Curious about the opposition on lead ammo switch

V

Viper99

New member
Hello all.

I was wondering why there is such an opposition to switching from lead ammo to say copper?

1 reason is obvious, price. But is it such a hig difference that even the NRA fights it or am I missing more important points?

Thanks in advance for your comments / education
 
Its been in use since the invention of gunpowder. Also the environmental impact is minimal the few situation where it is an issue, it is exagerated to ridiculous. The environmental/health issue is just being used as a step toward getting rid of the whole of the 2nd.
 
Well, for me the main problem is that I cast a lot of my own bullets. That would be a lot harder to do with copper. Also in some applications lead performs better.
 
I normally shoot in indoor ranges and to tell you the truth, I am concern about lead exposure specially when your mouth starts to taste like metal. Don't know if that is from the gunpowder or the lead in the ammo.

Obviously lousy ventilation but most indoor ranges my way are not top to the line.
 
I personally think it is the gunpowder you are tasting. If using lead bullets puts enough lead in the air to be a problem I think copper would do the same thing. Copper is less dense than lead and would stay in the air longer.
 
When you "destroy" your original data that should raise red flags as to the validity of the research.
Click to expand...

In scientific terms, if your data can not be reviewed and replicated there are no grounds to say you have a valid conclusion.
 
Hello, Viper99. I am a cast-bullet fanatic..rifles and revolvers..But aside from that what about the .22 rimfire?..and with a super-accurate bench type rimfire..would you really want to run a substitute thru it?
But most important of all..if gun owners let this slide..what will lawmakers decide to ban next?
 
I normally shoot in indoor ranges and to tell you the truth, I am concern about lead exposure specially when your mouth starts to taste like metal. Don't know if that is from the gunpowder or the lead in the ammo.

Obviously lousy ventilation but most indoor ranges my way are not top to the line.
Click to expand...

Lead doesn't taste like "metal", it tastes sweet.

Wash your hands and blow your nose (not necessarily in that order) after you are finished shooting and you'll be way ahead of the game. If you are still worried about lead exposure, take vitamin C tablets. Lead is quite harmful to children, but I'll bet you are not a child or you wouldn't be posting here. :rolleyes:

After getting rid of lead paint and leaded gasoline, the EPA should have declared a victory, had a little party, and disbanded. But that's not how government works, is it? So now they make up new issues to justify their existence when the science doesn't really back them up.

If you want to limit your lead exposure, use copper-plated bullets and leadfree primers. The lead in the bullet cores doesn't matter.
 
The right answer...

I believe Ideal Tool has hit it on the head. He said,
But most important of all..if gun owners let this slide..what will lawmakers decide to ban next?
Click to expand...
It's just something for the antis to crusade against. If they can make a case, and make it stick, and get lead banned from ammo, they will go on from there to the next step in getting rid of guns, whatever that may be.

The antis don't care about practicality, or anything else. They just want to get rid of guns. All the guns. Everywhere. Any step toward this ideal, they regard as progress.

Unfortunately, as I've stated before, some antis are very wealthy, some are lawyers, and many are very stubborn. Getting rid of guns is part of their belief system--Logic takes no part in their discussion.

We have no choice but to defend our contrary beliefs, or see the antis' will imposed upon us.
 
Last edited:
Lead in the form of bullets ball etc is very stable, not a problem unless your eating it , it will lie where it lands for centuries, even in the water. As stated this is just the first step to banning all ammo, and would produce about as much good as gun registration.
 
I was wondering why there is such an opposition to switching from lead ammo to say copper?
Click to expand...

Economy of use.

I'm all for getting away from lead so I really don't care what the NRA says. I take their statements with a grain of salt anyway, just like I do with environmentalist.

The History Channel "Modern Marvels" show on lead was quite interesting. Especially the amount of lead ammunition suppliers used on a daily basis. I can't recall the exact amount but it was a staggering number.

My rifles shoot just as well, or better, with all copper (ex, TSX) bullets so I'm all for the switch.
 
I'm all for getting away from lead so I really don't care what the NRA says. I take their statements with a grain of salt anyway, just like I do with environmentalist.
Click to expand...

I tend to discount what any wacko says.

The History Channel "Modern Marvels" show on lead was quite interesting. Especially the amount of lead ammunition suppliers used on a daily basis. I can't recall the exact amount but it was a staggering number.
Click to expand...

I did not see the program, but I was wondering if they said how lead from single projectile ammo actually made it into the environment as it does not dissolve short of the presence of very high temperatures.:confused: I don't know, maybe homeless people frequent ranges to forage around the berms...:eek:
 
Last edited:
Copper has its own ill effects on the environment. It is toxic to plant life and I believe to fish as well.

Very little lead is shot into the woods or wilderness. Most is fired at indoor or outdoor ranges, and is easily recovered. There is absolutely no reason to ban its use in firearms.
 
Of course one can point out that steel core ammo would be a viable alternative, except the anti's got that banned as "armor piercing". Just point out to them that if they want to reduce lead usage in ammo just allow steel core ammo. Not only will it be cheaper to shooters, but it will reduce the supposed lead pollution. If they don't like this idea then you know right away that they are NOT concerned about the environment.

Copper has its own ill effects on the environment. It is toxic to plant life and I believe to fish as well.
Click to expand...
Completely forgot about this. You know darn well that if they go to copper only they will be complaining about the environmental costs of copper.
 
Liberals have figured out that banning guns is an uphill battle. But, if they can have all viable bullet metals declared to be an "Environmental or Safety Issue," they can make shooting too expensive or too much trouble for the average person. A big chunk of the battle won right there.
Is there any material or compound that can't be hazardous, in enough quantity?
 
But is it such a hig difference..
Click to expand...

Yes. Copper is currently trading at about $3.60 a pound on the LME, while lead is about $0.90 per pound. So copper is almost exactly 4 X the price of lead. This price obviously reflects demand for copper, due to the variety of applications for the metal and alloys that contain copper. Adding ammo to that demand would increase the costs of everything from electronics to housing.
 
A lot of to do over nothing on lead exposure. I remember the EPA getting down on lead in the late 80's. My shop used to use lead hammers. After they get smashed up a little you can melt and repore them. Young people now days think if you touch much less look at lead you will die. This all started from some unsupervised kids with moms on welfare eating paint chips off the window sills.. Like the sheep we are we believe everything the government puts out.
Thank god all thoes evil 100 watt incondesent light bulbs will be ban in January. Praise the Government!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top