Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo Ban

Duck hunting in California topics include: California duck hunting trips, the past hunting seasons, and share information about California duck hunting guides.

Moderators: #1wingnut, duckman2000, PinTeal, finsnfeathershunter

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Sun Aug 03, 2014 11:09 pm

quack-attack wrote:Pretty prrdictable. In the end we will be fine..I remember when steel shot was mandated for waterfowl and everyone was talking how it would be the end of hunting... it wasnt

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using Tapatalk 2


good point.
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop


Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby 7mllrds » Mon Aug 04, 2014 5:56 am

Maybe not the end of hunting but it's about conservation and ethics. Many more birds are crippled and lost as a result of steel vs lead. If you don't believe that, you never shot lead. The same will be true with the big game ammunition. Our deer population really can't withstand that, nor is it ethical. Can deer be killed with non-lead ammunition? Sure. They can be killed with just about anything with a well placed shot. But how far that deer will travel before it dies and whether it will be recovered will be a different story. Anyone who thinks copper bullets are as good as lead have not used them in the field to any great extent. Just because they shoot tight groups on paper does not mean that they're terminal ballistics are as good as lead.
7mllrds
hunter
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:00 am

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:53 am

7mllrds wrote: it's about conservation and ethics. .


ahh yes, the conservationist and ethical hunter who used lead because it kills better. Let me grab my cup of Kool-aid as I absorb this philosophy.
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Wed Aug 06, 2014 8:49 pm

Does anyone hear a cricket ?
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:24 pm

chirp.
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby 7mllrds » Thu Aug 07, 2014 6:00 am

I'm actually done trying to educate the ignorant. It's an impossible task trying to help those that can't be helped because they are so unwilling to listen to facts. And yes, the conservation and ethical argument is that lead kills better. It leads to faster and more humane kills without lost game and the fact that you can't comprehend that proves my first point. End of discussion.
7mllrds
hunter
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:00 am

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby marsh-mello » Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:30 am

I doubt it's the end of the discussion...although it's an old one now that has presently passed it's significance.

I also do not think that lead kills better than some copper bullets out there either just saber rattling. Penetration and expansion of some of the Barnes bullets are devastating. I'm sure any detractor can provide their own gelatin block experiments and live kill wound channels as definitive proof of these specious claims? No?

The real issue as some have mentioned here is the availability in all calibers. Clampdaddy hit the nail on the head with his concerns. I also don't really relish shooting a copper bullet or sabot through my cap lock .50 caliber. It just isn't the same warm fuzzy feeling I get as sinking that round ball into the patch. Doing so...well that is just tantamount to blasphemy! :crying:

IMHO for the impinging on my freedom crowd, the veto was probably surprising and worth being thankful for. :thumbsup:
Charter member of the "I only shoot bar belly geese club". I'm a Bar belly goose purist!
marsh-mello
hunter
 
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Thu Aug 07, 2014 10:30 am

7mllrds wrote:I'm actually done trying to educate the ignorant.
:hi: :hi: :hi: good bye.
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby clampdaddy » Thu Aug 07, 2014 11:25 am

7mllrds wrote:Maybe not the end of hunting but it's about conservation and ethics. Many more birds are crippled and lost as a result of steel vs lead. If you don't believe that, you never shot lead. The same will be true with the big game ammunition. Our deer population really can't withstand that, nor is it ethical. Can deer be killed with non-lead ammunition? Sure. They can be killed with just about anything with a well placed shot. But how far that deer will travel before it dies and whether it will be recovered will be a different story. Anyone who thinks copper bullets are as good as lead have not used them in the field to any great extent. Just because they shoot tight groups on paper does not mean that they're terminal ballistics are as good as lead.

I disagree with this one. I switched to lead free bullets in my deer rifles years ago, prior to any lead ban nonsense because I found them to actually work better than lead cored bullets (and yes, I shot lead enough to see a difference). I can load my .270wsm with a 110 grain copper bullet sped up to 3525 fps, get better penetration, equal terminal performance, and it shoots about as flat as my .22-250. The 120 grain pills really pepped up my 7x57mm Mauser too.

That being said, I believe that its total crap that people should be forced to use them if they don't like them.
User avatar
clampdaddy
hunter
 
Posts: 3687
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Where spoonies go to die

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Thu Aug 07, 2014 11:31 am

clampdaddy wrote: I believe that its total crap that people should be forced to use them if they don't like them.


Did you cut n paste that from an Obama Care forum ?
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby clampdaddy » Thu Aug 07, 2014 11:46 am

friedcoot wrote:
clampdaddy wrote: I believe that its total crap that people should be forced to use them if they don't like them.


Did you cut n paste that from an Obama Care forum ?

Nah. If I did it would've read "Uh....if you like your bullets...uh....you can keep your bullets. Period." :lol3:
User avatar
clampdaddy
hunter
 
Posts: 3687
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Where spoonies go to die

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby ditchbanker » Thu Aug 07, 2014 11:54 am

7mllrds wrote:I'm actually done trying to educate the ignorant. It's an impossible task trying to help those that can't be helped because they are so unwilling to listen to facts. And yes, the conservation and ethical argument is that lead kills better. It leads to faster and more humane kills without lost game and the fact that you can't comprehend that proves my first point. End of discussion.


Sorry...my capacity to comprehend is compromised lately :huh:
...am I safe to conclude your position includes banning bow-hunting ?
"Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment." - Will Rogers
User avatar
ditchbanker
hunter
 
Posts: 859
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:54 am
Location: berkeley ca

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby ditchbanker » Thu Aug 07, 2014 11:56 am

clampdaddy wrote:
friedcoot wrote:
clampdaddy wrote: I believe that its total crap that people should be forced to use them if they don't like them.


Did you cut n paste that from an Obama Care forum ?

Nah. If I did it would've read "Uh....if you like your bullets...uh....you can keep your bullets. Period." :lol3:


HaHa...good one :thumbsup:
"Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment." - Will Rogers
User avatar
ditchbanker
hunter
 
Posts: 859
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:54 am
Location: berkeley ca

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby clampdaddy » Thu Aug 07, 2014 12:10 pm

ditchbanker wrote:
7mllrds wrote:I'm actually done trying to educate the ignorant. It's an impossible task trying to help those that can't be helped because they are so unwilling to listen to facts. And yes, the conservation and ethical argument is that lead kills better. It leads to faster and more humane kills without lost game and the fact that you can't comprehend that proves my first point. End of discussion.


Sorry...my capacity to comprehend is compromised lately :huh:
...am I safe to conclude your position includes banning bow-hunting ?

You mean you haven't tried lead broadheads?!
User avatar
clampdaddy
hunter
 
Posts: 3687
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 9:23 pm
Location: Where spoonies go to die

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Thu Aug 07, 2014 12:11 pm

ditchbanker wrote:
7mllrds wrote:I'm actually done trying to educate the ignorant. It's an impossible task trying to help those that can't be helped because they are so unwilling to listen to facts. And yes, the conservation and ethical argument is that lead kills better. It leads to faster and more humane kills without lost game and the fact that you can't comprehend that proves my first point. End of discussion.


Sorry...my capacity to comprehend is compromised lately :huh:
...am I safe to conclude your position includes banning bow-hunting ?


7 is done. Your going to get his pressure up. He already went in for a series of blood tests (they found no lead). You know the doctors
generally don't check for lead unless something has flagged their attention. So lets be easy on 7 and know that his symptoms could be the result of any number of environmental factors other than lead.
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby 7mllrds » Thu Aug 07, 2014 4:01 pm

friedcoot wrote:
ditchbanker wrote:
7mllrds wrote:I'm actually done trying to educate the ignorant. It's an impossible task trying to help those that can't be helped because they are so unwilling to listen to facts. And yes, the conservation and ethical argument is that lead kills better. It leads to faster and more humane kills without lost game and the fact that you can't comprehend that proves my first point. End of discussion.


Sorry...my capacity to comprehend is compromised lately :huh:
...am I safe to conclude your position includes banning bow-hunting ?


7 is done. Your going to get his pressure up. He already went in for a series of blood tests (they found no lead). You know the doctors
generally don't check for lead unless something has flagged their attention. So lets be easy on 7 and know that his symptoms could be the result of any number of environmental factors other than lead.

Wrong again. But why should I be surprised. I requested the test out of curiosity and to prove a point and it served its purpose.
7mllrds
hunter
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 10:00 am

Re: Gov vetoed assault weapon ban bill, but signed Lead Ammo

Postby friedcoot » Thu Aug 07, 2014 5:04 pm

7mllrds wrote:[
I requested the test out of curiosity and to prove a point and it served its purpose.


Being an ethical hunter, I'm sure you were relieved knowing that you would not have to go thru the same procedures as the Condor.
User avatar
friedcoot
hunter
 
Posts: 1627
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 12:10 am
Location: Behind a laptop

Previous

Return to California Duck Hunting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests

cron