"Non-Toxic" rant

NigelM

Well-Known Member
It might seem a bit pedantic, but I'm getting more and more ****ed off with people referring to copper bullets as "non-toxic". It just suggests that lead must be "toxic".

We have been using lead for many, many years. It's no more "toxic" than it was 100 years ago and I'm not sure that many of us have died of lead poisoning. It's not as if it's suddenly become radio active. It's not suddenly become impregnated with arsenic or any other "toxic" chemical.

We are shooting ourselves in the foot when it comes to any semblance of a managed transition away from lead, waiting for the bullet manufacturers to come up with better product or at least fire up the production capacity to fulfil demand of the current copper offering. When we call it toxic we're nailing down the coffin lid ourselves and playing right into the hands of the anti's.

Why would anyone want to shoot "toxic" bullets into any landscape, being shooting deer, foxes, rabbits or targets. The government certainly will not endorse the use of toxic anything into the countryside and the general public will be horrified by it.

I'm not anti copper, I've tried it and at normal deer stalking ranges it works, but until it works in 22rf, air rifle and for long range shooting we do need to at least try to put off the day when it's banned.

So can we please get back to referring to bullets that are not made from lead as copper bullets, or brass bullets, or non-lead or anything other than "non-toxic".

Sorry, rant over :coat:
 

Foxyboy43

Well-Known Member
It might seem a bit pedantic, but I'm getting more and more ****ed off with people referring to copper bullets as "non-toxic". It just suggests that lead must be "toxic".

We have been using lead for many, many years. It's no more "toxic" than it was 100 years ago and I'm not sure that many of us have died of lead poisoning. It's not as if it's suddenly become radio active. It's not suddenly become impregnated with arsenic or any other "toxic" chemical.

We are shooting ourselves in the foot when it comes to any semblance of a managed transition away from lead, waiting for the bullet manufacturers to come up with better product or at least fire up the production capacity to fulfil demand of the current copper offering. When we call it toxic we're nailing down the coffin lid ourselves and playing right into the hands of the anti's.

Why would anyone want to shoot "toxic" bullets into any landscape, being shooting deer, foxes, rabbits or targets. The government certainly will not endorse the use of toxic anything into the countryside and the general public will be horrified by it.

I'm not anti copper, I've tried it and at normal deer stalking ranges it works, but until it works in 22rf, air rifle and for long range shooting we do need to at least try to put off the day when it's banned.

So can we please get back to referring to bullets that are not made from lead as copper bullets, or brass bullets, or non-lead or anything other than "non-toxic".

Sorry, rant over :coat:
Amen! Don’t tell our environmentalist friends of course but copper oddly enough is pretty damned toxic too - just think of the millions of tons of it leeched into the seas from ships’ antifouling. It also apparently kills trees, though in what time frame I know not. I entirely agree with your rant, indeed it sounds very familiar, maybe just find a generic word to cover all bases, now let me see, hmmmm, “bullets”?
🦊🦊
 

Woodsmoke

Well-Known Member
Yep. I don't know where all this nonsense about lead has come from , to be honest. Yes, it can be pretty nasty stuff under certain circumstances, but so can water for that matter. I've eaten game shot with lead all my life, and while I wouldn't want to be chewing on it for any length of time, I've ingested my fair share of lead shot. And we all know the eventual highly-visible and un-flushable result of doing so.

Just like the OP, I have no particular quarrel with copper bullets (not that I've actually tried any yet), but it boils my proverbial to be forced down any particular route just because some idiot with an agenda makes enough noise about something that really doesn't affect them in the grand scheme of things.
 

User00025

Well-Known Member
Amen! Don’t tell our environmentalist friends of course but copper oddly enough is pretty damned toxic too - just think of the millions of tons of it leeched into the seas from ships’ antifouling. It also apparently kills trees, though in what time frame I know not. I entirely agree with your rant, indeed it sounds very familiar, maybe just find a generic word to cover all bases, now let me see, hmmmm, “bullets”?
🦊🦊
There's a certain river in Wicklow that has no fish due to, guess what? Bingo, Copper leachate from the old mines.
 

Alantoo

Well-Known Member
I could only acquire lead free bullets from Germany when I first started using them, and usually use the German Bleifrei "lead-free" description.

Partially because it is accurate and partially because the equally accurate non-toxic seems like a red rag to a bull to many posters on here.

I don't like referring to them generically as copper because only few of the mono metal lead free offerings are pure copper, Barnes and one other I think. Most mono metal are copper zinc alloys, either gilding metal or brass. The frangible lead-free are steel or gilding metal jacketed with either tin cores or compressed copper and/or tin dust core.

All lead free.

Alan
 
Last edited:

C h r i s

Well-Known Member
How many houses have lead mains water pipes...? Mine does, the whole street of 300+ houses built in 1938 does. How many have lead solder joints on internal plumbing. When the government rip out all the existing millions of tons of lead from building and plumbing products then I might consider using non lead ammunition, until then its just utter utter BS especially when we are talking about fox or target shooting.
 

steve sxs

Well-Known Member
Yee hah, some commen sense at last, now all we need to do is de brain wash the brain washed (best of luck with that one) other than that we need to gather all the lead up and dig out all the lead oare in the world and then dig a bigger hole and Bury it problem solved :dummy:🤪
 

User00025

Well-Known Member
If that’s the Avoca then there were lead and zinc mines too.
That's the one, mainly copper leachate from just above Avoca, clogged the gills on any fish. During a flood at the right time the odd few would run and go up the Aughrim to spawn. The lead would be from much further up and not quite so lethal.
 

badbob

Well-Known Member
I agree not to use the word toxic :evil: ............" lead free" :)is more suitable.
The thin edge of the wedge is well home now regarding lead.
The latest " WILD JUSTICE " newsletter :rolleyes: slates Sainsburys for having high levels of lead in game meat.
I read recently that high lead levels in Alpine glaciers was supposedly due the surge in lead mining in Derbyshire in the middle ages.
I`ve developed a few lead free loads , but unless requested I`ve got a lot of toxic , sorry lead, bullets to shoot.
 

steve sxs

Well-Known Member
How many houses have lead mains water pipes...? Mine does, the whole street of 300+ houses built in 1938 does. How many have lead solder joints on internal plumbing. When the government rip out all the existing millions of tons of lead from building and plumbing products then I might consider using non lead ammunition, until then its just utter utter BS especially when we are talking about fox or target shooting.
There is another question here, when all the said Lead is removed where is it stored
 

Alantoo

Well-Known Member
I tend only to shoot fair-trade, organic bullets these days...and, boy, do I want everyone to know it...
Judging by the proportion of response type on this thread...I would say it is the the anti lead free bullet campaigners that wish to be noticed...but I am only counting on my fingers.

The only thing most people seem to have responded to in the OP is the rant rather than the semantic query.

Alan
 
Top