to absorb and excrete them out. Usually found in dissolved amounts in our water and absorbed through the kidneys.

So, is eating the occasional lead pellets in our food going to kill you, or even kill an animal if left in them. Probably not, you will probably excrete it and it does not accumulate in the body. In the animal it is often encapsulated by the body and rendered inert to avoid contamination.

We have removed it from our drinking water, and very few cases are found in the community any more unless you are around a dump and it is in the ground water.

Logic and facts, the enemy of liberals everywhere.

Larry
Tinkerer
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-17-2012, 04:48 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Townsend, Montana.
Posts: 7,900
Re: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

I can not believe that anyone that has ever cut up their own meat would buy into the whole "lead" myth. It is very evident when any, even the smallest particle, of lead or copper passes through. It is living muscle and it bleeds and leaves a trace of where it goes that is easily seen. So I have no fear what so ever as we remove all this and discard it.

Jeff
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-17-2012, 05:30 PM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 2,439
Re: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

I believe lead projectiles are only harmful to your system if they enter it at a couple hundred fps. If one is concerned about lead levels in his/her family-eliminate Chinese toys, Halloween costumes, H20 bottles, and most of their other products. Ingestion from game is so far down the list of threats focussing on it is obviously another agenda. Add me to the list of those that cast lead bullets, kept split shot in my mouth, pellets from my air rifle (even swallowed those on occasion), I use more judgment in handling lead as an adult, but for me it's not a concern.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-18-2012, 10:21 AM
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: greenwood, IN
Posts: 3,604
Re: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?

I know of at least a half dozen men in the late fifties to mid seventies that are walking around with a piece of lead inside them. I personally have ate at least 250 birds brought down with lead shot. Did I remove 100% of the shot? I seriously doubt it.

Now we all sit here wringing our hands over lead shot and bullets like it's a sledge hammer hanging over our heads. What we should be worrying about is the mercury in those florescent light bulbs. The salt intake alone in our diets is doing far worse damage than all the lead shot in the land! (I'm as guilty as anybody). Plus does anybody here think that everything in our house is safe? Take the covers off your audio speakers and look at the tweeters. If they're made of metal, then it's probably beryllium. One of the single most toxic elements known to mankind. The dust from it alone will kill you in forty minutes or less! Got a transformer in your work shop that's over forty years old and oil cooled? It's probably full of PCB's. Anybody here ever work in a machine shop using free machine steels??? The vast majority of it is loaded with lead! Tobe exact I know of very few steels that don't contain lead
sorry to bust your bubble!
gary
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads for: Should firearm safety also include the material of the projectile being used?
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gotta include some Blond humor philny1 Humor 1 04-06-2007 08:57 AM
Best material for gong littledevil2873 General Discussion 9 05-11-2006 10:52 AM
Question on Barrel Material jab22 Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics 7 10-17-2005 07:56 PM
READING MATERIAL Gandolf1 General Discussion 3 08-19-2005 08:23 PM
Denser core material? MAX Rifles, Bullets, Barrels and Ballistics 27 09-05-2003 11:26 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Management Powered by vBadvanced CMPS
All content ©2010-2014 Long Range Hunting, LLC