Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:27 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Editorial: Ban on lead bullets appears all but inevitable 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Editorial: Ban on lead bullets appears all but inevitabl
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:47 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:42 am
Posts: 206
Location: Northern 'burbs
dismal wrote:
That's not good enough, of course. Before hunters take to the fields and woods five months from now, they'll need to know a lot more about what happens to a bullet when it hits a deer -- and what could happen to the people who eat that deer.


Meanwhile, the experts had <b>some interesting ideas about how hunters could shoot deer more "carefully," and how meat processors might examine venison closely to make sure no microscopic bullet fragments end up on the dinner table</b>.



Heh!

Bullets need to be made less lethal and since the element lead has been a part of nature longer than the existence of humans, it's our responsibility to assure a safe and complacent human and lead bonding in peace. :lol:


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 11:54 am 
Occasional Participant

Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:46 pm
Posts: 84
Next we will have to sign a waiver before we can buy a hunting and fishing lic acknowledging we understand the risk of lead poisoning from the animals we shoot and fish we catch.

_________________
Ron

www.unholstered.com
www.sonarmap.com


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:01 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:42 am
Posts: 206
Location: Northern 'burbs
westberg wrote:
Next we will have to sign a waiver before we can buy a hunting and fishing lic acknowledging we understand the risk of lead poisoning from the animals we shoot and fish we catch.


As with all other issues politically, the band plays on....

Issues and concerns are the trough of sustenance for politicians and when life in general is good, issues and concerns need to be created. :wink:


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:16 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:44 pm
Posts: 1525
Location: Isanti, MN
For what it's worth, I've met with State Sen. Chaudhary and dined with him and his wife at several M.O.H.A. Legislative Banquets in recent years. I don't think he is one to take a knee jerk reaction to something like lead bullet fear mongering. I do know that he has worked very hard in the effort to protect hunting and fishing traditions in our state. For years he was a sponsor to the Shooting Range Protection Act bill in the State Senate that finally got passed into law a couple of years ago. While my politics go toward conservative and his are more liberal, I have found him to be a person that you can talk plain talk with.

_________________
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
- Winston Churchill -


WITHOUT LIBERTY THERE IS NO FREEDOM


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:37 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 5270
Location: Minneapolis
Scott, if you have had previous contact with him, can you call him and ask him for a copy of (or link to) the Pawlenty/Holsten proposal to ban lead shot he references in this press release? http://www.senate.mn/members/member_pr_ ... 85&id=1639

His press release doesn't line up with this: http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?id=3783

_________________
I am defending myself... in favor of that!


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:04 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:42 am
Posts: 206
Location: Northern 'burbs
DeanC wrote:
Scott, if you have had previous contact with him, can you call him and ask him for a copy of (or link to) the Pawlenty/Holsten proposal to ban lead shot he references in this press release? http://www.senate.mn/members/member_pr_ ... 85&id=1639

His press release doesn't line up with this: http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?id=3783


A discrepancy of speak via a politician?

We now have 8 wonders in this world to contend with. :shock: /sarcasm


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:08 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:44 pm
Posts: 1525
Location: Isanti, MN
Hi Dean, I will try to contact the Senator and get some feedback from him. It seems to me (if I am reading correctly) that he withdrew the lead provision from the Omnibus Bill as he thought the matter needed much more thorough investigation, not just a "knee jerk reaction".

Quote:
Sen. Chaudhary said, “When we are considering a big change like this, it’s fair to pause and make sure our information is on point. I was under the impression that the ‘experts’ in the DNR had done this.”


I really want to get to the bottom of the Pawlenty/Holsten element in this matter. :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

_________________
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
- Winston Churchill -


WITHOUT LIBERTY THERE IS NO FREEDOM


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:18 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:19 pm
Posts: 2305
Hmm.. Could it be that The Senator proposed the ban because some info from the DNR said that it could be a problem, found out that the information that he had to support the ban was flawed, then retracted the proposed ban until people got their facts strait?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:21 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:42 am
Posts: 206
Location: Northern 'burbs
Scott Hughes wrote:
Hi Dean, I will try to contact the Senator and get some feedback from him. It seems to me (if I am reading correctly) that he withdrew the lead provision from the Omnibus Bill as he thought the matter needed much more thorough investigation, not just a "knee jerk reaction".

Quote:
Sen. Chaudhary said, “When we are considering a big change like this, it’s fair to pause and make sure our information is on point. I was under the impression that the ‘experts’ in the DNR had done this.”


I really want to get to the bottom of the Pawlenty/Holsten element in this matter. :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:


Scott, I'm always impressed with and read your tag line every time when I come across your posts 8) .

Like minds....


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:42 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 10:44 pm
Posts: 1525
Location: Isanti, MN
someone1980 wrote:
Hmm.. Could it be that The Senator proposed the ban because some info from the DNR said that it could be a problem, found out that the information that he had to support the ban was flawed, then retracted the proposed ban until people got their facts strait?


My gut tells me that is the case. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the DNR types from various states were getting together to discuss common issues. I'm getting a feeling that some enviro-wacko, sky-is-falling types are somehow getting inside and making an endplay. And I am not at all comfortable with what Tim Paw might be up to. :x

_________________
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
- Winston Churchill -


WITHOUT LIBERTY THERE IS NO FREEDOM


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:54 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 11:42 am
Posts: 206
Location: Northern 'burbs
Scott Hughes wrote:
someone1980 wrote:
Hmm.. Could it be that The Senator proposed the ban because some info from the DNR said that it could be a problem, found out that the information that he had to support the ban was flawed, then retracted the proposed ban until people got their facts strait?


My gut tells me that is the case. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the DNR types from various states were getting together to discuss common issues. <b>I'm getting a feeling that some enviro-wacko, sky-is-falling types are somehow getting inside and making an endplay.</b> And I am not at all comfortable with what Tim Paw might be up to. :x


And the media are giving their full support to this end play. :evil:

Tim Pawlenty? He's doing what is best for him as all politicians are expected to do these day's.


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group