Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 39

Thread: Court ruling against lead opposition

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,121

    Default Court ruling against lead opposition


  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    515

    Default

    ​Now if we could just get back to lead shot for migratory birds, ie ducks and geese.

  3. #3
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,888

    Default

    That is great news!

    Though according to some forum members you can't trust what you read on fox (faux)news.
    Also did you not know that endangered Alaskan condors injest lead in dead animals and are now facing extinction?
    You need to find it on a more credibal unbiased news source such as MSNBC.
    All kidding aside that is great news!
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

  4. #4
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,219

    Default

    http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/421BCEB1FE2C191285257DB70054D62E/$file/13-5228-1528839.pdf
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  5. #5
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Well this tidbit is very interesting . . .

    "The Toxic Substances Control Act exempts cartridges and shells from regulation"
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  6. #6
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ADfields View Post
    Well this tidbit is very interesting . . .

    "The Toxic Substances Control Act exempts cartridges and shells from regulation"
    Well, it's incorrect and misleading to state that it "exempts" them; the fact is that it doesn't have anything to do with them one way or another. The TSCA <LINK> is pretty specific in scope, and it only really deals with lead in the context of lead based paint.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKBEE View Post
    I know it sounds encouraging, but when you consider what else was said in the article, (See Below) it doesn't mean much. **************************************************
    "Lead is a carcinogen with significant health effects on people. EPA banned lead-based paint and lead-based paint products in 1978.

    In 1991, the government adopted a nationwide ban on lead shot in migratory waterfowl hunting after biologists estimated 2 million ducks died each year from ingesting spent lead pellets."

    ************************************************** ***********
    OK, so it's delayed right now, but the "Premise" for doing it is STILL THERE. And, it ain't goin away as long as Junk Science prevails.

    (2 Million Ducks??? How many ducks are killed by hunters each year?)

    SOTN
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Well, it's incorrect and misleading to state that it "exempts" them; the fact is that it doesn't have anything to do with them one way or another. The TSCA <LINK> is pretty specific in scope, and it only really deals with lead in the context of lead based paint.
    Yeah right, no-one is interested in banning lead for bullets, and sinkers for fishing.

    No-one had, or will have, reason to believe that the EPA wants and will one day regulate/ban lead bullets.

    It's all just a huge misunderstanding. Thanks for setting us straight. AS USUAL.

    You are soooo predictable.

    SOTN
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  9. #9
    Member GrassLakeRon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Grass Lake Michigan
    Posts
    1,978

    Default

    Ok, but the last major lead plant has shut down. So they are exempt, but no lead production means ship from overseas or no lead bullets. Ruling or not....
    "Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure science"

    Edwin Hubble

  10. #10
    Premium Member kasilofchrisn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Central Kenai Peninsula
    Posts
    4,888

    Default

    I believe this passed. Thats why the judge ruled the way he did. Hopefully this holds them off for awhile on our lead ammo.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/congre...110000868.html

    Bullets
    When House Republican leadership held a press conference Wednesday morning, Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) could have chosen any number of elements of the omnibus to highlight. He opted for a provision preventing the Environmental Protection Agency from passing any rule “to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition components, or fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act.” He said the threat of such a rule had made it so hard to buy ammo that people can’t even find it at Walmart.
    "The closer I get to nature the farther I am from idiots"

    "Fishing and Hunting are only an addiction if you're trying to quit"

  11. #11
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    Yeah right, no-one is interested in banning lead for bullets, and sinkers for fishing.

    No-one had, or will have, reason to believe that the EPA wants and will one day regulate/ban lead bullets.

    It's all just a huge misunderstanding. Thanks for setting us straight. AS USUAL.

    You are soooo predictable.

    SOTN
    As are the likes of you, Smitty. Predictable, in your attempts at spin doctoring, putting words in others mouths, and reading things which aren't there. I did not state, nor imply that "no-one is interested in banning lead for bullets". I'm sure those people are out there, somewhere; maybe you're even one of them, who knows? One thing's prety sure tho, and that is the fact that no one is going use the TSCA to ban ammunition. At least not without changing it first. As far as the EPA goes, in the case in question here, they were arguing against the proposal that ammunition based lead could/should be regulated under the TSCA, and your beloved NRA was siding with them. I'm quite sure you're smart enough to know that was the case, so why the attempt to spin my post?
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  12. #12
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kasilofchrisn View Post
    I believe this passed. Thats why the judge ruled the way he did. Hopefully this holds them off for awhile on our lead ammo.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/congre...110000868.html

    Bullets
    When House Republican leadership held a press conference Wednesday morning, Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) could have chosen any number of elements of the omnibus to highlight. He opted for a provision preventing the Environmental Protection Agency from passing any rule “to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition components, or fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act.” He said the threat of such a rule had made it so hard to buy ammo that people can’t even find it at Walmart.
    Again, Chris, this is feel-good Republican smoke and mirrors, without the smoke. The TSCA can't be used to ban lead based ammunition, the EPA wasn't attempting to (some environmental groups were proposing that they should, the EPA argued, correctly, that they shouldn't/couldn't); thus, the Repubs passing a (non-)funding bill "preventing" the EPA from doing something they weren't attempting to do in the first place is ridiculous on its face. And if you truly believe your statement "Thats why the judge ruled the way he did.", then you truly are gullible. The judges (there were three of them) ruled the way they did because of this wording in the TSCA:
    (v) any article the sale of which is subject to the tax im-
    posed by section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954
    (determined without regard to any exemptions from such tax
    provided by section 4182 or 4221 or any other provision of such
    Code), and

    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  13. #13
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Well, it's incorrect and misleading to state that it "exempts" them; the fact is that it doesn't have anything to do with them one way or another. The TSCA <LINK> is pretty specific in scope, and it only really deals with lead in the context of lead based paint.
    From the first URL you posted.
    Opinion for the Court filed by
    Circuit Judge TATEL.

    "EPA went on to explain that, even were it to consider the petition, it would deny it on the merits because another provision of TSCA, section 3(2)(B)(v), exempts cartridges and shells from the definition of "chemical substance."
    SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
    (2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the term ‘‘chemical
    substance’’ means any organic or inorganic substance of a particular
    molecular identity, including—



    (v) any article the sale of which is subject to the tax imposed
    by section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954
    (determined without regard to any exemptions from such tax
    provided by section 4182 or 4221 or any other provision of such
    Code), and



    looks to me like ammunition is exempt just as stated.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  14. #14
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ADfields View Post
    From the first URL you posted.
    Opinion for the Court filed by
    Circuit Judge TATEL.

    "EPA went on to explain that, even were it to consider the petition, it would deny it on the merits because another provision of TSCA, section 3(2)(B)(v), exempts cartridges and shells from the definition of "chemical substance."
    SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
    (2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the term ‘‘chemical
    substance’’ means any organic or inorganic substance of a particular
    molecular identity, including—



    (v) any article the sale of which is subject to the tax imposed
    by section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954
    (determined without regard to any exemptions from such tax
    provided by section 4182 or 4221 or any other provision of such
    Code), and



    looks to me like ammunition is exempt just as stated.
    Here is section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code

    26 U.S. Code § 4181 - Imposition of tax
    There is hereby imposed upon the sale by the manufacturer, producer, or importer of the following articles a tax equivalent to the specified percent of the price for which so sold:
    Pistols.
    Revolvers.
    Firearms (other than pistols and revolvers).
    Shells, and cartridges.

    Plain as day these things are 100% exempt from the TSCA just as was stated!
    It isn't as you say "incorrect and misleading to state that it "exempts" them" as it in full fact does exempt them.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  15. #15
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ADfields View Post
    ...looks to me like ammunition is exempt just as stated.
    Yes, so are any number of other things. It would have been more correct of me to say it doesn't specifically exempt them... Nowhere in the act does it use the words "ammunition, bullets, cartridge, shells, shot", etc., let alone lead sinkers, or anything else of the sort. But they are, in fact, exempt, by virtue of the fact they fall into the category of items as described in 3(2)(B)(v). As I said, the act is pretty narrow in focus; it pretty much only deals with lead in the context of lead based paint. It was foolish of the environmental groups to think they could stretch the defined scope of the TSCA to include ammunition, and correct for the EPA to take the stance that it should remaining within the scope of its regulatory mandate. Kind of entertaining to watch a case in which the NRA testifies alongside the EPA, eh?
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    As are the likes of you, Smitty. Predictable, in your attempts at spin doctoring, putting words in others mouths, and reading things which aren't there. I did not state, nor imply that "no-one is interested in banning lead for bullets". I'm sure those people are out there, somewhere; maybe you're even one of them, who knows? One thing's prety sure tho, and that is the fact that no one is going use the TSCA to ban ammunition. At least not without changing it first. As far as the EPA goes, in the case in question here, they were arguing against the proposal that ammunition based lead could/should be regulated under the TSCA, and your beloved NRA was siding with them. I'm quite sure you're smart enough to know that was the case, so why the attempt to spin my post?
    IO:
    I really tried to remain silent on this.

    There was no attempt to spin your post.

    I was simply complaining about how you so often "attempt" to make light of any threat or perceived threat, to restrict our right and ability to own and enjoy firearms.

    A high percentage of your posts consist of that sort of thing.

    Was there no such effort, by these "environmentalists"? Then, what was the lawsuit about and the ruling?

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SwampView AK, Overlooking Mt. Mckinley and Points Beyond.
    Posts
    8,816

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    It was foolish of the environmental groups to think they could stretch the defined scope of the TSCA to include ammunition, and correct for the EPA to take the stance that it should remaining within the scope of its regulatory mandate.
    But they DID, didn't they? and, they might have succeeded, as they have in other so-called environmental cases. I've no doubt, given your mindset, you would have approved.



    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Kind of entertaining to watch a case in which the NRA testifies alongside the EPA, eh?
    It's not entertaining, but maybe interesting as to why the EPA would start telling the truth NOW.
    The IRS hasn't, nor has the State Department, or the Current Admistration?

    Smitty of the North
    Walk Slow, and Drink a Lotta Water.
    Has it ever occurred to you, that Nothing ever occurs to God? Adrien Rodgers.
    You can't out-give God.

  18. #18
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty of the North View Post
    I was simply complaining about how you so often "attempt" to make light of any threat or perceived threat, to restrict our right and ability to own and enjoy firearms. A high percentage of your posts consist of that sort of thing.
    And I think your perception is just a bit skewed; I think you're seeing what you expect to see; I think you've lost objectivity. I strive to maintain objectivity on the subject and not get suckered by misinformation. I try to research for myself, find factual information, and draw my own conclusions. I make every effort not to simply believe the hysteria that's spoon fed by the fear mongers, and not to mindlessly regurgitate it verbatim. I don't see a conspiracy behind every tree. I think it does a great disservice to the cause that so many folks are so willing to abandon objectivity, get wrapped up in and perpetuate the fear mongering hysteria. If that offends you, well, that's something you'll need to contemplate upon for yourself. Merry Christmas.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  19. #19
    Member 1Cor15:19's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dillingham, AK
    Posts
    2,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    And I think your perception is just a bit skewed; I think you're seeing what you expect to see; I think you've lost objectivity. I strive to maintain objectivity on the subject and not get suckered by misinformation...
    This is an admirable goal, it's just not possible. Subjectivity isn't something you can avoid; at best, it is something that you realize in your argument and can admit to others.

    This isn't to say that some people/arguments aren't more objective than others, but that real objectivity (even helpful objectivity) is less common than unicorns........
    Foolishness is a moral category, not an intellectual one.

  20. #20
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Cor15:19 View Post
    This is an admirable goal, it's just not possible. Subjectivity isn't something you can avoid; at best, it is something that you realize in your argument and can admit to others.

    This isn't to say that some people/arguments aren't more objective than others, but that real objectivity (even helpful objectivity) is less common than unicorns........
    It should be an accepted given that there are no absolutes.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •