Page 8 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 148

Thread: Just when you thought the new gun bill was our greatest threat.......

  1. #71
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer Suther's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Fraser Valley
    Posts
    18,783
    Quote Originally Posted by FLYBYU44 View Post
    Stop it, don't try and show them logic, their heads may explode. I shoot steel shot waterfowl hunting and it really wouldn't bother me to shoot steel shot when upland hunting too, but right now there is limited steel shot in low brass 2 3/4 shells. And how will they make a .22lr that is lead free? Reminds me of my Mom arguing with me about oil.

    "We have to stop using oil"

    "Great, park you car, throw your electronics and anything else made of plastic away and most of your clothes too, then we can start to talk."

    Things like this are not something you can change in a day or even 10 years, they need a viable replacement to lead first, that is affordable and functions 99% like lead.
    What's the price difference between Hornady ammo loaded with a premium lead bullet, vs the same thing with a Barnes? Next to nothing I'd bet.

    Lead free ammo is more expensive for two reasons. The biggest reason is they don't make bargain brand ammo, it's all match grade/premium ammo, or defensive ammo in the case of handguns. In these cases, they're comparably priced to an equal lead product. The second is simply economy of scale. There isn't enough demand for it. If they outlawed lead ammo in usa/canada, they would be forced to produce more and cheaper lead free ammo. Copper is more expensive than lead, for sure (3x the cost basically i think?) but the rest of it, the brass case, powder and primer are no different.

    Therefore, prices wouldn't go up nearly as much as most around here seem to think it would. Economies of scale and bigger consumer demand would keep prices quite close.

    Of course, it would eliminate cheap surplus ammo because there is no way the military would swap, and the economy of scale would only work if the USA banned it, so I'm not down with any Canada only bans, that would really suck.


    As for lead coming from the earth, that's a really weak argument. Uranium comes from the earth, and is even denser than lead. Should we switch to that?
    "We don't take souls, we leave that to wives and girlfriends, but we can do a layaway " - Grumpy Wolverine.

    If you need religion to have good morals then you don't actually have good morals.

  2. #72
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer tigrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Burns Lake BC
    Posts
    4,366
    Just another nail in the gun sports coffin. Don't worry they will leave the sling shot with steel balls alone. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
    The challenge of retirement is how to spend time without spending money.
    Remember, it's not what you did once, but what you can do on demand that counts. Fr. Frog
    Look around is there someone you can introduce to shooting because that’s the only way we will buck the anti gun trend sweeping Canada! "tigrr 2006"

  3. #73
    CGN Regular Matt762's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    136
    Oh boy wouldn't it be just peachy if the RCMP banned lead bullets?

    It would be time to find a new hobby...

  4. #74
    CGN Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    700
    This will fundamentally alter the way some ammunition performs. 55gr 5.55 won’t fragment anymore. It may now just be armor piercing. And I mean level III armour if you’re throwing a copper round at 3200 FPS

    Edit:
    I just looked at prices. About the same. Big to do about nothing. I’ll gladly switch

  5. #75
    CGN Regular IBM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Lower Mainland BC
    Posts
    772
    Quote Originally Posted by paul792 View Post
    They already make polymer ammunition. That and solid brass projectiles would be a fine replacement over lead. Although the cost right now is higher for the polymer rounds, its only because they are a niche round with very small production. If they were to become the norm and production was brought up to the level of lead ammunition, the cost would be the same. Polymer goes threw paper just as good as lead. With added benefit of decreasing the lead levels in our blood from indoor ranges and the environmental benefits its seems like a reasonable change.
    Solid polymer rounds? Or are they polymer jacketed lead? Please provide a link.

  6. #76
    CGN Regular Canuck1978's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    186
    So maybe we can ask Norinco or whomever that makes the crates of ammo we buy to eliminate lead from their ammo. Just a steel core coated in a copper jacket? Or somehow change the way fmj ammo is made by sealing off the back end of the projectile to make a true full metal jacket. I say Norinco because I don't know of anyone else who makes current cases of "surplus" ammo . Every other country seems to have made theirs in the 70s or 80s. Although it may seem like sometimes some of those craters get opened up and the ammo gets modified somehow. Maybe a large importer can open up all crates, pull the projectiles and insert new projectiles. I've been buying projectiles at about $10us/100 for 5.56 but open back fmj. I guess add a couple bucks and I'd get Barnes type projectiles. If that started being the trend, other boolit makers would get on board and who knows, maybe the price of Barnes would come down a little since there would be a fair bit more competition. Like any change, when we are comfortable, we don't like it. It'll cost a bit to adapt but in the long run it shouldn't be a major hiccup. Our kids and theirs will be the ones to reap the rewards. We will be the generation that everyone in the future will look back on and say it was us that paid the extra cost to ensure a cleaner, safer future for everyone henceforth.

  7. #77
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Suther View Post
    The EPA is run by someone who sued the EPA multiple times. They're a complete joke at this point. I wouldn't trust their opinion on much of anything, they're supposed to be environmentally focused and they're trying to deny man made climate change despite the fact 2017 was the warmest year ever recorded, sea level is rising at unprecedented rates and co2 concentrations are higher today than any time in the past 600 000 years.
    The gun range i shoot at is located on a drinking water resevoir. Last summer the water was tested over 30 days and no problems found. The 100 yard range starts about 50 yds/mtrs from waters edge

  8. #78
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer propliner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,170
    The nooses are slowly tightening around our necks and still there are plenty of chicken littles who are willing to help tighten them. Fewer options equal dwindling opportunities for those who enjoy the shooting sports. Be very careful what you concede because you'll never get it back. They push and you relent. They win and you lose it all, forever.

    Lead doesn't leach into surface water as many people might think. The enviro-alarmists and the gun grabbers would love for you to believe it though. Heck, they'd love it if you never set foot outside your house again, let alone picked up a gun for ANY reason.

    Look at California if you want to see your future as a spineless gun owner and sportsman.

  9. #79
    CGN frequent flyer pikesroad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,072
    Love the new guy at the EPA I hope he continues breaking down the Lefts propaganda. I cant stand the government here taking land owned by farmers out of production for their pet causes. Carbon taxes= money grab. Lead ban= higher cost= less hunters. If you shot it with lead and eat it so be it.

  10. #80
    CGN Regular shaddp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sask
    Posts
    215
    Quote Originally Posted by Ingots View Post
    Spot lead is at 1.08 USD per Pound
    Spot Copper is 3.07 USD per Pound
    Yes and price of other "alternatives" listed copper or copper-zinc alloy, steel, tungsten or bismuth

    Steel $0.43/lb
    Tungsten $31.40/lb
    Bismuth $12.40/lb

    The alternatives are much more expensive raw materials, switching over production to them on a larger scale will not decrease pricing on them by much. In fact it could increase demand for the material increasing pricing further due to supply limitations. Steel is cheaper but you can't make an all steel bullet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •