BlaserF3 Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Is anybody else on this forum bothered about http://www.shootingtimes.co.uk/news/448740...tion_Group.html or is it just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vampire Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I use steel shot so no problems with ban here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I hope so, otherwise we're in trouble. Hadn't heard about (still waiting for the stage coach and the Sunday papers down here) and will look forward to BASC's response. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Fudd Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 not really bothered. my guns can take steel ok, in fact ive been using it quite a bit lately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackpowder Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 That is bad news, my shotguns are all over 100 years old and I just do not want to subject them to the punishment of lead shot. What knowledge have these people who oppose the ban anyway. There are sporting estates around here, in fact all over Britain where lead shot has been used for up to 200 years. On these estates you WILL find a wider diversity of flora and fauna than on mere farmland, it is time that the shooting fraternity made its voice more loudly heard in this issue. Blackpowder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J@mes Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Nice "I'm ok so **** everyone else" attitude there lads - well done. Lead first, then steel, then guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I had better stock up on lead now then that is a bit of a ****** only one of my guns is steel proof Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groach1234 Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I think the CA will be getting more of my money in future i am not sure if i will be renewing in basc when it comes up. George Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Fudd Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Nice "I'm ok so **** everyone else" attitude there lads - well done. Lead first, then steel, then guns. thanks if you read the title it says "IS ANYBODY BOTHERED, Lead shot ban" so i answered a simple question - no, i am not bothered, assuming that bothered means its annoying and irritating me. now if the title had read "do you support a ban on lead shot" i would have replied no, as i dont agree with it. now, would you like a ladder to get down of that horse or would you prefer to jump?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Is anybody else on this forum bothered about http://www.shootingtimes.co.uk/news/448740...tion_Group.html or is it just me. Hi, it's just over an hour since you posted. As I type, with over 200 members 'on line', there's been just 20 posts on the two related threads. I hope that is not telling us something. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbivvy Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 (edited) http://jamesmarchington.blogspot.com/2010/...-shot-then.html some of our representative organisations are rolling over too easily on the issue of lead. says it all. Edited March 31, 2010 by markbivvy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J@mes Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 surely if you don't agree with it, you should be bothered by it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boromir Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Hi, it's just over an hour since you posted. As I type, with over 200 members 'on line', there's been just 20 posts on the two related threads. I hope that is not telling us something.Cheers Dont worry they;ll all be complaining when they'll have to pay £500 for a 1000 carts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chard Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 As a clay shooter, I wouldn't want to see a lead ban, because steel is **** on anything except short range stuff. It would be a bad days work for clay shooting if these mincing tarts get their way, seeing as how most clay grounds have banned steel because of alleged Rick O'Shea problems. Load of old cock. Like most things in this country though, the decision will rest with people who don't know their harris from their helbow. :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utectok Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Can't belive swift is talking such mumbo jubo come on basc what is your problem! There's no doubt that Swift has a good grasp of the language required for this sort of thing. Here's a sample: "The group is tasked with identifying any significant threats as well as any perceived threats that are not significant. The group is to advise on options for managing any risks, knowledge gaps and communication issues. It is essential that the sub-groups are as inclusive as possible and balanced and fair in their investigations and findings. At the end of the first year a written progress report will be submitted to Defra and FSA. Our scope is limited to England but the devolved administrations will be kept informed and FSA has a UK-wide remit." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluebarrels Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 surely if you don't agree with it, you should be bothered by it? :blink: BB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Fudd Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 surely if you don't agree with it, you should be bothered by it? :blink: BB :no: nope. why should i be? as i said, bothered = annoyed and irritated. theres plenty of things in life that i dont agree with, but if i let them all bother me i'd have a stroke, or at least a bad case of high blood pressure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markbivvy Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 http://forums.pigeonwatch.co.uk/forums/ind...amp;hl=lead+ban 2008 . its been planned for a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab1964 Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 (edited) As I'm sure you all are aware - this non-toxic / anti-lead issue has nothing to do with protecting the environment, and everything to do with making shooting sports, and firearms usage, more difficult. The greenies and anti-gun nuts will use any means to restrict the things that they don’t like. If it is not an attack on large automobiles using the global warming hoax as an excuse, it’s using the toxicity of lead to limit shooters. Can any one point to any accredited study or research that shows water fowl have suffered from lead poisoning via ingestion? This issue has everything to do with the politics of shooting – and nothing to do with protecting the environment. Edited March 31, 2010 by ab1964 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boromir Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 As I'm sure you all are aware - this non-toxic / anti-lead issue has nothing to do with protecting the environment, and everything to do with making shooting sports, and firearms usage, more difficult. The greenies and anti-gun nuts will use any means to restrict the things that don’t like. If it is not an attack on large automobiles using the global warming hoax as an excuse, it’s using the toxicity of lead to limit shooters. Can any one point to any accredited study or research that shows water fowl have suffered from lead poisoning via ingestion? This issue has everything to do with the politics of shooting – and nothing to do with protecting the environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malkiserow Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 (edited) blimey, I've just spent part of the afternoon reading a 149 page report from DEFRA which was a monumental cock up. The authors from academia made some gross errors and wrote with bias-by-the-bucket-load. The DEFRA representitive was green to the core and did not know what she was talking about so just rubber stamped it then published it! DEFRA employs too many inexperienced personnel IMHO Edited March 31, 2010 by malkiserow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
utectok Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 As I'm sure you all are aware - this non-toxic / anti-lead issue has nothing to do with protecting the environment, and everything to do with making shooting sports, and firearms usage, more difficult. The greenies and anti-gun nuts will use any means to restrict the things that don’t like. If it is not an attack on large automobiles using the global warming hoax as an excuse, it’s using the toxicity of lead to limit shooters. Can any one point to any accredited study or research that shows water fowl have suffered from lead poisoning via ingestion? : This issue has everything to do with the politics of shooting – and nothing to do with protecting the environment. come on basc if you want my membership money listen to your members don't get high on your poltical ambitions your working and representing us ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferret Master Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I'm afraid to say that any shooting organisation that does anything other than fiercely oppose a lead ban has its head in the clouds if it thinks it will maintain its member base. Not only will disgruntled members disaffect but plenty of people will give up shooting. FM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest1957 Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 I'm bothered for two reasons: Firstly a lead ban would mean many beautiful older guns are either too expensive to run for the average shooter, or will be destroyed because they don't shoot steel. Secondly, the countryside will probably become littered with plastic shot cups as most people will move to shooting steel as the alternatives are so expensive. On a general point as well, I have yet to see evidence of large numbers of animals keeling over from ingesting lead shot. There is a very slim chance, even if lead shot is in the soil, that an animal will ingest a pellet whilst feeding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David BASC Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 Rather than run two threads I have posted a reply on the other one. However, anyone who says or thinks that lead is not not toxic and not a threat to the environment is crackers! However as with anyhting it is a matter of fact and degree, so lets await the new lead shot groups research and results. As I said before , for the FACTS about BASC and lead or any other issue ask BASC or go on the BASC web site, do not believe the half truth cobblers put out by others, who after all are only saying such things to serve their own ends...think about it... David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.