California passes all sorts of silly laws and people are leaving the state after getting too much of its ideas. I'd hate to see our country follow the example of California - or Denmark for that matter. There seems to be some evidence of lead shot damaging waterfowl. I know of no real data showing rifle projectiles, air or PB, made of lead harming people through poisoning. Misplaced shots can harm animals but that is not limited to lead projectiles. Again, I know of no real data that lead poisoning is killing significant numbers of animals (including fish). This is just my guess but my guess is that the people that want lead projectiles and sinkers ban don't like hunting and fishing so they are just trying to raise the cost hoping people will stop doing it. It is just not a cause and effect situation where we know the lead causes damage and that banning them will result in benefit. Without that evidence, we would just be passing laws based upon mob rule or something, not science.
I agree that copper bullets for center fire PBs work and have been around for awhile. Some believe they are better than bullets with lead cores. But centerfire PBs develop 50,000 to 60,000 pressure which will push copper into the rifling. I doubt that our air rifles can push a copper projectile outward. Maybe a pellet, but not a slug. But it could easily be tested. I think for air guns, tin is the most practical metal. Same material used now. Copper is also much less dense than lead so even if it worked I don't think it would obviously be better than tin in air rifles. Copper is also relatively expensive. It works in PBs because a lighter weight copper projectile can be engineered to penetrate as well as a heavier lead core bullet. I just don't see how to do this for an airgun. But maybe somebody smarter than me will figure it out.
Let's hope that the crazy stuff is limited to Europe or maybe Europe + California. I agree we need to do reasonable things to protect the environment but banning lead projectiles without solid data there is a real benefit is just not a reasonable thing to do. Doesn't mean it won't happen but when we start doing things that don't make sense we are not headed in the right direction.
I agree that copper bullets for center fire PBs work and have been around for awhile. Some believe they are better than bullets with lead cores. But centerfire PBs develop 50,000 to 60,000 pressure which will push copper into the rifling. I doubt that our air rifles can push a copper projectile outward. Maybe a pellet, but not a slug. But it could easily be tested. I think for air guns, tin is the most practical metal. Same material used now. Copper is also much less dense than lead so even if it worked I don't think it would obviously be better than tin in air rifles. Copper is also relatively expensive. It works in PBs because a lighter weight copper projectile can be engineered to penetrate as well as a heavier lead core bullet. I just don't see how to do this for an airgun. But maybe somebody smarter than me will figure it out.
Let's hope that the crazy stuff is limited to Europe or maybe Europe + California. I agree we need to do reasonable things to protect the environment but banning lead projectiles without solid data there is a real benefit is just not a reasonable thing to do. Doesn't mean it won't happen but when we start doing things that don't make sense we are not headed in the right direction.
Upvote 0
