Lead ban

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

NOTE the military/police exemptions??? Places like Sailsbury plain,Grafenwoher in Germany and all others would be then utter health hazards to troops and cost billions to clean up,if ever...

What about the Somme, Verdun, Passchendaele, Neuve Chapelle, etc etc, from the first lot and then the second war, Sicily, Monte cassino, the battle of the bulge, the battle of Berlin and thousands of others ? Billions of spent rounds all over the place.

The British in the first world war alone fired 170 million shells, if you assume the Germans fired back roughly the same, thats 350 million shells. How many rifle and machine gun bullets were fired for every shell fired ? 10 ? 50 ? 100 ?

What the entire sports shooting population of europe fire in a decade is absolutely nothing in comparison.

Edit, the Germans fired 222 million shells in the first war.

Grizzly 45

French& Belgians reckon it will take 700 years for them to get the "Iron harvest" of ww1 out of their land. Include the nastier things like chlorine, mustard and phosgene gas shells that are there and will eventually erode and poison the land,as well as a couple of the forgotten 100 ton"trench crater" mines that could still detonate in the French countryside. Shotgun pellets and some rifle bullets from hunters seem to be a small addition.

Here's the thing,all that war junk will eventually SINK deeper into the soil, and be less harmful to the environment.in a century it is still at plough depth.Shotgun pellets do the same thing after a few years, they sink in river beds and swamps and fields. Crops arent deep rooting at all,and for how long have we been eating French and Belgian produce that have been grown on WW1 battlefields?We should be dead from lead poisioning along time ago.

Grizzly 45

Kinda a last throw of the dice this...But...

https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/meps-table-motion-to-fix-major-errors-in-lead-gunshot-ban-proposal/

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Kinda a last throw of the dice this...But...

https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/meps-table-motion-to-fix-major-errors-in-lead-gunshot-ban-proposal/

Fingers crossed, but i don't hold out much hope.

Limerick Sovereigns

Who are the members of that committee so that maybe we could lobby some of them?

Grizzly 45

Limerick Sovereigns wrote: »

Who are the members of that committee so that maybe we could lobby some of them?

Here ya go.:) One email,CC'd to all by every shooter here by 5pm would be effective.:)
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/envi/home/members

tudderone

What time is the vote ?

Limerick Sovereigns

Ammendment was defeated 41 to 33 with 4 abstentions.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/214593/2020-10-29%20roll-call-votes.pdf

If you scroll down to vote number 4 you can see who voted for and against. The 2 Irish members Wallace and O'Sullivan voted against the amendment. No surprize there I suppose.

I think the vote was closer than I expected so event though its a defeat, it gives some hope that there is enough opposition growing that we might get changes implemented later in the process.

tudderone

Limerick Sovereigns wrote: »

Ammendment was defeated 41 to 33 with 4 abstentions.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/214593/2020-10-29%20roll-call-votes.pdf

If you scroll down to vote number 4 you can see who voted for and against. The 2 Irish members Wallace and O'Sullivan voted against the amendment. No surprize there I suppose.

I think the vote was closer than I expected so event though its a defeat, it gives some hope that there is enough opposition growing that we might get changes implemented later in the process.

Goodbye lead shot, hello crappy steel shotshells and expensive bismuth etc.

Grizzly 45

Greens and Lefties again.

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Greens and Lefties again.

All well meaning and good intentions, and fcuking things up, because none of these daft laws they bring in do a damned thing.

meathstevie

tudderone wrote: »

All well meaning and good intentions, and fcuking things up, because none of these daft laws they bring in do a damned thing.

Nothing well meaning about them, the people who openly talk about restricting rural villages to a ludicrous car pooling system and inadequate public transport, vilify agriculture and farming, want to end most if not all country pursuits have nothing well meaning in mind. What they want is everyone to conform to their woke, which coincidentally rhymes with boke, politically correct and sterile utopia. Four legs good, two legs better and big brother is watching you, well meaning my a r s e.

tudderone

meathstevie wrote: »

Nothing well meaning about them, the people who openly talk about restricting rural villages to a ludicrous car pooling system and inadequate public transport, vilify agriculture and farming, want to end most if not all country pursuits have nothing well meaning in mind. What they want is everyone to conform to their woke, which coincidentally rhymes with boke, politically correct and sterile utopia. Four legs good, two legs better and big brother is watching you, well meaning my a r s e.

I have to agree, its blind faith in an ideology (being green) that doesn't work in the real world. There are more holes in the green thing than a fishing net, but they follow it all the same. There is a green nazi in my nieces school, he's a teacher. Some of the pure bilge he spouts is worring. How can a grown supposidly educated man believe such tripe ?

A lot of people profess to being greenies, so long as they can have their 4 litre Audi/ Range rover suvs to one up the neighbours in.

meathstevie

tudderone wrote: »

I have to agree, its blind faith in an ideology (being green) that doesn't work in the real world. There are more holes in the green thing than a fishing net, but they follow it all the same. There is a green nazi in my nieces school, he's a teacher. Some of the pure bilge he spouts is worring. How can a grown supposidly educated man believe such tripe ?

A lot of people profess to being greenies, so long as they can have their 4 litre Audi/ Range rover suvs to one up the neighbours in.

“Green” can work, just like social democracy can work and communism can’t. The fundamentalist fringe is a road to damnation.

We collectively need to use less resources and use the ones we have far more considerately and we need to pollute less, the only other alternative is the human population needs to shrink ( e.g. China’s one child policy ). How do we do it is the big question.

In the case of Ireland would it for example not be a wise move to acquire a sizeable nuclear power plant that could supply electricity with a margin for growth for the next few decades to reduce fossil fuel usage.

We’re in a geologically very stable location ( no Fukushima’s ) and have quite a few disused mines where waste can be stored deep and below ground water levels.

Does Europe for example need to completely change over to electrical vehicles or should we do this in conjunction with continued use of hyper frugal combustion engines.

My old diesel Skoda for example does about 4,5 to 5l per 100k on a 140k commute.

With weight reduction and enhanced engine performance I’m quite sure this can be pushed down to about 3l in newer cars unless we keep stuffing cars full of energy consuming and weight increasing gadgets and gizmos that contribute nothing to the functionality of a car.

Do we for example revert back to glass bottles rather than plastics and should we reinvent the old paper wrapping from the days of old for meat and cheese ?

TrimeTime

Would something like this effect someone who is only now taking on learning how to shoot and obtaining a firearm license in coming months?

I planned on buying a 22LR calibre rifle.

Also all of Ireland isn't Wetlands so they'd hardly ban lead rifle use from Irish market entirely.

meathstevie

TrimeTime wrote: »

Would something like this effect someone who is only now taking on learning how to shoot and obtaining a firearm license in coming months?

I planned on buying a 22LR calibre rifle.

Also all of Ireland isn't Wetlands so they'd hardly ban lead rifle use from Irish market entirely.

Have a look at the definition of a “wetland” that is being used. Hardly any part of Ireland isn’t covered by it.

Fastnet50

I do not think rifle bullets come under the wetlands umbrella as the main objection they believe is that water birds can ingest the small leadshot as it is similar to grit. I think you would be fine with your .22 rifle. I also hope that the definition of wetlands is deemed to mean that and not some rain puddle in a ditch somewhere and that leadshot can still be used for all other game and vermin shooting. So tired of this constant pressure and restrictions being applied to our sport.

tudderone

Fastnet50 wrote: »

I do not think rifle bullets come under the wetlands umbrella as the main objection they believe is that water birds can ingest the small leadshot as it is similar to grit. I think you would be fine with your .22 rifle. I also hope that the definition of wetlands is deemed to mean that and not some rain puddle in a ditch somewhere and that leadshot can still be used for all other game and vermin shooting. So tired of this constant pressure and restrictions being applied to our sport.

You need to read up, it does mean that. Wetland is land with water on it, so puddles = wetland. In addition i know of clay layouts on boggy wet ground thats useless for agriculture, they are going to be in trouble now too.

Fastnet50

I have read it up and I was talking about lead rifle ammo which is not mentioned under wetlands. Let us see what comes out in the wash regarding leadshot and so called wetlands?

Grizzly 45

Fastnet50 wrote: »

I do not think rifle bullets come under the wetlands umbrella as the main objection they believe is that water birds can ingest the small leadshot as it is similar to grit. I think you would be fine with your .22 rifle. I also hope that the definition of wetlands is deemed to mean that and not some rain puddle in a ditch somewhere and that leadshot can still be used for all other game and vermin shooting. So tired of this constant pressure and restrictions being applied to our sport.

You need to read the thread,you will find that ALL your points are answered with a resounding YES from the EU Soviet.
YES, they will go after rifle ammo and ranges next.:mad: After that muzzleloading ammo and bullet casting

YES they HAVE declared now that even a puddle of rainwater like what we have had yesterday all over Ireland is now a "wetland".We tried to get this changed to a more rational definition. Our two wasters Grace O Sullivan {Green] and Mick Wallace[gob****e] voted against this:mad:

YES now a primary EU human right of "burden of proof" that you weren't intending to use the lead shot on a wetland has now fallen on YOU.

YES you can still use the lead ammo for the clays and vermin.PROVIDED you are not hunting on a new "Wet land" by their crazy definition.
guess where most of our clay ranges,and rifle ranges are built???:mad:

Fastnet50

The case against rifle ammo is not very strong and is based on meat pollution caused by h/v ammo disintegrating and splashing on impact and therefore making its way to the human and animal food chain. The case for target ranges are less strong as most bullets can be caught in bullet catchers and recycled. I know you already know all this already and I have no doubt they will keep at this campaign to ban lead in ammo completely. However I think they have a huge way to go to have this implemented as firstly they have no alternative to lead for most small caliber bullets. I also feel that we should not try to discourage younger shooters from entering the sport by complete negative posting. If and when they come up with a suitable alternative to rifle ammo I have no doubt they will switch to that but until then I do not think they will. Appreciate your thoughts .

meathstevie

Fastnet50 wrote: »

The case against rifle ammo is not very strong and is based on meat pollution caused by h/v ammo disintegrating and splashing on impact and therefore making its way to the human and animal food chain. The case for target ranges are less strong as most bullets can be caught in bullet catchers and recycled. I know you already know all this already and I have no doubt they will keep at this campaign to ban lead in ammo completely. However I think they have a huge way to go to have this implemented as firstly they have no alternative to lead for most small caliber bullets. I also feel that we should not try to discourage younger shooters from entering the sport by complete negative posting. If and when they come up with a suitable alternative to rifle ammo I have no doubt they will switch to that but until then I do not think they will. Appreciate your thoughts .

Science and fact has nothing to do with it. They want lead ammunition gone, rifle, shotgun all the same. The only place in Ireland not covered by that ban will be an indoor range.

tudderone

Fastnet50 wrote: »

The case against rifle ammo is not very strong and is based on meat pollution caused by h/v ammo disintegrating and splashing on impact and therefore making its way to the human and animal food chain. The case for target ranges are less strong as most bullets can be caught in bullet catchers and recycled. I know you already know all this already and I have no doubt they will keep at this campaign to ban lead in ammo completely. However I think they have a huge way to go to have this implemented as firstly they have no alternative to lead for most small caliber bullets. I also feel that we should not try to discourage younger shooters from entering the sport by complete negative posting. If and when they come up with a suitable alternative to rifle ammo I have no doubt they will switch to that but until then I do not think they will. Appreciate your thoughts .

Look at a range the size of the midlands, some job to build a bullet catcher on that ! What about the bullets that fall short ? Its not just lead shot, it IS bullets too, in the last week i posted a video of a Swiss range closed because of lead bullets could not be recovered, i wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't the eussr pressuring them to do it.

If you look at california, they are trying now to ban indoor pistol and rifle ranges, hiding it all behind health and safety. Lead exposure and all that.

If we don't get consessions, i reckon we could be finished.

Fastnet50

I am around a long time and remember this debate about leadshot in the mid 1970s. It took them over 40yrs to get lead banned in 2020. I do not think banning all lead in ammunition will happen anytime soon but I will stand corrected.

BattleCorp

Fastnet50 wrote: »

I am around a long time and remember this debate about leadshot in the mid 1970s. It took them over 40yrs to get lead banned in 2020. I do not think banning all lead in ammunition will happen anytime soon but I will stand corrected.

If you stand corrected, it'll be too late for all of us. We will all lose out. :mad:

tudderone

Fastnet50 wrote: »

I am around a long time and remember this debate about leadshot in the mid 1970s. It took them over 40yrs to get lead banned in 2020. I do not think banning all lead in ammunition will happen anytime soon but I will stand corrected.

You think the eu have gone through all the trouble to write a bill, and get everyone to vote for it, and are then going to forget it ? With the greatest respect, i think you are deluding yourself.

Fastnet50

There has been no vote on lead in rifle or pistol ammunition, at least as yet and believe me I am not deluding myself at all. I could see this ban on leadshot over water coming years ago as could most shooters. I am trying to encourage a new shooter to buy a .22 rifle as I do not know what will happen in the future no more than the rest of you do but I am not putting an angle grinder through my firearms just yet.

tudderone

Fastnet50 wrote: »

There has been no vote on lead in rifle or pistol ammunition, at least as yet and believe me I am not deluding myself at all. I could see this ban on leadshot over water coming years ago as could most shooters. I am trying to encourage a new shooter to buy a .22 rifle as I do not know what will happen in the future no more than the rest of you do but I am not putting an angle grinder through my firearms just yet.

There was a vote on shooting lead over wetlands. If the whole island is basically classed as wetland, then where can you shoot, rifle pistol or shotgun ?

BattleCorp

Fastnet50 wrote: »

There has been no vote on lead in rifle or pistol ammunition, at least as yet and believe me I am not deluding myself at all. I could see this ban on leadshot over water coming years ago as could most shooters. I am trying to encourage a new shooter to buy a .22 rifle as I do not know what will happen in the future no more than the rest of you do but I am not putting an angle grinder through my firearms just yet.

Nobody is asking you to put an angle grinder through your firearms but there's no point denying the fact that this legislation will cause problems for shooters here.

There are several problems for us that I can see.

1. The definition of wetlands. It's quite possible that pretty much all of Ireland could be classed as a wetland.

2. If most of Ireland is classed as a wetland, they might make the decision to get rid of lead altogether, and not just in the wetlands.

3. Even if it's not contained in EU legislation, our own Government might sneak in a few extra conditions as they did with the EU magazine ban about a year ago. Mags could have been grandfathered for sporting purposes. They Irish Government didn't do that. The EU legislation had nothing in it regarding keeping ammo in locked containers but our legislation added that in.

I'm not scaremongering here but this legislation poses a real threat to shooting here.

Fastnet50

Shooting leadshot from shotguns.