Another attack on gun owners

27 Aug 2010 13:05 #21 by Wayne Harrison

The Viking wrote: Hunters contribute over $25 Billion per year that goes to help the environment. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.


Are you saying paying $25 Billion each year (your figure) should give people the right to pollute the environment or fill it with lead? What about a large corporation? If they pay $25 Billion, should they be allowed to dump toxic waste into the environment?

I'd say polluting the national forest where gun owners are allowed to shoot without charge is biting the hand that feeds you.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 13:39 #22 by Local_Historian
OK - to the heart of the topic-

What is the replacement material/metal?
What does this mean for people who load their own?
What does this mean for black powder folks, who make their own balls?
How about the military - are they changing too?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 14:12 #23 by EddieWess
A very similar argument occurred in the late 1980s and early 1990s over the Lincoln Park Gun Club on the shore of Lake Michigan in Chicago (which was and is the source of drinking water for millions of people in the Chicagoland area, including me and my family). It turns out that after decades of trap and skeet shooting over (and consequently) into the lake the Chicago Park District refused to re-new the clubs lease because the club was polluting the water with lead. The club eventually did admit that they did pollute the lake with lead. I believe the park district determined that there was about a ton of lead on the lake bottom near the club.

Here are a couple of links to news articles from that time:

http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/gu ... oid=872880

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/16/us/ch ... ution.html

I don't know who, if anyone cleaned up the lead, I hope someone did, that just can't be good.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 14:16 #24 by Photo-fish
That is also the reason you see fishing tackle stores selling less lead sinkers and more tin or tungsten sinkers.

´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`´¯`•...¸><((((º>´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•´¯`•...¸><((((º> ´¯`•.. ><((((º>`•.´¯`•...¸><((((º>

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 14:17 - 27 Aug 2010 14:24 #25 by BearMtnHIB
As you probably know - there is not a good replacement for lead for one primary reason - lead is a soft metal. All the alternatives are brutal on gun barrels. Steel shot will tear up a gun barrel, and destroy the weapon. This is the main reason why knowlegable gun owners will oppose a lead ban.

Yes Wayne, billions of dollars are collected by the states for the management of wildlife through the hunting and fishing license fees and hunter safety classes. As one DOW officer explained to me - for all the whining and complaining that the anti-hunting crowd does - they do not contribute one single dollar to manage the resources.

Groups like PITA and other leftist org.'s do nothing but provide lip service.

The dept of wildlife is one of the only state government departments that do not use tax money from the state - all the money comes from hunters and fisherpersons.

And no it dosn't give us the right to leave shells laying around - your reaching as you usually do. I pick up bottles and fast food wrappers on my road all the time, the pigs who throw them out the car windows are littering - and a target shooter who does this is littering as well. If I see it happen - I will have the person ticketed.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 14:20 #26 by Martin Ent Inc
Local_Historian\n

OK - to the heart of the topic-

What is the replacement material/metal?Copper mostly
What does this mean for people who load their own?same
What does this mean for black powder folks, who make their own balls?make their own Balls rofllol
How about the military - are they changing too? sorta

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 15:57 #27 by Wallace Stegner
It's like a huge new tax on gun owners and hunters. Ammo would go up over 80-100%. SO instead of a box of ammo for $25-$30 now it might be $55. That may be a small problem to you but not to gun owners and hunters. Just another way to make gun owners pay.


Expensive ammunition...a great incentive to become a better shot. Like Barney Fife.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 17:38 #28 by LadyJazzer
Gee, you'll have to find something else to be outraged about... The EPA just rejected the request...

Oh, dear....

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 17:53 #29 by Stella22
So-- if not gun owners, who should be responsible?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

27 Aug 2010 17:59 #30 by Nmysys
Replied by Nmysys on topic Another attack on gun owners
How about the Democrats for causing the fear of losing our gun rights, in the first place!! That fear was what caused the huge increase in sales of firearms and ammunition to the point of shortages.

Nah! Can't place the blame there. It will just upset you more. LOL

My only real question is what will you folks do about protecting yourself against attack from outside our borders, like a foreign invasion, or maybe an oppressive Republican regime? Imagine it!!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.180 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+