The author is an air head, putting it nicely.
Study on Game Meat Skips the Science
NSSF encourages the media and hunters to carefully read studies that attempt to disparage the consumption of game taken with traditional ammunition.www.nssf.org
Interesting......
- Thread starter mtmuley
- Start date
kwyeewyk
Well-known member
Must have been an autocorrect error!
Doesn't seem like any downside compared to a healthy family. Thanks for the information
Another condemnation. Thanks for the info. mtmuley
Well what is the upside to lead ingestion for people and animals that's makes the use wide spread use something that we should condone? It looks like there is a viable alternative, without much downside, according to your statement.
Hunting Wife
Well-known member
Before we get too far off in the ditch on this, the point of posting the links and providing information was to help people make informed decisions for themselves. The point was not to condemn everyone who chooses to shoot lead. It’s legal, not everyone is satisfied with the performance of non-toxic options, not everyone weighs the risks the same.
None of my business what people kill with. Not my place or yours to "condone" anything. The thinly veiled condemnation of people that shoot lead is "interesting". Happens all the time. mtmuley
Drive an internal combustion engine vehicle? For a start. mtmuley
refuseresist
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2020
- Messages
- 109
That's a false equivalency, given copper is a viable alternative for almost every situation but walking is not. signed, someone who puts about 5k miles a year on his truck
Last time that I checked I wasn't getting ham sandwiches for my kids from the tail pipe.
Seems that the righting is on the wall for lead projectiles used for hunting and the impact they have in the ecosystem.
We have two options. We do nothing, say nothing and wait for others to make decisions for us. Then complain about them.
Or we take the bull by the horns, police ourselves and come up with viable alternatives that are better for us, the animals and the environment.
Last edited:
Or, people shoot what they want. You would be surprised what I load in my rifles. What I won't do is stare down my nose at other hunters that don't "conform". mtmuley
Your not make any sense. I can give rats ass if you drank all your water though a lead straw for the rest of your life. Or sucked on spit shot for a hobby.
However when our actions
effects other people, animals and the environment then we have other considerations then our "wants "
Happy New Year. mtmuley
You too!
jryoung
Well-known member
Should state agencies start regulating minimum BC?
refuseresist
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2020
- Messages
- 109
Pretty sure they do. Does yours allow the harvest of deer with a .22?
jryoung
Well-known member
There's no minimum caliber requirement here, but that wasn't my question.
refuseresist
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2020
- Messages
- 109
Same question, basically. "Should we regulate by [aspect of cartridge]?"
Why not? Then we can move on to maximum cartridge, projectile weight, scope magnification and rangefinder capability. The possibilities are endless. mtmuley
Similar threads
