California activists call for lead ammunition ban to aid condors

[sumpnz]

benEzra - I'm pretty sure you can get Barnes X bullets in .308 Win right now, so I'm not sure your info is entirely correct. Could you point to a source so that we are both on the same page here?

 

[benEzra]

sumpnz,

You may be right. Here's the applicable laws: http://www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/legal/armor.htm

Under Title 18, UNITED STATES CODE, CHAPTER 44 as amended by Public Law 103-322 The Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (enacted September 13, 1994) 18 U.S.C. CHAPTER 44 § 921(a)(17)(B) the term 'armor piercing ammunition' means --

(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or

(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.

(C) The term 'armor piercing ammunition' does not include shotgun shot required by Federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Secretary finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the Secretary finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device.

I'm still trying to find the text of the Feb. '04 ruling that brought .223 and 7.62x39 under the handgun rule, since I am pretty sure 7.62x51 was also included (and 7.62x51 military AP is indeed restricted), and paragraph (i) would seem to cover it unless X-bullets are pure copper. It is possible that X-bullets for the .308 are exempted at the discretion of the Secretary because they are "primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes," though such a finding could presumably be revoked at any time.

Here's one story about the Feb '04 ruling (the Olympic Arms fiasco): http://www.thegunzone.com/762x39.html

 

[Art Eatman]

steveno, whooping cranes taste a lot like sandhill cranes, and are much, much tastier than bald eagles...

The whacko-thrash is about wounded animals escaping with bullets in them, and the condor being indiscrimate as to taste. My problem is that from what I've seen, the bullets are more likely to have penetrated and exited than remaining in the animal, insofar as deer are concerned.

SFAIK, non-lead shot isn't required for upland birds. I'd bet that a condor would eat a lost dove or quail as happily as it would a deer or hog. Much higher probability of lead-ingestion from upland birds.

, Art

 

[MarkDido]

Maybe we could figure out how to make bullets from baby Harp Seals?

 

[c_yeager]

Maybe we could figure out how to make bullets from baby Harp Seals?

Excellent idea. I would go with ivory myself though.

 

[sumpnz]

benEzra - If you're a reloader at least, you can load Barnes X bullets in .223, and .308. Didn't see any listed for 7.62x39. You can also get solid copper/zinc (i.e. brass) bullets for both .308 and .223 that are designed for minimal expansion so as to not excessively damage pelts. The solids are solid brass with no cavity at the front of the bullet, and the X-bullets are heat-hardned monolithic copper (they don't say what, if anything, it's alloyed with) hollowpoints.

I have no idea how DOJ would handle pistol bullets so constructed. Since the entire bullet is constructed of copper/brass it might well fall afoul of paragraph (i). But, since it doesn't have a seperate core, maybe not. I guess tests would have to be done to determine how such bullets would perform vs "standard" bullets against body armor. So long as there were no legal implications with such a switch, terminal performance were at least as good, and cost didn't go up much if at all I would not have any particular problem with such a switch. That's a lotta if's though.

 

[JohnKSa]

I've thought for awhile that it will be the EPA that ends shooting in the U.S. and that it will be an ammo ban, not a gun ban.

 

[Dmack_901]

Humm... Do I smell a trade? Say, Lead in exhange for AP. That would sound good to me.
also:

Under Title 18, UNITED STATES CODE, CHAPTER 44 as amended by Public Law 103-322 The Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (enacted September 13, 1994) 18 U.S.C. CHAPTER 44 § 921(a)(17)(B) the term 'armor piercing ammunition' means --

(i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or

(ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile.

(C) The term 'armor piercing ammunition' does not include shotgun shot required by Federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Secretary finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the Secretary finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device.

I guess that would mean that titanium and non-depleted uranium rounds are fine.

 

[cracked butt]

You can pretty much buy and load Barnes X-bullets in any caliber for rifle, handguns and muzzleloaders, and they are realy good bullets.

I have a feeling that the lead bullet bad is following the same tack as the federal ban on lead shot for waterfowl hunting. I've never actually heard of a duck dying of lead poisoning but the ban did make waterfowl hunting much more expensive and more frustrating so voila! in a few years, waterfowl populations start increasing as fewer people bother to go waterfowl hunting. More waterfowl have been lost crippled with steel shot than could have ever died from lead poisoning.

 

[sumpnz]

Crackedbutt - I've commented on that issue before. The problem was not so much lead poisoning of water fowl, but of the predators that feed on same. It's the same reason why methyl-mercury is a problem in tuna, swordfish, baracuda and sharks, but not in grouper, salmon, perch, and flounder. They prey do develop some level of lead in their system, but due to shorter life spans, and being lower on the food chain it often does not get high enough to warrant significant concern. But the top predators (raptors for birds, sharks/tuna for fish) are more prone to lead (or mercury) poisoning becuase they are eating a lot of mild-moderatly contaminated prey and so are subject to higher cumulative exposure. WRT to the lead vs steel shot for waterfowl hunting, the idea was not to save ducks from lead exposure but to save falcons/hawks/eagles from exposure via their prey. The fact that it made hunting less desirable to some I'm sure was a (welcome) by-product than a desired outcome from the stand-point of the greenies.

 

[CGofMP]

A coalition of environmentalists, American Indians and hunters ...

Good grief.... I guess I left a group off...
Whichever 'hunters' do not use a rifle, shotgun, or handgun, please raise your hands....

 

[Ivy Mike]

just make the bullets out of old brake pads.
Fairly heavy and in plentiful supply. FInd the ones that use organic compunds and the EPA won't be able to say squat.

They might have a problem with introducing more asbestos (from OLD pads) into the wild, but its not like they didn't litter cities with it 20 years ago.