California is at it again!

Originally Posted By: Tbone-AZi hate to point this out. But isn't lead a natural element?

It's not like we make it out of thin air. It's been here on the planet and despite their best efforts, liberals will have to understand that it's not going away.

Maybe... Just maybe.. The condor is eating something that is getting lead from other sources that are not bullets.

maybe mice or something.. Who knows.

There is no hunting in and around the Grand Canyon.. So if the Condors have it in their system.. Then how did they get it? I have seen that picture.. And don't buy the X-ray.. I want to see more than one, it's really not that much of a stretch to think they would doctor something, or find one, that makes their point, and then say they are all like that.

Exactly, we are just recycling a "natural" element. So they are getting in the way of a recycling program, how un-Libocrat of them.
 
I think what was funny was, when the libs were banning lead bullets there really wasn't anything else. I don't think they figured that someone would figure out a way to get around lead.. Like Barnes.. Next they will tell us that tungsten and other things are bad.

Personally i find it really hard to follow that logic.. Biologist have stated that game killed by hunters isn't even top 4 for animal control.. Then most of the bullets we use for game hunting, where there would be a gut pile, talk about how they are more than 85% bullet weight rention.
A big nasty bird flies in, and eats a gut pile. That mind you is about the size of a 35 gallon trash can.. And somehow wades through all of that and eats the bullets, or the less than 15% lost lead that was in that gut pile..

Putting all of that into motion.. I have shot a lot of elk over the years... I don't shoot them in the gut.. second.. I almost always find the bullet in the far side just inside the pelt or lodged into the far side shoulder or some other bone. So are they saying that these Condors are chewing on the bones too?
Talk about finding the needle in a haystack and then eating it.
 
I cast a lot of bullets for my airguns and I poured a couple 95/5 solder bullets today for the 45 cal they shot but were real fast due to they were supper light not sure about accuracy yet I just wanted to see if my gun could push them because they are so dang hard.
 
I shot a deer in CA this week... with a LEAD bullet!
ohmy.gif
But none of the lead was in the guts because I didn't hit the guts! Neck shot.
smile.gif
The lead bullet I used claims 90% + retention and it exited the far side of the deer anyways striking the hill behind the deer.

Plus there aren't any condors around here, but what does that matter?

But like I said, it was never about the lead. It's always been about control.
 
Originally Posted By: elkhunter2002Originally Posted By: DiRTY DOGIt is not about condors, never was. It's about banning guns and ammo, one step at a time until they get it all banned.

The figured out it's easier to take away the ammo than it is to take away the guns. Lead bans, micro stamping, restricted ammo sales, $0.05 ammo tax per round, mail order ammo ban, ammo purchaseswith background checks and thru FFLs only, magazine restrictions, etc, etc.

Death by a thousand cuts.

Amen DiRTY DOG, you hit the nail on the head, Don't fold into these liberal so called scientist that say lead is so evil. These folks have an agenda. Just one stop closer to stopping all hunting and shooting.


This is the real agenda folks. I used to live in Pasadena and had to listen to all of the liberal BS every day. But there are conservatives and pro-shooting guys, even in La La Land. Band together, get organized and tell Sacramento "No!!!" If you keep voting in these idiots, you will continue to get more of the same. It is sad to see the home of Ronald Reagan doing things like this. And for the rest of us, if California does it, it could be in your state next. Beware.

Irish
 
I think that it is interesting, that you folks think that your vote still counts.
rolleyes.gif


You know what Joe Stalin said, "It doesn't matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes."
 
Not to be Debbie Downer here but let’ be honest. California is lost for the foreseeable future. Cali has also infected Colorado they might not be lost yet but they have a long up hill road. The Cancer that is California liberalism will continue to spread as people leave Cali due to the [beeep] sandwich is has and will continue to become, they then try and turn the place they just moved to in to Cali.
 
Originally Posted By: 4eyesI think that it is interesting, that you folks think that your vote still counts.
rolleyes.gif



Well let's see. There's me, there's my wife, there's my friends and their friends, there's a whole bunch of pissed off district 3 voters, and there's two FORMER Colorado senators that damm sure think our vote still counts.

Actually kinda sad that you don't.
rolleyes.gif
 
It's not only California that has the liberal problem. It is a nationwide epidemic. Our children are being indoctrinated into the liberal agenda in their public schools. From grade school thru college they are taught by liberal anti constitutional teachers and professors. This nation doesn't stand a chance. By one more generation it's pretty much over for the US as we know it. Between the education system, single party government, and the welfare parasites I think we as red blooded constitutional loving hunters are all in the minority.
 
I agree.
frown.gif


Don't get me wrong, I still vote every chance I get, and write letters to my "representatives". I just don't have a lot of faith in the system any more.
unsure.gif
 
Condors? really?!?

Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending — if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained — we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me,give me liberty or give me death
 
Don't settle for any thing less than lead. If you give in and buy anything else, You might as well throw away your rights with it. Lead bullets have been around a long time and are just now causing a problem. ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!! That's a good one.
 
It seems that many states have, in the recent couple of decades, been infected with higher degrees of Liberalism...While most of it comes from the migration of people from California, it's also from other sources as well...

Corporations are fueling the support with dollars to the Sierra Club and other environmentalist groups as influential leaders are graduating from the Liberal bastions of our academic communities and achieving power status within them..

Educational systems are turning out peer groups that are anti-firearm and subjected to rewritten history and political policies..Looking through some of the current history books from the Middle School grades that my grandkids have brought home, many areas of incidents that caused me to consider the participants as heros to our country have been either omitted or cast in a somewhat negative light..

The Liberals have been successful in removing the tenants of religious responsibility and are now promoting 'Free Will' without consequences for action..Much of current society has no moral anchor...
 
This is how it works in a liberal mind - the appearance that lead causes an issue is all that's needed, not the actual facts. This is where the Marxist idea of controlling the schools and the media wins big - make it appear so for the bigger agenda. The bigger agenda is: 1. create ways to restrict shooting by the public, 2. in time, restricted shooting leads to less shooting (theoretically), 3. less shooting leads to less desire to shoot (esp. if introduced slowly), and less practiced shooters in the public, 4. less practiced shooters leads to less effective mental and physical resistance to any Marxist movement to control in the big scale. Also leads to less dead animals by humans, which is a BIG no-no in liberal minds - they can die anyway they will except at the hands of a human. If all the elk in the West were killed by wolves, it is better in their minds than one being killed by a human.

When non-lead alternatives are 4x the cost of lead bullets, guess what happens. Look at non-toxic shotgun ammo - phasing out cuz it's not selling due to high cost. Hunters are choosing closer-range steel loads or nothing due to cost. Less effective killing is the result, and that means more birds alive = liberal bliss. Don't get me wrong, there are problems with lead contamination in areas - just look around old shooting ranges. We have some here with dead spots in fields and woods where nothing, or little grows due to lead contamination - to try to reason otherwise is idiocy. Lead is a toxin to life forms in high enough doses, and it is a heavy metal that does not like to leave live animal bodies once it gets there. Lead also happens to be a good performer as a jacketed bullet base, and is plentiful enough on Earth so as to be inexpensive, relatively speaking.
 
Quote:Union leaders opposing Calif. bill to ban lead bullets for hunters

Published September 23, 2013 • FoxNews.com
Several unions have joined in opposition to a California bill that would stop hunters from using lead bullets, and have asked Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown not to sign the legislation.

The Democratic-led Legislature passed the bill earlier this month, based in part on studies that appear to show animals ingest lead fragments found in the soil and the dead prey they eat, which can contaminate the human food supply.

Critics say the studies have not made that clear link between the bullets and the food, and that retooling guns and switching to bullets made of copper or other metals will be an expensive job-killer for firearms and ammunition makers.

The group Californians for Conservation has released a list of nine union leaders and labor groups that think the measure is a bad idea, according to The Los Angeles Times.

Among them are the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers District Lodge 190 and the Contra Costa Central Labor Council.

"Approximately 65% of all union households participate in hunting, fishing, or outdoor activities," said Mark Gagliardi, an official with the Office and Professional Employees International Union Local 277 in Fort Worth, Texas, according to The Times.

Whether Brown will sign the bill remains unclear. If he does not act before Oct. 13, the bill becomes law without his signature.

Evan Westrup, a spokesman for the governor, last week told FoxNew.com: “The Governor has not yet taken a stance on this bill.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/09/...ts-for-hunters/

Regards
hm
 
Back
Top