It's time to stock up on ammo because the Obama Administration is working feverishly to undermine the Second Amendment. Oh, they can't get away with out-and-out banning guns, so they do what they do best: work in a stealth-like manner to regulate how they are used.
Have you ever noticed that liberals are notorious for being sneaky about their policy making? Why do they not do their dirty work right out in the open for all to see? Because they would be run out of office so fast our heads would spin. They are counting on an ill-informed American public.
Read about their latest ploy to make it difficult for gun owners, you know, those of us who "cling to our guns", via Red State:
Obama’s EPA to Regulate Hunters and Fisherman
"The Obama Administration is considering using the vast power of the federal government to ban the sale of certain types of ammunition. This administrative ban would increase cost for hunters and fisherman dramatically. If implemented, this ban would go against the will of the American people. Furthermore, this action is an inappropriate use of federal power.
U.S. News and World Report posted a story today indicating that President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering a ban on lead bullets and sinkers in the name of protecting the environment. This ban, if put into place, would dramatically increase the cost of ammunition for hunters and lead sinkers for anglers. If gun owners needed any more evidence that the Obama Administration is looking for creative ways to take away the Second Amendment rights of all Americans, they need to look no further than this new proposed rule.
This is an idea that would have absolutely no chance of passing in Congress, yet liberals in the Obama Administration clearly are looking for ways to implement a creative means to raise the prices of ammunition and infringe on hunter’s rights. The American people reject gun control, yet the EPA does not care about the will of the American people. Remember, this is the same Administration that nominated two anti-Second Amendment lawyers to the Supreme Court, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
From the story:
'The National Rifle Association, already on high alert over gun control rumors, has gone to battle stations to fight a new scheme before the Environmental Protection Agency to restrict hunters and anglers from using lead bullets, shot and sinkers.'
John McCormack of the Weekly Standard has an excellent piece where he explains that this creative means to regulate gun ownership through doubling the cost of ammunition for deer hunters.
'Several environmentalist groups led by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) are petitioning the EPA to ban lead bullets and shot (as well as lead sinkers for fishing) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Although EPA is barred by statute from controlling ammunition, CBD is seeking to work farther back along the manufacturing chain and have EPA ban the use of lead in bullets and shot because non-lead alternatives are available. But here’s the catch: the alternatives to lead bullets are more expensive. A ban on the sale of lead ammunition would force hunters and sport shooters to buy non-lead ammunition that is often double the cost of traditional lead ammunition. A box of deer hunting bullets in a popular caliber could be upwards of $55.'
The National Rifle Association (NRA) Executive Director Chris Cox has written a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging the EPA to stand down, because the EPA does not have authority under existing law to ban a certain type of ammunition.
'We are writing to urge you to reject a petition filed by the Center for Biological Diversity and others asking the EPA to ban lead shot and bullets under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Simply put, the Act does not grant the EPA the authority to regulate ammunition of any composition.'
Hunters and fisherman need to keep a close eye on environmental bureaucrats to make sure that they don’t ban lead fishing sinkers and ammunition under the pre-text of protecting the environment.
UPDATE: The Obama Administration has backed away from banning lead in bullets, but may allow a ban on lead fishing sinkers. From U.S. News and World Report:
'In a swift and unexpected decision, the Environmental Protection Agency today rejected a petition from environmental groups to ban the use of lead in bullets and shotgun shells, claiming it doesn’t have jurisdiction to weigh on the controversial Second Amendment issue. The decision came just hours after the Drudge Report posted stories from Washington Whispers and the Weekly Standard about how gun groups were fighting the lead bullet ban.'"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Oh, please! They're "anti-gun" because they're trying to keep lead out of the environment?
Why not complain how hunters aren't allowed to use thermonuclear devices in their endeavors?
How thoughtless!
DiogenASS: Oh, please! your ass clown!
Yea, lead bullets are a hazard for the animals health!
You mean tire weights and fishing weights are a hazard to the environment?
Approximately 50 million pounds of lead is used annually to produce tire weights worldwide in autos and light trucks, if you use anything other than lead shrapnel will be flying all over the roads, not mention the deaths attributed to the tire blow-outs from the shrapnel.
I guess you have to be a Harvard grad to figure that one out?
Riiiiiight!
This administration is looney-toons!
Is lead in our water sources a problem? I would guess that it is, but I'm not the expert. Neither are you. I'm guessing the EPA might know a little more about it than you and I combined.
If a kid can get lead poisoning from eating paint chips, it doesn't sound that far-fetched to think that lead bullets in game, or lead sinkers around fish, might be a problem.
Is it worth banning lead? I don't know. But to assume it's because this asdministration has a stealth campaign against gun owners is a tad ridiculous.
But not amongst the black helicopter Religious Rightwingnut crowd, I see.
Lead isn't flown in from another planet moron diodumbass. It is a naturally occuring substance. Banning lead in ammo makes about as much sense as the crazy notion of trying to restrict CO2 when every human on the planet exhales it with every breath.
Maybe all humans should just eliminate themselves to SAVE the planet.
I think that because you are so worried about the environment, you should set an example and eliminate yourself first. Maybe it will catch on!!!
Eliminating humans is exactly what the wacko environmentalist Discovery channel bomber wanted to do. No more "parasitical babies" he said.
What irony! He did his part to reduce the world's population, thanks to whoever took him out during his hostage takeover at the Discovery building.
Notice the American Pravda is silent about his radicalism. Thanks, Al Gore, for your contribution to this nutjob with your ridiculous movie.
JD, what makes you think that just because a substance is naturally occuring, it can't be harmful or poisonous? That's utterly stupid.
Yeah, we all exhale carbon dioxide. What say we put you in a room completely filled with carbon dioxide and then see how well you function? Or, to prove your point, why don't you eat an exclusively lead diet for the next while, and report back to us, if you're still alive.
Do you EVER think even a half-step ahead of the words coming out of your anal orifice, JustaDumbass?
So you really think man has the power to change the earths climate?
Do you really think a sane person will go around eating lead.
The purpose of a bullet is to kill.
I really don't think the construction material makes much of a difference to the longterm health of the target.
Unless your are a idiot liberal who thinks only the police should have guns. If so, then you trump up ways to restrict ordinary peoples ability to afford ammo for personal protection.
You see, for liberals to truly rule as they want, citizens must first be disarmed or anarchy will occur.
Also your continued fixation with the male ass parts is very peculiar. Homo?
What the hell?? You CANNOT be that dense, JustaDumbass! It's just not possible, is it?
I doubt that any ban on lead bullets is intended for the continued longterm health of the victim. That's clearly not who they're protecting.
So, if that's not your point,what are you hoping to accompish with such nonsense? Deflect attention from your prior dumbass comment about carbon dioxide?
I'm not buying your attempt, nor the original post, to convince anybody that this was any sort of stealth attack on Second Amendment rights. Any proposed EPA regulation has nothing to do with who should have guns and who shouldn't. It's about the possibility of unintended consequences of lead poisoning. Now, as I said from the outset, I don'tknow anything about the science, to know if it's a significant risk or not, but it seems unlikely that the black helicopters will be deployed on this one.
Stand down, Brave Soldier!
Post a Comment