Originally Posted by taylorce1
I posted this on several forums, and you'd be surprised by some of the responses. If more people think like this guy we should be worried!

Quote
I haven't read into this aside from this thread so pardon me if I am missing something, but what is the big deal if lead ammunition is banned on federal land? I only deer hunt and when I do I shoot 308. I can buy a box of 100% copper ammunition for under $10 more than lead per box of 20. I take one or two deer a year and rarely miss. At most I figure I fire 5 rounds a year while in the woods. Ammunition used to sight a gun in can be lead since I imagine you won't be doing it on federal land so those 5 rounds would be all that I would be required to be lead free. That only adds up to an extra $2.50 a year if lead ammunition was banned. I know that plenty of people hunt a lot more than me but from where I sit I don't see the big issue. Like I said before, is there something I am missing or is the price difference the only complaint against banning lead ammunition?


If people can't/won't get a clue that this issue is deeper than copper and lead, we could possibly loose this battle.


Copied poster is definitely missing something. The. "Battle" as he puts it is having the right to choose.....


If we live long enough, we all have regrets. But the ones that nag at us the most are the ones in which we know we had a choice.

Doug