Tweet
To All,
This morning the Center for Biological Diversity, Project Gutpile, and a variety of other organizations re-filed a new petition to the Environmental Protection Agency.
While it essentially appears to be the same petition requesting a lead ammunition ban as has been rejected by both the EPA and by a court, plaintiffs are continuing the same line as before about original comments from the Congressional Record.
Like the last version, it's being filed during an election cycle. This, in turn, makes the petition even more controversial given national politics.
Perhaps another key difference this time appears to be an official request of the EPA to evaluate the alternative metals being used for ammunition as well as lead.
Given EPA metals guidance that have been previously published, study of the known toxicities of such metals as copper, tungsten and bismuth may result in additional ammunition restrictions than just besides lead.
The wisdom of earlier generations of Second Amendment Activists is coming into play up until now, what with language that so far has exempted ammunition from TSCA purview.
But that language and precedent are not stopping environmental activists from trying to go around the law so as to ban ammunition in general. A TSCA petition, as every one on Calguns has understood before, would address hunting AND target shooting AND self defense uses of ammunition made with the petitioned materials. If EPA were to conclude (as it has in other uses) that copper and tungsten bismuth likewise are toxic metals that can contaminate the environment, there would be very little left to shoot (and don't get me started on depleted uranium...).
I respectfully request that everyone with an interest in preventing ammunition bans by environmental regulations go and read the CBD press release at:
Then, I respectfully request that everyone with interest in preventing ammunition bans go and download the petition, then read it, at:
As demonstrated before, the science behind the claims of lead ammunition being the cause of lead poisoning has serious discrepancies among it's many claims. The case, as demonstrated before at the California Fish & Game Commission, is certainly weak enough for gunowners to totally object until such time as they see the objective proof, including the raw data, behind the claims. Until that time comes to pass, it can be easily said that the case against lead ammunition itself has been heavily overstated at best.
As always, when gunowners and firearms activists are united on a particular cause, especially important ones such as whether there will be ammunition available to shoot at all, they are a formidable group to deal with in the political and legal arena. I hope that continues to remain true as the various lead and ammunition bans emerge from the efforts of the Usual Suspects.
Respectfully,
Anthony Canales
This morning the Center for Biological Diversity, Project Gutpile, and a variety of other organizations re-filed a new petition to the Environmental Protection Agency.
While it essentially appears to be the same petition requesting a lead ammunition ban as has been rejected by both the EPA and by a court, plaintiffs are continuing the same line as before about original comments from the Congressional Record.
Like the last version, it's being filed during an election cycle. This, in turn, makes the petition even more controversial given national politics.
Perhaps another key difference this time appears to be an official request of the EPA to evaluate the alternative metals being used for ammunition as well as lead.
Given EPA metals guidance that have been previously published, study of the known toxicities of such metals as copper, tungsten and bismuth may result in additional ammunition restrictions than just besides lead.
The wisdom of earlier generations of Second Amendment Activists is coming into play up until now, what with language that so far has exempted ammunition from TSCA purview.
But that language and precedent are not stopping environmental activists from trying to go around the law so as to ban ammunition in general. A TSCA petition, as every one on Calguns has understood before, would address hunting AND target shooting AND self defense uses of ammunition made with the petitioned materials. If EPA were to conclude (as it has in other uses) that copper and tungsten bismuth likewise are toxic metals that can contaminate the environment, there would be very little left to shoot (and don't get me started on depleted uranium...).
I respectfully request that everyone with an interest in preventing ammunition bans by environmental regulations go and read the CBD press release at:
Then, I respectfully request that everyone with interest in preventing ammunition bans go and download the petition, then read it, at:
As demonstrated before, the science behind the claims of lead ammunition being the cause of lead poisoning has serious discrepancies among it's many claims. The case, as demonstrated before at the California Fish & Game Commission, is certainly weak enough for gunowners to totally object until such time as they see the objective proof, including the raw data, behind the claims. Until that time comes to pass, it can be easily said that the case against lead ammunition itself has been heavily overstated at best.
As always, when gunowners and firearms activists are united on a particular cause, especially important ones such as whether there will be ammunition available to shoot at all, they are a formidable group to deal with in the political and legal arena. I hope that continues to remain true as the various lead and ammunition bans emerge from the efforts of the Usual Suspects.
Respectfully,
Anthony Canales
Comment