The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old December 15, 2014, 06:44 PM   #1
Ozzieman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 14, 2004
Location: Northern Indiana
Posts: 6,117
The $1.1 trillion spending bill will let us use lead bullets

Spending bill extras sneak in approval,,, lead bullets
In the paper tonight
Part of the government spending
Hunting and fishing: Prohibits the EPA from regulating lead in ammunition or fishing tackle.
Republicans stopped it, there reasoning was that the EPA regulations were an overreach and just the threat would make it hard to find bullets.
Then again it increased the amount a donor could give to political parties from $194,400 to 1.6 million$$$
__________________
It was a sad day when I discovered my universal remote control did not in fact control the universe.

Did you hear about the latest study.....5 out of 6 liberals say that Russian Roulette is safe.
Ozzieman is offline  
Old December 15, 2014, 09:50 PM   #2
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 16,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzieman
Then again it increased the amount a donor could give to political parties from $194,400 to 1.6 million$$$
A cynical person might wonder what that has to do with "spending."

I really wish the Congress would adopt rules that absolutely prohibit sticking things into bills that are unrelated to the purported subject of the bill.
Aguila Blanca is online now  
Old December 16, 2014, 04:31 PM   #3
SSA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 1, 2010
Posts: 641
Did the EPA ever regulate, or attempt to regulate, lead bullets?
SSA is offline  
Old December 16, 2014, 06:21 PM   #4
thallub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Did the EPA ever regulate, or attempt to regulate, lead bullets?
The EPA has never had the authority to ban lead bullets.

Quote:
The Environmental Protection Agency has denied a petition by five environmental groups to ban lead in hunting ammunition, saying the issue is not within the agency's jurisdiction. The EPA said Friday it did not have the authority to enact the ban, aimed at protecting wildlife, under the Toxic Substances Control Act, as the groups had requested.
http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/...ammunition-ban
thallub is offline  
Old December 16, 2014, 06:30 PM   #5
45_auto
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 21, 2011
Location: Southern Louisiana
Posts: 1,399
We lost a local shooting range because of potential EPA personal responsibility concerns regarding lead cleanup.

The SEALS took it over about 10 years ago and have been hosing it down since then with about a million times as much lead in a week as the club did in 20 years.

Quote:
1.2.3 Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA)

The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA),
imposes liability on past and present owners or
operators of properties where a release of a
hazardous substance into the environment
exists. CERCLA is used to ensure that an
owner/operator cleans a contaminated site or to
seek reimbursement from past owners/operators
or disposers (potentially responsible parties or
PRPs) when a party, either the government or
private party, has cleaned up the contamination.
Under CERCLA, lead is considered a hazardous
substance.
EPA has the authority to order a PRP to clean up
a site or conduct the cleanup and recover its
costs from the PRP under CERCLA.
Responsible parties may be held liable for all
cleanup costs, which can be substantial. Under
CERCLA, shooting ranges may be liable for
government costs incurred during the cleanup
of ranges, natural resources damages, and
health assessments and/or health effects
studies. The following two examples illustrate
how shooting ranges (including one operated by
the federal government) can be affected by
CERCLA.
http://www.epa.gov/region2/waste/leadshot/epa_bmp.pdf
45_auto is offline  
Old December 16, 2014, 07:10 PM   #6
4V50 Gary
Staff
 
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,239
Considering that the FDIC is in a position to assume trillions (if not quadrillions) of derivative debts from the Too Big To Jail, this budget is not in the interest of We The People.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe!
4V50 Gary is offline  
Old December 16, 2014, 09:30 PM   #7
thallub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,046
Quote:
Considering that the FDIC is in a position to assume trillions (if not quadrillions) of derivative debts from the Too Big To Jail, this budget is not in the interest of We The People.
In this budget deal congress allowed the big banks to deal in another type of "swap".
thallub is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.03911 seconds with 9 queries