The end of lead - Extract from the RSPB and WWT letter - via the BASC website

[Scully]

3 hours ago, clangerman said:

laugh while you can pigeon shooting has billion pound farm and food industries behind it roll on the vote! 

Which has absolutely nothing to do with why you kill pigeons for your own enjoyment, but nice try anyhow. 
You decoy pigeons to shoot for the same reason we all do, because it is up there with any of the best shooting disciplines you care to mention, and you love the challenge and the buzz. The only difference between you ( and others like you ) and me is that you don’t have the grit or honesty to admit it, but would rather just mumble something about pest control if challenged by someone who didn’t understand.
If they’re not your own crops on your own land, then you seriously don’t have any genuine reason to do it, yet here you are, paying out of your own pocket for the kit to do it. Weird eh? I wonder why? 🙂

As for the vote, it’s entirely in your imagination; WJ already have decoying /pest control well in their sights, as with all shooting, and failing at their first attempt like they did a couple of years ago, won’t put them off. WJ also know all too well ( much more than you seemingly ) why pigeons are targeted by shooters, and they also know that farmers aren’t forever on the phone calling around in desperation for pigeon shooters, but rather it is the other way round! 
They also know why people shoot game, and it’s for exactly the same reason you and I shoot pigeons……because they ( including you and me ) love it. 🙂
 

1 hour ago, Fellside said:

I respectfully disagree. 

Read correctly (and in context) it promoted a vote to ban shooting - due to a resentful attitude towards pheasant shoots. 

 

 

Exactly this! 👍

Edited April 7, 2022 by Scully

[Scully]

The link won’t work as I’ve screenshot the image from a post a friend sent, but it may be worth a gander. 

[Fellside]

31 minutes ago, Scully said:

The link won’t work as I’ve screenshot the image from a post a friend sent, but it may be worth a gander. 

Excellent initiative….!!!!

 

P.S This news/info was launched on FB last week and the replies were overwhelmingly very positive. 

[Scully]

8 minutes ago, Fellside said:

Excellent initiative….!!!!

 

P.S This news/info was launched on FB last week and the replies were overwhelmingly very positive. 

I thought so too. 

Yes, you’re correct; a friend who picks up with her countless dogs sent me it. 
Good to hear. 👍

[Sweet11-87]

thanks for posting that. that NHS contract is exactly what shooting needs. find a bad guy or down side to that deal.

but i realy need to think the shooting community as a whole need to stop doing the "we shoot for these reasons" validation. It kind of undermines our whole standpoint when were indirectly agreeing shooting things isnt ok unless we have a cause for it with some "greater good" motive.

the argument is paper thin and falls down as soon as the questions like what scully asked above are asked. people arnt stupid were just not being honest with our opening statment and its so obvious its probably more damaging than helpful.

 yes i shoot mainly becasue i enjoy it. and thats why i buy all the gear and pay the ammunition out of my own pocket. if i didnt enjoy it id be bananas to do it under the conditions im doing it. however it has  other benefits (insert all the valid benefits and bonus) but lets just be open an honest the main reason were out is because we enjoy it then we can defend it with all the other benefits. but thats all they are other benefits theyre not the reasons we do it.

 

manure is great for the fields but its not the reason the cows eat the bloody grass.

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Sweet11-87 said:

yes i shoot mainly becasue i enjoy it. and thats why i buy all the gear and pay the ammunition out of my own pocket. if i didnt enjoy it id be bananas to do it under the conditions im doing it. however it has  other benefits (insert all the valid benefits and bonus) but lets just be open an honest the main reason were out is because we enjoy it then we can defend it with all the other benefits. but thats all they are other benefits theyre not the reasons we do it.

Im not pulling your reasoning apart, I agree with you.

But the justification thing is an important part of it.
Imagine the conversation:
Shooter: I enjoy shooting !
Joe Public: OK , what do you shoot, targets, clays ?
S. Yes but I shoot pheasants , foxes and occasionally deer too.
JP. So you enjoy killing animals ?
S. Errr , no, but , I just enjoy shooting ....

I had a conversation with a lady customer one day , and she bought up a conversation about hunting (for some reason)
I told her I did fox control, she told me I was cruel for doing it.
I said its cruel when new born lambs are torn apart by foxes.
She said that was part of nature, 'Gods' way , were her words, as she clutched her little rat dog.
I asked her if my actions in lamb protection were also part of nature ?
No she said, shooting foxes is not part of nature.

I asked her what she would do , if , when she was out walking her rat dog, a fox came along , and wanted to make a meal of her dog, would she let nature take its course ?
*Horrified look*
Would she be happy for a man to come along and save her dog, would she draw the line at his use of a gun on offending fox ?
*Puzzled expression*
Do shepherds not protect the flock, I said ?
Err, yes....
I am the shepherd, I just have a gun , with night vision 

[oowee]

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Im not pulling your reasoning apart, I agree with you.

But the justification thing is an important part of it.
Imagine the conversation:
Shooter: I enjoy shooting !
Joe Public: OK , what do you shoot, targets, clays ?
S. Yes but I shoot pheasants , foxes and occasionally deer too.
JP. So you enjoy killing animals ?
S. Errr , no, but , I just enjoy shooting ....

I had a conversation with a lady customer one day , and she bought up a conversation about hunting (for some reason)
I told her I did fox control, she told me I was cruel for doing it.
I said its cruel when new born lambs are torn apart by foxes.
She said that was part of nature, 'Gods' way , were her words, as she clutched her little rat dog.
I asked her if my actions in lamb protection were also part of nature ?
No she said, shooting foxes is not part of nature.

I asked her what she would do , if , when she was out walking her rat dog, a fox came along , and wanted to make a meal of her dog, would she let nature take its course ?
*Horrified look*
Would she be happy for a man to come along and save her dog, would she draw the line at his use of a gun on offending fox ?
*Puzzled expression*
Do shepherds not protect the flock, I said ?
Err, yes....
I am the shepherd, I just have a gun , with night vision 

🤣

[8 shot]

It would be an interesting thread in itself “Why Do You/I Shoot” 

[Fellside]

I’m perfectly happy to tell anyone who asks - I shoot because I enjoy the thrill of the chase and being out there etc. - but also for the satisfaction of a shot well taken. I’ve always been perfectly open about that. I don’t think we should make up spurious excuses at all. 

I once had a lecture from a newbie on a clay ground who said “I don’t know how you can do that, I couldn’t kill a living thing.” I told him it’s been 4 thousand years since his kind came out of the forests - and it would all come rushing back to him in one click of the trigger. He never said a word, but when I saw him again about a year later he was wearing a lot of green clothing. When we got chatting it turned out he was doing driven days here there and everywhere…… 🙂

[8 shot]

4 hours ago, Scully said:

The link won’t work as I’ve screenshot the image from a post a friend sent, but it may be worth a gander. 

All them Steel pellets will play havoc in the MRI Scanners 🤣🤣

[enfieldspares]

I shoot for the same similar pleasure that I fish. That is, in fishing, the "take". In shooting it is, yes, the "kill" be it a clay, a paper target, a falling plate, or feather, or fur. In fishing I fish alone. But in shooting more often I shoot in company. And so be it a clay, a paper target, a falling plate, or feather or fur, it is also for the "craic". And to enjoy the pleasure of making memories by taking out a gun that I enjoy owning regardless of if that came to me by purchase or by gift. And if feather or fur by preparing and eating the result of that endeavour. And all of these parts make the whole much greater in the all of it than in the fraction of it.

Edited April 7, 2022 by enfieldspares

[Scully]

35 minutes ago, 8 shot said:

All them Steel pellets will play havoc in the MRI Scanners 🤣🤣

🙂 I read somewhere just recently that this is a myth, and it’s bugging me that I can’t remember where. 

[Scully]

42 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

I shoot for the same similar pleasure that I fish. That is, in fishing, the "take". In shooting it is, yes, the "kill" be it a clay, a paper target, a falling plate, or feather, or fur. In fishing I fish alone. But in shooting more often I shoot in company. And so be it a clay, a paper target, a falling plate, or feather or fur, it is also for the "craic". And to enjoy the pleasure of making memories by taking out a gun that I enjoy owning regardless of if that came to me by purchase or by gift. And if feather or fur by preparing and eating the result of that endeavour. And all of these parts make the whole much greater in the all of it than in the fraction of it.

I can’t say I derive any pleasure in the act of killing, and have stopped shooting foxes because I quite like them, but I take great pleasure in a good impressive shot. Weird isn’t it? 
I was once asked by a woman why I enjoyed killing things; it was the first time anyone had asked me that and I must admit she had me stumped for a second or two, but told her that while I can’t say I enjoyed the act of killing, I absolutely loved shooting, to the extent it cancelled any misgivings I may have of killing things, and that as a meat eater I had absolutely no qualms about killing the things I did, even those I wasn’t going to eat but killed for another purpose. 🤷‍♂️
She admitted she was also a meat eater but couldn’t bring herself to kill anything. Fair enough, each to their own. 
The woman who really annoyed me was the one who claimed there must be something wrong with me for owning handguns! I could have easily fallen out with her but didn’t, as her husband was a good friend and a keen game shot! 
 

Edited April 7, 2022 by Scully

[8 shot]

28 minutes ago, Scully said:

🙂 I read somewhere just recently that this is a myth, and it’s bugging me that I can’t remember where. 

Nope all true, i was asked just recently to fill in a declaration form before a scan on my knee any metal in my body ie metal plates etc, also if i'd been angle grinding, working with metal 

[Scully]

36 minutes ago, 8 shot said:

Nope all true, i was asked just recently to fill in a declaration form before a scan on my knee any metal in my body ie metal plates etc, also if i'd been angle grinding, working with metal 

https://mriquestions.com/bullets-and-shrapnel.html

I think it mentions shot as not being of much concern. 
It’s a few years ago now, and admittedly I can’t recall being asked about internal steel elements, but was asked if my boots were ‘steel capped’ which they were. 🙂

[TIGHTCHOKE]

1 hour ago, Scully said:

I can’t say I derive any pleasure in the act of killing, and have stopped shooting foxes because I quite like them, but I take great pleasure in a good impressive shot. Weird isn’t it? 
I was once asked by a woman why I enjoyed killing things; it was the first time anyone had asked me that and I must admit she had me stumped for a second or two, but told her that while I can’t say I enjoyed the act of killing, I absolutely loved shooting, to the extent it cancelled any misgivings I may have of killing things, and that as a meat eater I had absolutely no qualms about killing the things I did, even those I wasn’t going to eat but killed for another purpose. 🤷‍♂️
She admitted she was also a meat eater but couldn’t bring herself to kill anything. Fair enough, each to their own. 
The woman who really annoyed me was the one who claimed there must be something wrong with me for owning handguns! I could have easily fallen out with her but didn’t, as her husband was a good friend and a keen game shot! 
 

That sums things up quite well.

I do love these people who eat meat but staunchly say they couldn't kill anything, I wonder how hunger might contribute to a change of mind if she had to?

[Old farrier]

20 minutes ago, Scully said:

https://mriquestions.com/bullets-and-shrapnel.html

I think it mentions shot as not being of much concern. 
It’s a few years ago now, and admittedly I can’t recall being asked about internal steel elements, but was asked if my boots were ‘steel capped’ which they were. 🙂

It mentioned lead shot of not being of much concern due to it not heating significantly 

ferro magnetic shot was of concern and recommended X-ray to determine type and place of shot as of in soft tissue it can travel up to 10 cm . 

[Scully]

28 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

That sums things up quite well.

I do love these people who eat meat but staunchly say they couldn't kill anything, I wonder how hunger might contribute to a change of mind if she had to?

How does the saying go? The only difference between vegetarians and meat eaters is a month of empty shop shelves? Or something like that. 

[Old farrier]

This is probably too simple to be a solution but I thought it would be worth mentioning 

all game dealers to say 

if you want to sell us your game it has to be shot with non lead!!

Probably to simple for the large bag estates to implement to solve there problems of disposal of large quantities of game 

 

[Rewulf]

7 minutes ago, Old farrier said:

all game dealers to say 

if you want to sell us your game it has to be shot with non lead!!

And there it is in a nutshell. You know that's not going to happen, and why? 

Because its nothing to do with lead, and everything to do with shooting. 

[Old farrier]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

And there it is in a nutshell. You know that's not going to happen, and why? 

Because its nothing to do with lead, and everything to do with shooting. 

Fully understand it’s all about shooting 

When they say all avenues were explored it should be mentioned the simplest wasn’t even tried 

[Sweet11-87]

tbh i think allot of  game dealers were refusing lead shot game more and more. they have certainly preffered non toxic shot game for years. becasue the end consumers didnt want it. The problem it  has started to cause was that shoots still used lead and then couldnt get  rid of the meat  and the mass waste was casting us in a bad light. Seriously though the only people that seem to have been taken by suprise by the ban on lead was the shooters.  its been on it way for sooooooooooo long.  its been under pressure for decades since they realised it was killing wildfowl. its not just shooting since they discovered it was toxic the use of lead in everything has been going one way regardless of what form it was in.

im actualy suprised it lasted so long.

like others have said above the perception is   lead = toxic = no thanks.

 

[rbrowning2]

However it has been very much simpler to remove lead from other uses at the use was limited in scope, e.g lead pipes, or lead in paint etc.

lead in firearms is a complicated issue with such a diverse and wide range of them, many of which will become obsolete.

would lead have been removed from petrol of it had made petrol obsolete? 

Think their are lies dam lies and statistics and certainly that applies to some of the so called science behind the move to ban lead from ammunition.

Edited April 8, 2022 by rbrowning2

[Sweet11-87]

i agree with what youre saying to a degree, it was before my driving days i must admit but removing lead from petrol didnt make petrol obsolete obviously  it did cause problems for owners of older classic cars though.. so in a way its very similar the removal of lead hasnt made cartridges obsolete, but  it has and will cause an issue for users of older classic guns

stuff can be done and options are avalible. its down to the owner now as it was then if its somthing they think is worth the cost.

youre probably right about the lies and statistics. frankly i think if somone  could prove lead was actualy good for you it would still take a great deal of time to turn the ship around and change public perception of it sadly.

[Rewulf]

12 hours ago, Sweet11-87 said:

i agree with what youre saying to a degree, it was before my driving days i must admit but removing lead from petrol didnt make petrol obsolete obviously  it did cause problems for owners of older classic cars though.. so in a way its very similar the removal of lead hasnt made cartridges obsolete, but  it has and will cause an issue for users of older classic guns

It didnt cause a problem fopr owners of classics cars at all, as all they did was buy a lead additive to put in with the petrol.
TBH I think youre missing the point, its not about making cartridges obsolete , its just going to make them a lot more expensive, which in turn , will make shooting more expensive , and limit the number of people getting involved in the sport.

Owners of older guns that cant use steel , could theoretically still use horrifically expensive bismuth, which isnt getting banned (yet) but is just as toxic as lead , if not more so.
In practice , those guns are liable to become ornaments or scrap, and again , less shooters.

12 hours ago, Sweet11-87 said:

youre probably right about the lies and statistics. frankly i think if somone  could prove lead was actualy good for you it would still take a great deal of time to turn the ship around and change public perception of it sadly.

Lead isnt good for you , the public has known this for decades, so I dont know where youre going with that.
Do the public tie shooting in to lead poisoning ? Highly unlikely if they even considered it.
Just the same as its of little concern to them that, the water coming out their taps has more than likely passed over some lead....
But nobody is bothered about that , as lead pipes dont have guns.