Today in StarAdvertiser "ban on lead in sporting ammunition"

Here is article today from Star Advertiser; they got it from New York Times:

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/nyt/20100803_Groups_seek_ban_on_lead_in_sporting_ammunition.html

They didn't put my response ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itoImZzPeaA ) in comments.

whats next ,they going ban gunpowder in the bullet

they may be a step closer to ban hunting all together.

This issue has been stewing in the background for several years. It started in California over concerns of lead intoxication of California condors. The condors are carrions feeders. It is widey assumed (known?) that they would pick up the lead fragments when eating left over gut piles. The response was to ban lead hunting ammuniton in the areas where condors lived. Later, anti-hunting groups expressed concern for the safety of venison donated to foodbanks. Several states have programs where hunters can donate venison to help feed homeless & hungry. It is claimed that the lead fragments from the bullets render the meat unsafe for human consumption. This assumption has not been found to be accurate though double blind testing of firearm harvested deer. In one study in South Dakota, people who ate rifle shot game had slightly lower levels of lead in their bodies than non-game eaters in the same counties tested. One fact the study did find....blood shot meat near the entry hole, or along the wound track had more lead than meat from farther away.(shot in shoulder....no lead in rump)

Getting the lead out of sporting ammunitions will drive up the cost of hunting. The "get the lead out" campaign is also making itslef known in the fishing world. The hidden problem that the antis don't address, is funding shortfalls to fish, game & wildlife departments. The antis do not have anything like the Pittman-Robertson Act.

Imagine if hikers and campers had to pay a fee for each camera they took into a park, in case they took a picture of an animal or plant? Not fair they'll say. I'm only taking a picture. Okay, why do recreational shooters have to pay a tax for wildlife & wildland conservation when they purchase target ammuniton that will not be used for hunting? Personally, I don't mind paying. Building roads for increased acess to wildlands destroys more wildlife and worse, habitat, than the taking of any single animal.

The average age of hunters in the US is increasing. The number of people who fish is decreasing as well. My question though, is why should the increasing cost per person, for conserving public resources be borne by just those who hunt or fish? That my friends is the question that we need to put to the antis.

kalama wrote:whats next ,they going ban gunpowder in the bullet

eh kalama where you got your svord knife from the one you use as avatar

sorry bradas i no like highjack the thread,,but thats one randall knife,i get one svord my friend can ship-um from new zealand...P.M me