EPA Surrenders to NRA on Gun Control Issue

[The Northerner]

In a swift and unexpected decision, the Environmental Protection Agency today rejected a petition from environmental groups to ban the use of lead in bullets and shotgun shells, claiming it doesn't have jurisdiction to weigh on the controversial Second Amendment issue. The decision came just hours after the Drudge Report posted stories from Washington Whispers and the Weekly Standard about how gun groups were fighting the lead bullet ban.
Click here to find out more!

The EPA had planned to solicit public responses to the petition for two months, but this afternoon issued a statement rejecting a 100-page request from the Center for Biological Diversity, the American Bird Conservancy, and three other groups for a ban on lead bullets, shot, and fishing sinkers. The agency is still considering what to do about sinkers.

The decision was a huge victory for the National Rifle Association which just seven days ago asked that the EPA reject the petition, suggesting that it was a back door attempt to limit hunting and impose gun control. It also was a politically savvy move to take gun control off the table as the Democrats ready for a very difficult midterm election.

The NRA has spent two years tracking down rumors that the Obama administration wants to impose gun and ammo bans on the public, but hasn't found anything credible. While the lead ban was viewed initially as a substantial chance for the administration to move into challenging the Second Amendment, the swift rejection by the EPA settled concerns inside NRA headquarters today.

Read more: http://politics.usnews.com/news/washington-whispers/articles/2010/08/27/epa-surrenders-to-nra-on-gun-control-issue-epa-rejects-attempt-to-regulate-lead-in-bullets-after-nra-protests.html

[old mark]

1. Good. Federal "gun control" efforts and "bans" were just empty politicking

and never did have any effect on the crime rate, just made some pols think they looked good.

mark

[Hestia]

2. This is about lead in ammo, not a 2nd admendment issue, dems cave to TPTB again

[Hoopla Phil]

6. This is a back door attempt to make ammunition too expensive

for people to enjoy shooting sports. It is also why ammunition is expressly exempted from EPA regulation authority.

[KansasVoter]

8. LOL...the gun forum shows up

[Hoopla Phil]

9. LOL and now the snarky remarks start. It is all that some people have.

So when is that CHL class you are going to take?

[tourivers83]

12. Here we are. And I don’t even have a penis.

I was born without one.:pals: :rofl:

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hoopla Phil]

18. 20 Million? Can yo please source that claim? Thanks

[AnArmyVeteran]

20. I just heard of that figure yesterday and I'll send you a link when I find it.

I forgot to add. Considering the hundreds of millions (billions) of spent bullets scattered throughout nature I can easily see that the 20 million figure is correct, or maybe even low. But I'll provide a link but I'm going to bed.

[Callisto32]

26. Because there are billions of people, I can easily see that there isn't enough room for us all...

Proof or GTFO.

I'm not even saying that you aren't right, just that that is a heck of a claim you just made...

[Hoopla Phil]

35. So, did you find that source for 20 million animals dieing each year do

to lead poisoning from bullets?

[X_Digger]

36. I think we can add that one to..

.. the plans for the engine that runs on nothing but water, or
.. the police report for the AK-totin man, or
.. the retail store with FFL where you can legally buy $100 guns without paperwork.

[Hoopla Phil]

37. Don't forget the multiple shooting event that turned out to be a knifing attack.

But I suspect you are correct.

[X_Digger]

38. Can't forget that one (knife transmutes into gun)! n/t

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

22. Please define "lead poisoning from bullets"... what does that 20,000,000 include?

I'd imagine 55-230gr doses of lead from bullets would kill just about any animals.
That's about the only way I see the 20,000,000 being possible.

[pipoman]

23. -snick-

Oooo.Oooo..two hundreds 50 brazillians animalz eatz da lead an diez every hour of every day!!1!11!!1

If you don't post a link from a credible source..well..the rest of your post isn't worth reading..

[backwoodsbob]

31. lets see...in how many ways are you wrong?

no link to that 20,000,000 yet.
i deer hunt but have NEVER baited and don't use a stand.I stay ground level...and my trusty .30-06 didn't cost 2,500.I got it used for 300 including scope
I have never publicly wished the deaths of tens of millions of people...like you just did.

[X_Digger]

32. Only 20% of gun owners hunt

Yet in 2009, 440 million dollars were collected in excise taxes on guns and ammunition alone*. In 2007, $560M was collected in licenses and stamps. You wouldn't have a place to camp with your kids if it weren't for all those hunters and their licenses and fees.


http://www.opposingviews.com/i/guns-and-ammo-excise-taxes-up-27-percent-in-2009

[virginia mountainman]

13. Not according to the OP, and the news writer...

They BOTH said it was a "Gun control issue"...

[krispos42]

21. If the federal government...

...declared that all newspaper ink had to be made from, say, llama fat, and could not be made from anything else (petroleum, soy, etc.) than that would be a de facto ban on newspapers and thus free speech.

Same thing here. Lead is by far the cheapest and easiest thing to make bullets out of. It's dense, corrosion-resistant, has a low melting point, is easily worked at room temperature, and bonds readily to reinforcing metals such as copper or brass.

There are alternatives, but they are either vastly more expensive (and would skyrocket if this became law) or would run afoul of other federal laws.

Tungsten is much denser than lead, but also has a super-high melting point and is very hard... not at all suitable to be formed into a bullet. Tungsten is used in premium shotgun shells )e.g., Hevi-Shot) and it works quite well, but it's expensive!

Steel could work for bullets... it's what the former Soviet bloc did for ammo for their AK-47s. Bullets made out of low-quality, soft steel then coated with a thin layer of copper. But I think they would then run afoul of federal regulations, which would consider them "armor-piercing ammuntion" and not for sale to civilians. Steel can also work for shotshells, but because it is a lot less dense than lead you need to increase the size of the shot you are using. And when you increase the size of the shot, you lose pellet count... unless you have a larger capacity in the shotshell. In other words, you need a larger payload volume to shoot the same number of larger but same-weight pellets.

Copper would work for bullets; in fact, there are many big-game bullets that are made from pure copper. However, it is expensive. And would become even more so if you forced people to begin loading up shotgun shells with them. Each blast of a shotgun discharges an ounce or more, so a clay shooter can easily discharge several pounds of copper an hour!

[Callisto32]

27. Another consideration.

Lead is also the best idea because it is plentiful. Tungsten and copperfor example, are both suitable, chemically, to make bullets from, though copper's lower mass does require pretty long bullets... They are also valuable because they have other uses. So does lead, of course, but I can hear it now if lead ammo was banned. "WE CAN'T LET PEOPLE HAVE AMMUNITION, THAT TUNGSTEN IS TOO VALUABLE IN OTHER APPLICATIONS!"

[krispos42]

34. Basiclly, yeah.

The prices for tungsten and copper would skyrocket. Admitedly, we're using less tungsten now thanks to the widespread use of fluorescent lightbulbs instead of the old tungsten-filament ones, but I doubt very much that counts for a lot in terms of replacing lead ammunition.

[tritsofme]

3. Surrenders? More like declines to take action that is outside of it's jurisdiction.

Ah, that sounds more truthful.

[AnArmyVeteran]

15. It's an environmental issue. Lead bullets kill 20,000 animals a year.

Since the EPA is the 'Environmental' Protection Agency what other agency would have jurisdiction over chemicals/products polluting our lands with lead that is toxic to animals? An estimated 20,000,000 animals die from lead poisoning every year due to lead poisoning. Surrender sounds like the more appropriate term to me.

[Hoopla Phil]

17. It's a matter of law. The EPA is expressly forbidden by law from regulating ammunition.

This poster did the research and posted it here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x336462#336478

Can you please site the 20,000 animals killed per year?

Thank you.

[Kali]

19. pretty sure

that's how they do it during deer season around here - lead bullets.;-)

[pipoman]

24. Which is it?

20,000 or 20,000,000? I don't believe you can post a credible source for either number but 3 zeros is a significant difference.

[PavePusher]

25. Three orders of magnitude...

is a pretty significant typo at best.

At worst, it certainly suggests mendacity. Hopefully the poster will provide a cite Sunday, as claimed.

[backwoodsbob]

33. is it 20,000 or 20,000,000

provide a link please

[bluestateguy]

4. I think that's fantastic.

I fundamentally reject so called "gun control" and applaud the Obama Administration for standing up for our 2nd Amendment rights.

[proteus_lives]

7. +1000

[virginia mountainman]

16. Hear Hear!!!!

:toast:

[ManiacJoe]

5. Really bad title on that opinion piece.

The correct title should be "EPA Surrenders to Federal Law on Gun Control Issue".

The Gun forum has some good threads on this.

[Imajika]

11. The EPA followed the law...

They have no jurisdiction over ammo. This back door effort to jack up the cost of bullets failed. The gun grabbers have completely lost this debate. Gun control is dead, please let it go.

[virginia mountainman]

14. Gun Control?? I thought it was about lead in the environment..

"EPA Surrenders to NRA on Gun Control Issue"

I thought it was about lead in the environment, NOT gun control??? Does this writer HOPE that the EPA ignores law? All this sort of thing does is prove that to some, it really is "any means necessary" to advance the failed policies of gun control advocates??

I don't think it matters at this point, this "Obama's EPA bullet ban" is ALL OVER the internet and news channels...

Much political damage is already done... This is how, an idiot, with an axe to grind, makes a "hail Mary" pass at banning something they "don't like" it don't have a prayer of passing, but they MUST TRY... Ends up being a huge "friendly fire" incident, upon Democrats who are doing their best to cling on to their seats in swing districts. The last thing they need to be doing right now is trying to convince "shaky supporters" is that "obama is not trying to ban bullets"....

[shadowrider]

28. Thanks. You provided me with my morning chuckle n/t

[old mark]

29. This was all about gun control by any means - if the anti's can't do it

legally - and it seems they can't,they will try by lies and diversions.

They are fundamentally dishonest fascistic people.

mark

[shadowrider]

30. And I'm willing to bet your paycheck

Had this not gone viral and remained a backdoor deal, secretly, some sort of ban, to one degree or another, would have occurred.