doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Possibility of Limited Lead Authorization

That's just too simple.

I've more than a dozen doubles, Joe, and bought a Beretta o/u 686 and two cases Kent's TM and bismuth, too hot in my opinion for the other guns. Handloading is simple answer for me.

I don't do much waterfowling but have recently been getting back into it.

I have been using up old supplies of bismuth and steel but just looked up the price on Kent TM at Cabelas.

Is that right, $3.50-4.50 per shell?

I am surprised that that has become accepted.

Rob, I don't know if that price is correct, but TM has always been expensive. Bismuth is back, and it's a good bit less expensive.

No one needs to "build up" the image of the bald eagle. It got built up when it became our national symbol. It got built up even more when the population was extremely low, and most people in the country never saw any. No way to "debuild" the image of the bald eagle . . . unless maybe we can resurrect old Ben Franklin and his proposal that the wild turkey should be the national bird.

How do we go on the offense against the waterfowl ban? We'd have to run tests, shoot a whole bunch of lead on areas where there are a whole bunch of waterfowl, and hope like heck that we don't find sick or dead birds that have ingested lead. And there's no point in doing that if we're going to fail. If ingested lead shot really DOES kill waterfowl.

If it doesn't, how did we get where we are? It wasn't all because of a dead eagle or two. If the "science" behind the ban were bogus, where were the wildlife biologists who focus on waterfowl who should have told us it was all bogus?

Let's compare to climate change. Yes, most scientists agree that it's happening, and it's happening due to human activity. BUT THERE ARE SOME WHO DO NOT AGREE, AND WHO SO STATE IN PUBLIC.
If there are climate change contrarians--which there certainly are--then why were there not lead ban contrarians? There was a conspiracy in which NO ONE came out and said this is bogus, and here's why? I have trouble believing that. Small conspiracies can work. Big conspiracies . . . they have to rely on too many people not saying anything. And there's never been any shortage of outdoor writers who would be more than happy to break a story like that.

I oppose going "on the offensive" not because I think "the offensive" in general is a bad way to go, but because I don't think THIS PARTICULAR OFFENSIVE can win. Custer won by going on the offensive . . . until he went on the offensive when the odds against him were too high.

Doesn't seem to be a problem for a more than a dozen doubles owning, clear cuttin', wine sippin', just buy another gun and cases of ammo elitest from Nova Scotia. Just get a better job, Rob. Problem solved.


______________________________
The U.S. pays 3 billion for the UN, more than 185 countries combined. (things that make you go hmmmm?)

Ah, Joe, I'm doing all those things and still raising incomes and working conditions of rural people continuously for 50 years, too. That's what elites do.

Larry, a reporter friend told me of a fresh reinforcement officer who joined the platoon one night in Italy during WWII with orders to attack in the morning. Years later that officer, a duck hunting buddy, said my friend saved his life. Pointing out concealed German positions that had them taped, the corporal said his men weren't moving, wait for the guns. Outnumbered and outgunned is no place for offensives. The corporal earned a Mention In Dispatches the next day. Allied infantry casualties in Italy were greater than Northwest Europe, D-Day to the end.

Forget the job, Rob. Just grow alligator arms when the check shows up. Boo Coo dinero for shells then.


__________________________
The benefits of EU membership are inextricably connected to the obligations. Angela Merkel lecturing UK on Brexit. (pity she doesn't feel that way about NATO)

Bald Eagle preservation is it?

The former Green Peace loving administration permitted wind farms authorizing them an acceptable rate of kill on eagles and other birds of prey. So their existence is not sacred and as they are no longer threatened or endangered.

Since science is their argument, then science is ours, the percentage of shooters chosing to use damascus guns to shoot lead will be limited, as will the number of actual shots they take. They could be restricted from high volume areas. The actual threat generated is rather small compared to the green energy industry.

The only down side of it I can see is that there maybe some fool who fails to understand damascus ammunition limits and might blow their gun up.

If we can't account for a minut threat to eagles, then maybe we should go after the wind industry

Lead the way.

SRH