been looking at this since your PM not sure it is added to sink the dross, 0.1% is looking like the amount used if any.
HSE lead ammo proposals - FAQs and updates
- Thread starter Conor O'Gorman
- Start date
been looking at this since your PM not sure it is added to sink the dross, 0.1% is looking like the amount used if any.
Utectok
Well-Known Member
I’m not certain but I think many states already ban lead. They have much higher pressures in their steel loads for shotguns though.. cip just doesn’t cut it apparently.No they're not.
It can't be won if your orgs volunteer to ban it before anyone even mentions it
Americans won't stand for it, so it will only happen if individuals want to use none lead.
If they tried a blanket ban like here, it would get very messy fast.
I just put it in less scientific terms . The lack of fluidity is basically dross ( lumpy custard ). I visited weekly for many years as I own a fabrication company
Show me something to counter this then , I got that from a good source in the industry who actually makes lead bullets
Fact remains they have a heck of a lot of lead ammo in reserve and am pretty sure this and similar has already been published by other nato members
one way of looking at it, to me as someone who has melted a lot of lead, lead alloy, dross is the crap that floats on top and needs removing as part of the process of cleaning the lead by fluxing it, the fluidity of the lead remains unchanged as it depends on the composition of the lead alloy, e.g tin in lead makes it flow ideal for casting, antimony hardens the lead hence bullet casting alloys contains all three lead, tin and antimony.
What the USA also has is a tradition of using single barrel pump action and self loading shotguns for duck hunting and what they call "upland pheasant hunting" which we'd know as walked up shooting in corn stubbles or in set aside. Indeed Browning's rightly revered over and under was designed AFTER he had designed for Winchester the 1897 and for himself the Browning Auto-5. So steel as such is not an issue as if your barrel gets damaged you throw it away and buy another one for the UK equivalent of a mere £100 to £150.
For American Skeet and what they call (as we do "English Sporting") they can and do use lead shot. So you will see on many US Forum notifications of a "Side by Side Day" at X, Y or X clay range or club.
That is also a problem, because if you stop using lead as material, then almost the entire supply of bismuth is also stopped. That, by definition, prevents it being a sustainable alternative in a world where we phase out lead use.
There's some truth to that. However, that also reflects the reality that sometimes the materials we need to use to get something done well are toxic.
I don't know how to put this tactfully, but you are flat-out completely wrong. Bismuth is rare. It's about twice as common as gold and significantly rarer than silver. They must be extraordinarily strong people working at these galvanising firms, a sack of bismuth would be far too heavy to lift. In an idle moment, I have calculated that a normal cornflake box of bismuth would weigh 44kg. I don't know what you saw being used, but it can't have been bismuth.
Why is the HSE involved, surely its remit is Health and Safety in the Workplace!!
Shooting sports is in the realm of Leisure and Sport.
Game meat falls under the "Food Safety Act" and under this legislation the minister already has sufficent powers to issue "control orders" if the is a danger of contamination. As far as I'm aware there have been zero orders put in place on the grounds of lead contamination in food. Someone is hellbent on stirring up a hornets nest wasting time and resources.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
One has to ask why all these the questions were were not asked back 5 or more years ago when the rumblings of a lead ban was more than obvious and hit head on!
Now it’s almost imminent and there is nothing but yowling and growling about it.
Really you have all have had your heads in the sand for the last 5 years, when really you should have being preparing for it, or preparing to fight it!
It is not as of you were not warned.
Now it’s almost imminent and there is nothing but yowling and growling about it.
Really you have all have had your heads in the sand for the last 5 years, when really you should have being preparing for it, or preparing to fight it!
It is not as of you were not warned.
Because '5 or more years ago' in 2016 to be precise , the LAG were thoroughly beaten by UK gov , and BASC , in that a lead ban was NOT required.
This is why I keep asking what changed since then, there have been NO new studies.
The only new thing is , the EU have decided to make moves to ban it by 2023, and our orgs and government have decided to go along with it, for some inexplicable reason.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
Rule 1 - NEVER believe anything the government says when it comes to things like this!
It was always going to happen its was just a matter of when.
Oh dont worry , I dont believe anything they say, any of the time !
Maybe so , but its just another back door method of reducing legal firearms usage, which grates on me.
I think that approach can lead to problems if they actually do tell the truth - as may from time to time occur....
I know where youre coming from , but the frequency of political truth telling is that low, we can safely err on the side of caution almost constantly
dunwater
Well-Known Member
Not quite true.
The rumblings and negotiations were going on for about 30 years at EU level.
About 4 years ago a ban on lead over wetlands was being pursued with a radically redefined definition of what constituted a wetland, someone, from memory it was the Hungarians but I stand to be corrected, threatened to take the whole process back to committee stage.
The EU bureaucrats pulled the current REACH proposals out of their brief cases and overnight the ground shifted and the argument swivelled 180 degrees
We were no longer negotiating a reduction in lead use, we were being made to justify our continuing use of a known toxin where alternatives exist and where zero lead in civilian firearm projectiles was now official policy for scientifically backed environmental and health reasons.
Every single shooting organisation in the EU has been challenging this unsuccessfully because the fact that lead is toxic is undeniable. The change cut the rug from under us, we are now facing a near complete ban.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
I completely agree with what your saying, ot was written on the wall, BUT why did so few take bloody notice????
Or was it pig ignorance and the old fashioned “it will nevet happen?!”
Well guess what ……….
Brace yourselves because i think it wi be a 100% ban woth no quarter given for anything!
dunwater
Well-Known Member
The change happened pretty much overnight, we went from negotiating what the definition of a wetland was to a situation where the continued use of lead, any lead, was now contrary to EU policy.
It caught everyone off guard, no one saw it coming and so far no one has managed to put a dent in it.
We’re in deep doo doo.
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
Yea i agree, most are in deep do do!
But the deer stalkers who thought forward and have embraced it are getting on with the job!
Why is the stalking community still in this copper denial i have no idea!
dunwater
Well-Known Member
Let’s call it institutional inertia.
The long range target shooters are in serious trouble, so is anyone with a .22.
A lot of people still haven’t realised quite how profound the change is probably going to be, we should have just accepted the new wetlands definition, but hindsight is perfect.
