Great News........I think...I hope. Ref. ammo & firearms

AGL4now

Unavailable
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
9,616
Reaction score
625
This was posted on another forum.......Maybe you'all know this, first I heard of it.....
http://itstactical.com/forum/index.php?/topic/3499-pro-gun-protections-enacted-into-law/
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Last week, Congress approved the Fiscal Year 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act. Included in the Act were a number of pro-gun provisions that prevent the Obama administration from implementing its anti-gun agenda.

This Act includes new provisions to stop the Obama administration’s efforts regarding Operation Choke Point, a program in which the Department of Justice intimidates financial institutions into refusing or severing financial services to legally-operating ammunition and firearms dealers. In addition, the Act prohibits funds for the Internal Revenue Service to target groups for scrutiny based on their political beliefs, such as the NRA.

Further, the Act contains a new provision to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency, or any other federal agency, from regulating the lead content of traditional ammunition and fishing tackle. For years, radical animal rights and environmental advocates have used all the tools at their disposal, including litigation, to attempt to ban lead ammunition. A ban on traditional ammunition would affect hunters, sportsmen, law enforcement, military, and target shooters – whether or not they hunt. There are currently no comparable alternatives to lead ammunition in terms of cost, ballistics, and availability. This provision would prevent a traditional ammunition ban and protect not just hunters, but millions of law-abiding American gun owners.

Moreover, the Act contains a provision to prevent the Department of Justice, or any government entity, from spending taxpayer dollars on “gun walking” programs like Operation Fast and Furious. The Act also prevents funds being used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the National Institute of Health to advocate or promote gun control.

Finally, the Act prevents funds from being used by the Obama administration to implement the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.


 

4merguide

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 18, 2012
Messages
12,668
Reaction score
545
Location
Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
It never ceases to amaze me when these political whack jobs try and put a strong hold on guns and ammo IN AMERICA.

How hard is it to understand that without guns and ammo, we'd probably still be speaking with a British accent......well, right up to the point where we'd be speaking German or Japanese.

Such a slap in the face to our forefathers who fought and died for our freedoms, and had the foresight to understand this "probable" threat waaaaaay back then....

This is indeed GOOD NEWS...!!!
 

Mountaintrekker

New member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
362
Reaction score
19
Location
Off the road system,AK
Where is the link to the .gov site? I'm skeptical on this one. Also, the Fed agencies are prevented from banning lead, but how about states? CA banned lead hunting ammo... I need more proof on this as it sounds like someone's Christmas wish list.
I hope it's true...

Mountaintrekker
 

.338WM

New member
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
2,021
Reaction score
109
Location
Eagle River
Where is the link to the .gov site? I'm skeptical on this one. Also, the Fed agencies are prevented from banning lead, but how about states? CA banned lead hunting ammo... I need more proof on this as it sounds like someone's Christmas wish list.
I hope it's true...

Mountaintrekker


For your reading pleasure, please let us know when you are able to confirm, or rebut the OP. https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/83/text

My head began to ache after reading through it, I quit before I could find the language to support, or rebut the OP
 

Abel

New member
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
1,455
Reaction score
40
Location
Kodiak
Where is the link to the .gov site? I'm skeptical on this one. Also, the Fed agencies are prevented from banning lead, but how about states? CA banned lead hunting ammo... I need more proof on this as it sounds like someone's Christmas wish list.
I hope it's true...

Mountaintrekker
I know NY banned sales of lead fishing weights under 1oz back in the 90's, they went to tungsten and such. Can still use lead under 1oz, but you can't buy them in the state.
 

Dakota boy

New member
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
301
Reaction score
3
This was posted on another forum.......Maybe you'all know this, first I heard of it.....
http://itstactical.com/forum/index.php?/topic/3499-pro-gun-protections-enacted-into-law/
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Last week, Congress approved the Fiscal Year 2015 Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act. Included in the Act were a number of pro-gun provisions that prevent the Obama administration from implementing its anti-gun agenda.

This Act includes new provisions to stop the Obama administration’s efforts regarding Operation Choke Point, a program in which the Department of Justice intimidates financial institutions into refusing or severing financial services to legally-operating ammunition and firearms dealers. In addition, the Act prohibits funds for the Internal Revenue Service to target groups for scrutiny based on their political beliefs, such as the NRA.

Further, the Act contains a new provision to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency, or any other federal agency, from regulating the lead content of traditional ammunition and fishing tackle. For years, radical animal rights and environmental advocates have used all the tools at their disposal, including litigation, to attempt to ban lead ammunition. A ban on traditional ammunition would affect hunters, sportsmen, law enforcement, military, and target shooters – whether or not they hunt. There are currently no comparable alternatives to lead ammunition in terms of cost, ballistics, and availability. This provision would prevent a traditional ammunition ban and protect not just hunters, but millions of law-abiding American gun owners.

Moreover, the Act contains a provision to prevent the Department of Justice, or any government entity, from spending taxpayer dollars on “gun walking” programs like Operation Fast and Furious. The Act also prevents funds being used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the National Institute of Health to advocate or promote gun control.

Finally, the Act prevents funds from being used by the Obama administration to implement the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.



Need more proof than a bunch of people on some blog. Nothing could be found on the nra website. There was a article about a bill that was sent to the house in July that included some of the above but who knows how this changed since then. So I'm very skeptical. Need proof then I'll celebrate it was my understanding the above bill was considered a loss for republicans not a win as the above provisions would make it
 

Dakota boy

New member
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Messages
301
Reaction score
3
Need more proof than a bunch of people on some blog. Nothing could be found on the nra website. There was a article about a bill that was sent to the house in July that included some of the above but who knows how this changed since then. So I'm very skeptical. Need proof then I'll celebrate it was my understanding the above bill was considered a loss for republicans not a win as the above provisions would make it

I stand corrected found that the above article is word for word of the NRA website. Time for celebration!!!!!
 

.338 mag.

New member
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
3,096
Reaction score
109
What a sorry state of affairs our nation is in when laws like this have to be passed. Our nations laws are only as good as those that defend them. Our sitting president and attorney general have agendas, so they choose what laws they will enforce, ignore and intentionally with hold the truth, and do not protect and uphold our nations constitution. Shame on our congress for allowing it. Any way, thanks for sharing the information.
 

bushrat

New member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Messages
5,704
Reaction score
713
Location
Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
I just wanted to point out that the concerns about lead in bullets is not always per-se an "anti-gun" agenda. Lead in ammunition is and has been a big problem in the U.S. That's why it was banned in the use of shotgun shells back in the early 1990s. That's also why we banned lead in paints and toys and gasoline. Lead is just highly toxic to humans and animals when ingested from the air, by mouth etc.

To find the provision in the new budget funding bill the U.S. Congress passed, just do a "find" for "lead." You'll come up with mostly false findings due to "lead" is part of many words, but here's the part that concerns lead in ammunition:

funding prohibition

Sec. 425. None of the funds made available by this or any other
Act may be used to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition
components, or fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.) or any other law.
This division may be cited as the ``Department of the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015''.

All I'm trying to say here is that lead is highly toxic and in great quantities can cause real problems to wildlife and humans. Both indoor and outdoor shooting ranges also have major problems in dealing with lead in bullets. And the reason the military and police are starting to phase out lead in bullets is certainly not some "anti-gun" agenda.

Here's an old article on military trying to convert to non-lead ammo:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98594


 

iofthetaiga

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
9,187
Reaction score
779
Location
Tanana Valley AK
I just wanted to point out that the concerns about lead in bullets is not always per-se an "anti-gun" agenda. Lead in ammunition is and has been a big problem in the U.S. That's why it was banned in the use of shotgun shells back in the early 1990s. That's also why we banned lead in paints and toys and gasoline. Lead is just highly toxic to humans and animals when ingested from the air, by mouth etc.

To find the provision in the new budget funding bill the U.S. Congress passed, just do a "find" for "lead." You'll come up with mostly false findings due to "lead" is part of many words, but here's the part that concerns lead in ammunition:

funding prohibition

Sec. 425. None of the funds made available by this or any other
Act may be used to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition
components, or fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.) or any other law.
This division may be cited as the ``Department of the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015''.

All I'm trying to say here is that lead is highly toxic and in great quantities can cause real problems to wildlife and humans. Both indoor and outdoor shooting ranges also have major problems in dealing with lead in bullets. And the reason the military and police are starting to phase out lead in bullets is certainly not some "anti-gun" agenda.

Here's an old article on military trying to convert to non-lead ammo:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98594


And as discussed in the other thread on this same subject; the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is pretty specific to lead only within the context of lead based paint. The TSCA is NOT applicable to ammunition. Therefore, Congress' recent bloviations about not funding the TSCA to prevent its regulating ammunition, is simply a red herring. It's equally as ridiculous as saying we're not going to fund apples, so as to prevent them turning into oranges (as if they otherwise might).
 

kasilofchrisn

New member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
5,721
Reaction score
374
Location
Central Kenai Peninsula
I just wanted to point out that the concerns about lead in bullets is not always per-se an "anti-gun" agenda. Lead in ammunition is and has been a big problem in the U.S. That's why it was banned in the use of shotgun shells back in the early 1990s. That's also why we banned lead in paints and toys and gasoline. Lead is just highly toxic to humans and animals when ingested from the air, by mouth etc.

To find the provision in the new budget funding bill the U.S. Congress passed, just do a "find" for "lead." You'll come up with mostly false findings due to "lead" is part of many words, but here's the part that concerns lead in ammunition:

funding prohibition

Sec. 425. None of the funds made available by this or any other
Act may be used to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition
components, or fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.) or any other law.
This division may be cited as the ``Department of the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2015''.

All I'm trying to say here is that lead is highly toxic and in great quantities can cause real problems to wildlife and humans. Both indoor and outdoor shooting ranges also have major problems in dealing with lead in bullets. And the reason the military and police are starting to phase out lead in bullets is certainly not some "anti-gun" agenda.

Here's an old article on military trying to convert to non-lead ammo:
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=98594

Just for the record though Lead paint and leaded gasoline are apple and oranges compared to lead based fishing sinkers and lead bullets.
First off let me say I have worked in a lead mine. I also cast hundreds of pounds of lead sinkers and fishing jigs each year and rarely if ever use a respirator to do so.
While my blood lead levels are a little higher than the national average they are below the levels of the average american during the days of burning leaded gasoline.
Lead paint was and is a hazzard because it is/was found in areas easily accessible by small children and babies. If it was part of your house your family was exposed to it. Small children like to put painted toys, paint flakes and whatever else they find that falls on the floor into their mouths.
They are rubbing on and playing next to door and window trim which are areas of your house often painted with lead based paints back when it was popular. Lead based paint was also found on some childrens toys.
I do not store my ammo or sinkers anywhere near where children or anyone dumb enough to do so can put it into their mouths.
Today my family is not exposed to it every time they open a window. My nephews are not playing with toys that have lead based paints on them or playing with my lead based ammunition,sinkers and jigs.
I do not place lead based items where young children can get ahold of it.
Lead based gasoline spewed unburnt lead particles and vapors into the air for all of us to breath. If you ever were near an internal combustion engine burning leaded gasoline you could not get away from it. People living in bigger cities were forced to breath lead laden air just to live their lives.
Unless I shoot you or force you to swallow one of my jigs or sinkers if you do not touch it my lead will not effect you physically.
They will not give you lead poisioning unless you directly handle them in their raw state and do not use proper hygiene.
Now if you are a shooter or a fisherman you might get lead on your hands on occasion. Proper hygiene such as handwashing before eating,drinking,smoking,etc. will keep your exposure and it's effects to a minimum if there are any at all.
If you are into lead abatement as a job or work in a lead mine yes you will be exposed.
With rare exceptions only those who choose to handle lead based items are going to be exposed to lead and it's associated health risks.
To those people for which shooting or fishing are not part off their daily lives lead will not likely ever pose them the slighest health risks whatsoever. Unlike leaded gasoline or lead based paint which were at one time all around us and we were forced to be exposed to it as part of our daily existence.
Casting with lead can also be done quite safely. I talk to guys online who have been molding lead based fishing products with out respiratory protection for 30-40+ years with out suffering any harmful effects from doing so.
There are precautions to take but all in all it is not nearly as harmful as most people would suspect.
Anyone wanting to learn lead safety in casting bullets,sinkers or jigs can PM me for more info.
Now for the wildlife. I will admit that certain species such as California condors may have at times had health effects from spent hunters bullets left in meat that they ate. That is a rare occurance that is due to the biology of condors and the way they reproduce.
Notice we do not hear of this affecting other wildlife in the same manner.(think of our scavenger species such as eagles,ravens,wolves and bears)
Yes lead ammunition was banned for hunting waterfowl. Again a unique situation whereby hunters often hunt the same blinds over the same ponds and lakes for generations. It had the opportunity to build up just as though it were your local trap shooting range.
This scenario does not hold true for other Alaska species.
Other species do not feed the same as puddle ducks do either.
So yes lead does pose a health hazzard to those who handle it. But if they take a few simple precautions it will never effect their health or that of their families. And the Alaskan wildlife will not be dieing off due to our lead bullets left randomly throught the hunting areas of Alaska.
Just my 2 cents anyway but I see apples and oranges here.
 
Top