Lead Ban ChroniclesA couple of weeks ago, I got a call from a fella who said he was a reporter for CNN. He wanted to ask me a bit about the lead ammo issue, “green” bullets, and other related topics. Of course, I jumped at the opportunity to talk to someone in the mainstream media about this issue, and hopefully interject my own take on this into the national conversation.

We spent quite a while on the phone, and I probably gave the writer, John Sutter, a lot more than he really needed (or wanted) to hear… but hey, as any regular HogBlog reader has probably noticed, I’m pretty passionate about this thing.

The interview came and went, and I spent a day or two recounting what we’d discussed. As with anytime I’ve done a newspaper or television interview, I’m always worried that I missed a key point, or worse, that I’ll come off as a serious drinker of the Kool-Aid®.  Did anything I said come across as supportive of a lead ammo ban (I don’t support a ban)?  Did I make it sound like I was totally buying into the anti-lead hype, or was it clear that my choice was based on a personal ethic (it’s a personal choice… I don’t see a lot of hard evidence to support a lead ban)? 

Anyway, after a few days, I’d pretty much forgotten about the interview.

This morning, when I logged onto my computer, my email suddenly lit up!  At the top of the list was an email congratulating me on getting myself and my blog into the national news!  It took me a moment to realize what was going on, so I linked over to CNN to see the “Green Ammo” article right there in print! 

After I got over the heady rush of seeing my name in print on the CNN website, I read through the article objectively.  I have to give credit to Mr. Sutter for keeping the piece fairly balanced, especially since this is a topic that really can teeter toward either side pretty easily.  If there was a bias, it was probably due to my own position that we (hunters) need to take a proactive role in this debate, and that we shouldn’t simply discount the potential risks of lead ammunition.  I suggested that switching was a good choice, but should remain a voluntary choice… and I think Mr. Sutter captured that very well. 

Sure, I was a little disappointed that Sutter didn’t capture my concerns about the availability of non-lead bullets for most non-standard calibers.  He gets that, but he uses the NRA/NSSF quote to make the point… which, in my opinion, damages the credibility of that point simply because of the source. 

The current lack of availability, and to some extent the high cost, are two main reasons that bans like we have here in CA are bad policy.  Yes, that situation is changing… slowly… but that doesn’t help the countless hunters who are stuck with the choice of learning to handload or buying a new gun.  A ban on lead ammunition, in some cases, does amount to a ban on some guns… even if it is a temporary ban, it’s a bad thing.  This should be grounds for a fight, but it doesn’t seem to be getting much traction.

As far as the cost argument, while I can’t discount it completely, its validity suffers in the light of the sales of other “premium” ammunition already on the market.  Hunters and shooters are already buying up premium bullets as fast as the manufacturers can come up with them, and the price of these is comparable in many cases to the cost of non-lead.  The point is, if we’re going to stand up as a united front (and this is REALLY what we need to do), we need solid arguments… not stuff that can be dismissed so easily by our detractors. 

Anyway, I’m sure I’ll hear from a lot more hunters and shooters out there who think I’m sleeping with the enemy here, and that’s fine.  At least people are talking about this, and if we can get the discussion up to the right level, maybe we can interject a little common sense and constructive thinking into it.  What folks think about me on a personal level is pretty irrelevant… as long as we can find a way to work toward the preservation of our hunting and shooting sports.

Related Posts