Are you suggesting this is a comprehensive study?? I don't think so. It says at the top of the page "This website was created by Robin Izzo Scott in support of a term paper" So I am not sure what merit an undergrad term paper project has (as a product of left wing pre and post secondary education at that!!)
Just when you thought the new gun bill was our greatest threat.......
- Thread starter Frontier Firearms
- Start date
- Status
Are you suggesting this is a comprehensive study?? I don't think so. It says at the top of the page "This website was created by Robin Izzo Scott in support of a term paper" So I am not sure what merit an undergrad term paper project has (as a product of left wing pre and post secondary education at that!!)
I'm first to say that lead isn't environmentally friendly, and I'm all in favor of using solid copper bullets for hunting rounds and FMJ for plinking, but lead is not the devil some would like us to believe. All the argument in favor or removing lead completely vanish into thin air when they get into the real world:
1-Zinc and frangible ammos for handguns have very low density. A 90grn zinc bullet has roughly the shape of a 147grn lead FMJ. You would need almost 1400fps to reach minor power factor with that kind of bullet, which just isn't possible with commercial ammos, and barely at all when reloading. The zinc bullets are also more prone to ricochet, so they can't be used at most indoor range with steel backstops. And finally, the zinc fouling in barrels is really, but I mean REALLY hard to get rid of. It's a bad solution for the average 9mm handgun, and a non-existing one for most other handgun calibres.
2-Steel would be a "good" replacement, but they're not allowed at indoor ranges due to ricochet.
3-Solid metal hunting ammos like the barnes TTSX are fine, I use them personnaly, but they have their downsides too. First, the best solid metal bullets will NEVER have the accuracy of the best lead bullets, so they're off the table for long range competition. Second, they're really long for a given weight, so for some calibres (most WSM comes to mind), they're really not ideal. Then they cost quite a bit. The cost isn't that big a problem for hunting ammos, it's not like paying an extra dollars make a difference for a 5000$ hunting trip, but for 3-gun or cqb competition, where you can shoot hundreds of times in a day, the cost quickly becomes prohibitive. At about 1$/piece, a typical TTSX 308 bullet is 4 times the price of a campro FMJ. Roughly the same ratio for 223.
4-The current price for zinc, frangible and solid copper ammos is not too high because the demand isn't too high, but good luck trying to feed the whole market with those ammos. The price of components will skyrocket immediately.
If someone has the bright idea of banning the sale of lead ammos or bullets, I'm ordering enough campro, berrys and others to last my lifetime. Not sure where I'm gonna stack all that stuff but I'll find a way.
1-Zinc and frangible ammos for handguns have very low density. A 90grn zinc bullet has roughly the shape of a 147grn lead FMJ. You would need almost 1400fps to reach minor power factor with that kind of bullet, which just isn't possible with commercial ammos, and barely at all when reloading. The zinc bullets are also more prone to ricochet, so they can't be used at most indoor range with steel backstops. And finally, the zinc fouling in barrels is really, but I mean REALLY hard to get rid of. It's a bad solution for the average 9mm handgun, and a non-existing one for most other handgun calibres.
2-Steel would be a "good" replacement, but they're not allowed at indoor ranges due to ricochet.
3-Solid metal hunting ammos like the barnes TTSX are fine, I use them personnaly, but they have their downsides too. First, the best solid metal bullets will NEVER have the accuracy of the best lead bullets, so they're off the table for long range competition. Second, they're really long for a given weight, so for some calibres (most WSM comes to mind), they're really not ideal. Then they cost quite a bit. The cost isn't that big a problem for hunting ammos, it's not like paying an extra dollars make a difference for a 5000$ hunting trip, but for 3-gun or cqb competition, where you can shoot hundreds of times in a day, the cost quickly becomes prohibitive. At about 1$/piece, a typical TTSX 308 bullet is 4 times the price of a campro FMJ. Roughly the same ratio for 223.
4-The current price for zinc, frangible and solid copper ammos is not too high because the demand isn't too high, but good luck trying to feed the whole market with those ammos. The price of components will skyrocket immediately.
If someone has the bright idea of banning the sale of lead ammos or bullets, I'm ordering enough campro, berrys and others to last my lifetime. Not sure where I'm gonna stack all that stuff but I'll find a way.
Let me do some math out loud:
They think approximately 2 million people hunt or use guns in a year in Canada, and 5100 tonnes is 11,243,600 pounds:
Works out to an average of 5.6218 pounds of lead (not copper lead and or brass, just lead) per person per year, I certainly don't shoot close to that.
I know there are a few who put a lot of lead downrange as active shooters, but I think it's pretty safe to call that statistic skewed, unless I've missed something with that math, if so please let me know.
They think approximately 2 million people hunt or use guns in a year in Canada, and 5100 tonnes is 11,243,600 pounds:
Works out to an average of 5.6218 pounds of lead (not copper lead and or brass, just lead) per person per year, I certainly don't shoot close to that.
I know there are a few who put a lot of lead downrange as active shooters, but I think it's pretty safe to call that statistic skewed, unless I've missed something with that math, if so please let me know.
I didn't quite find what I was looking for but I felt that this was a good source of info and a potentially unbiased one. Do you have info that will back your stance, I'd be willing to read it.
Cameron SS
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ground Zero
There is a legitimate debate to be had about reducing lead use in hunting applications. As for shooting ranges, the practices necessary for managing lead ammunition are there, but are not being enforced. Frankly I am surprised we have gotten away with it for as long as we have.
Please tell me which government agency has banned steel core ammo? Some ranges ban steel core ammo, but that is usually because shooting steel core ammo on bullet traps designed for lead ammo is bad for the equipment.
Yes, it is, and if that lead was being removed from the bullet traps, it wouldn't be a concern. But when it is being allowed to accumulate with no management or mitigation, it does stay in the backstops.
Studies done on some ranges in Europe that have been around for 100 years found that wild flowers growing several kilometers away from the range contained sufficient levels of lead to be unfit for human consumption. Believe me, if Health Canada were to start testing crops being grown near shooting ranges for lead we would be lucky to have any ranges at all.
I don't support a lead ammunition ban, but I also don't support shooting ranges being allowed to pollute the environment either. Lead is waste. If you pick up your garbage its no big deal. If you just leave it lying there for a century, it is going to migrate and cause problems.
We can remain ignorant and hostile to the problem, and we can guarantee that the liberal "I love banning things" government will ram a lead ban down our throat.
We can do better, but we will need to be part of the solution. The single worst thing that we did as a community was refuse to participate in the study that was conducted.
Cameron SS
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ground Zero
We used asbestos for decades. Does that mean its safe?
They are right about the problem, they are wrong about the source. A gut pile contains very little if any lead, depending on shot placement. Even if it was whole contaminated a gut pile is unlikely to be shared among more than a few animals.
Shot gun ranges compromising of 40-100 hectares of land heavily contaminated with lead that has been accumulating for a century, which is trafficked upon and a source of food for hundreds of species that migrate is the more likely source.
Hunting accounts for probably less than 1%, probably 0.1% of all ammunition fired. I would suspect that lead used in hunting really only posses an immediate risk to the hunter and his family. Any ban on lead for hunting might be worth discussion, but that discussion should recognize that the effect of any ban on hunting will be negligible.
Shooting ranges ARE the problem.
We have a right to own firearms. We have a right to defend our life. We do not have a right to pollute the environment with toxic substances.
Managing lead in the environment is not difficult, but it does carry some cost. Very few outdoor ranges have been doing a good job of mitigating the risks of accumulated lead. Either we start picking up our own trash, or something far less informed and interested in civilian firearms ownership will legislate a solution for us.
Well this is pretty ignorant. With this attitude you are giving the government every excuse to ban lead outright in order to compel you, and industry, to get on board with lead free alternatives.
As a staunch libertarian, I dont care what you shoot as long as you pay the full costs of your activities. Shoot lead. Fine. Then go pick it up. If we had to pay the full costs of the ammunition life cycle, very quickly you would get on board with the convenience of using a non toxic ammo that you can just walk away from.
I put down more than double that much every time I got to the range, which is at least weekly. Like most industries, the top 10% of users are probably consuming more than 90% of the goods.
The cost of range memberships wouldn't need to go up very much in order to cover the costs of properly managing lead on shooting ranges.
I just emailed the environment minister to tell them that the government should be subsidizing and funding shooting ranges to modernize lead management practices. If they can give 100 million to ontario for green energy retrofit programs, they can give money to ranges to help manage lead. I also told them that they need to be promoting the use of shooting ranges through range membership subsidies and tax breaks, were lead can be contained and managed.
Large municipalities like Toronto and Vancouver have an ignorant attitude about shooting ranges and an association to gun crime. Closing shooting ranges in major centres just contributes to greater commuter pollution and the use of public lands for sport shooting where lead will never be managed and remediated effectively. If we don't take ownership of this problem a solution will legislated that will make no one happy.
Cameron SS
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ground Zero
I would guess that there is more than 30 years worth of domestic ammunition supply squirreled away. A ban on lead today would not have a meaningful impact on lead deposition into the ground for decades. A much more sustainable solution is actually manage the lead on shooting ranges properly.
Simply banning it is just as stupid as any of the other proposed bans on things.
I wonder how economical banning lead could be?
Lead is currently used due to cost and high density, but we've all seen how non-lead projectiles can be used just as effectively (Barnes tsx, bismuth shot, ect)...
Currently lead free ammo is expensive because they don't make it in huge quantities. If a lead ban happened in the USA and Canada (it wouldnt do anything on the grand scale if we ban but they don't) I wonder how much prices for lead free ammo would fall? If all ammo production switched to lead free, it would certainly bring costs down, I wonder by how much though...
I'm not against the idea of banning lead, if executed properly, but it wouldn't make any sense if we banned it but the USA didn't...
Lead is currently used due to cost and high density, but we've all seen how non-lead projectiles can be used just as effectively (Barnes tsx, bismuth shot, ect)...
Currently lead free ammo is expensive because they don't make it in huge quantities. If a lead ban happened in the USA and Canada (it wouldnt do anything on the grand scale if we ban but they don't) I wonder how much prices for lead free ammo would fall? If all ammo production switched to lead free, it would certainly bring costs down, I wonder by how much though...
I'm not against the idea of banning lead, if executed properly, but it wouldn't make any sense if we banned it but the USA didn't...
I wonder how much lead most skeet ranges have laying around on their property. On average every 16 rounds fired would equal 1 pound of lead fired down range. When you consider that a lot of shooters will shoot 4 rounds or more in a daily skeet session that is 100 rounds. That is as much as 6 pounds of lead per shooter per day and those are conservative estimates. On sporting clay tournament days or 5 stand tournament days each shooter could easily shoot a case of ammo when you consider their practice rounds as well as the competition.
Imagine how much lead is on these properties after years of shooting considering that one round of skeet can put 6 pounds of lead down range.
I enjoy shooting lead target ammo and I hunt with barnes lead free for big game as well as steel for and waterfowl or small game I intend to eat.
Just because I enjoy shooting lead does not mean that I am not open to considering measures to mitigate the amount of lead found at shooting facilities and ranges.
When waterfowl regulations first changed there was a bit of concern but folks quickly came to accept the changes.
Consider that the military and law enforcement have stockpiles of lead ammunition and shoot a very large quantity of rounds down range each year. A lead free legislation would hunt the government far worse then any recreational shooter or hunter. I think for this reason we will not see a ban of lead ammunition for target shooting but may infact see the standards of how ranges deal with lead accumulation change.
Imagine how much lead is on these properties after years of shooting considering that one round of skeet can put 6 pounds of lead down range.
I enjoy shooting lead target ammo and I hunt with barnes lead free for big game as well as steel for and waterfowl or small game I intend to eat.
Just because I enjoy shooting lead does not mean that I am not open to considering measures to mitigate the amount of lead found at shooting facilities and ranges.
When waterfowl regulations first changed there was a bit of concern but folks quickly came to accept the changes.
Consider that the military and law enforcement have stockpiles of lead ammunition and shoot a very large quantity of rounds down range each year. A lead free legislation would hunt the government far worse then any recreational shooter or hunter. I think for this reason we will not see a ban of lead ammunition for target shooting but may infact see the standards of how ranges deal with lead accumulation change.
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2018/eccc/En14-307-2018-eng.pdf
Pretty sure Military will me exempt from this
Pretty sure Military will me exempt from this
5.6lbs of bullets is only 262 150gr bullets, or 712 55gr bullets, or 980 40gr bullets. I don't shoot that much in a single trip generally, but I shoot way more than that over a year. Less than 1000rds of 22lr isn't a lot of shooting if you've got a semi rifle or handgun...
I shoot a LOT more than that. 5.6 pounds of lead is only 39,200grn, so about 316 rounds of 124grn 9mm. I buy my bullets by the 5000. I also shoot other calibres. Last CanPar shipment to my place weighted about 40 pounds and that was mostly bullets.
I don't believe the copper jacket or plating makes much of a difference in the total weight.
From what I can see, they are not trying to ban lead. They are trying to create a dialog about voluntarily switching to lead free alternatives. At least that's how I read the OP.
- Status
