I grew up fishing using lead split shot sinkers. The common practice is biting down on them to crimp them onto the line. Lead is still the standard. I don’t want to think about how much of that is in my system.
I always put a condom on my gun for extra protection
You know, I don’t think guns are very safe.
“Wait… It’s still lead poisoning?”
“Always has been…”
Pistol ranges largely indoors with running water.
Rifle ranges largely rural outdoors. No running water.
doesn’t lead toxicity cause aggressive behavior? Seems like a pretty bad mix. Almost like you could hypothesize a correlation between our current political climate and lead exposure.
Wouldn’t it be crazy if we could solve a big chunk of our political issues by just banning lead in stuff?
Well, problem is that it’s more of a slow time release thing with lead in the brain. We’re still dealing with the fallout from lead in paint and water pipes that were banned decades ago but it takes a while for the lead to leech into the brain, so they don’t tend to get dumber and more aggressive until later in life. So the people touching lead ammo will probably get worse as they age. Of course there could already be significant overlap with the lead paint and lead ammo people. In which case they’re probably just fucked.
So it might help, but it will take a lot longer than we’d like.
We are still seeing a net decrease in crime from the ban of lead paint and lead in gas.
It doesnt just fall off within 6-12 months of stopping exposure. The decline in negative issues from lead exposure can take generations
Is it possible the political divide in this country is people with lead poisoning vs. those without it?
Bruh they put lead in gasoline until the 80s.
MAGA is 10% nazis, 10% cult members, 10% painfully-ignorant cunts, 69% lead addled boomers/genx
and 1% rich fucks manipulating the rest of them.
airplane fuel is still leaded.
You are correct, but since some may read that and assume that all aviation fuel is leaded, I wanted to add more info.
Most people don’t know that “airplane fuel” and “jet fuel” are different. Jet fuel is not leaded. The fuel used by small, piston-driven prop engines is. Because small piston aircraft still use leaded fuel, aviation is still the largest source of airborne lead emissions. The FAA is working to phase it out by 2030.
You know what’s funny? One of the “quirky” things about the Fallout Universe is how everything is radioactive because all their tech is based on fission/fusion right? It’s meant to be funny like haha yeah our pollution is bad but atleast we’re not poisoning ourselves with everything we do. Yet if you sub out “radioactive” for “heavy metal contamination” and “microplastics” etc that’s basically 100% accurate to real life america.
Isn’t it just for some prop planes? Also there’s an approved unleaded version but for slme reason it’s being rolled out slowly
Jets run on kerosene but higher quality, so yes, the leaded fuel is small prop planes
Just flew with 100LL, and I also clean up with anti-lead soap. I’m the only pilot I know who does this, but I can’t wait to fly something electric ugh.
huh. maybe the chemtrail people were onto something.
I’ve known a few that were certainly on something…
Most people don’t handle airplane fuel
The danger from leaded fuels don’t come from handling, but from the exhaust. The lead becomes breathable and enters the environment, exposing those who lived in urban areas and near roads to more lead than others.
The other poster isn’t wrong about airplane fuel being leaded, but that can be misleading because most people don’t know that “airplane fuel” and “jet fuel” are different. Jet fuel is not leaded, but the fuel used by small, piston-driven prop engines is.
Yeah but the jet stream takes care of any concerning concentrations of exhaust.
Even under 10,000 ft the atmospheric dispersion is orders of magnitude above surface.
The turbulence at the surface on a bad day can ‘lock out’ the upper atmosphere sometimes, which is extra dangerous for surface car exhaust - but is actually beneficial the higher your altitude vs ground.
So in all ways the ways airplane fuel would expose someone to lead, isnt experienced by the general populace. (minus directly handling the fuel, may have concentrated lead get on someone’s hand/food, but thats another situation)
Does the lead in the exhaust come down into the air we breathe? Lead is heavy. Would probably be more in cities with airports and under flight paths. Diluted of course, but repeated every day… Perhaps a tin hat or mask would help.
Atmospheric dispersion is usually actually concerning good not bad, so it should dilute across the globe fairly quickly.
Air pollution usually becomes an issue when something like nuclear waste reaches the atmosphere, cause we ALL get to breathe in that nuclear waste.
But honestly some (probably large) percentage of meteors are lead deposited right to the atmosphere, cause its so atomically stable nearly everything decays to it.
So no matter what there’s some lead in the soup, and I can’t see jet fuel being a large contributer (to an already small amount)
Well jet exhaust would be a very large contributor if it were leaded, but luckily it isn’t. It’s just piston powered prop planes that use leaded “avgas”, anything with a turbine uses an unleaded jet fuel.
As it is, it’s pretty bad, but it could be a lot worse. Airborne lead is really quite bad for many aspects of biology. If small planes stopped burning leaded fuel today, I’m quite sure we would be able to track a measurable difference in health and educational outcomes within a decade.
Thats a good point, not even turboprops are leaded if I remember right.
Obviously it’d require a lot of study to definitively say the impact of the lead, but I’m convinced the impact wouldn’t be able to compare to natural levels in that atmospheric environment. Like we love our planes, but its still energetically really difficult for us to get them up there - but space rocks can have a hard time NOT burning up in our atmosphere. And lead is a larger than uniform part of our universe because its atomic stability, so odds are (IMO) atmospheres relatively lead-y, but have been for centuries.
That and the difficulty creating hotspots in such a turbulent environment makes it required to increase the entire atmosphere’s lead content to increase any one area to dangerous levels.
It’s why boomers are so fucking dumb
The Boomers grew up with EVERYTHING having lead in it, including the air thanks to leaded gasoline. Prolonged lead poisoning is almost surely a factor there.
Can’t blame boomers for the number of Gen-Z males who are absolute chuds.
The voting break in males over 65 is more liberal than those under 25.
I’d like to see this graphed against political leaning and opinions on things like gay rights or abortion.
This just proves that broader economic trends exist, but especially cause how much it detaches at the end, yet increases in step this is obviously not causation, and is really only loose correlation
The divergence makes sense.
Children age out of the sample cohort, but still have high lead levels and still contribute to the crime cohort.
I’d expect to see the lead level rate be proportional to the birth rate and the crime rate proportional to the death rate. Having the chart extend another 15 years to today might show that.
That’s incorrect. It’s correlation, not causation.
If lead were such a direct cause of violence, they should start diverging at the introduction of lead, not long after a notable decline in lead levels. (ok ok not diverge at first, but still have a predictable, visible connection throughout)
Children grow up constantly, and only one of the lines is not age-restricted. If it were to ever diverge while still being a major cause, it’d begin to diverge
at the introduction of the stimulus…or rather, start to diverge when the supposed initiating cause was reduced.As you say, lead is a lifetime problem. If it were to be a tent pole contributor to violence, violence wouldn’t have reduced in lockstep basically ever.
Lead is a massive problem and is a toxin, but it surely did not itself contribute to increased violence. Increased stupidity? Absolutely.
Lead is a neurotoxin. Its link to violence is not in question by any serious statistical analysis.
Leave apologia at the door please.
Cop brain is a real thing.
I’m not surprised. People don’t even wash their hands after using the rest room.
Oh shit. Is that why my eye is read?
read
Red
Jesus. Look through my post history and it will all make sense.
I gotta stop posting here first thing in the morning -_-
I said in one of my posts something like “this is house my cat sits”
How. The word was how. I said house. I made her a house sitting. And now my eye is a reader.
I’ve stopped stressing over perfect grammar and spelling myself. I go for 90% accuracy, that’s good enough.
Currently there is a push for hunters to switch to all copper bullets. The bullet technology has gotten good enough that solid copper bullets can be designed in a way to consistently petal and create big wound channels. They’re obviously more expensive so I stick with lead for the range and practice.
At the learn to hunt deer class I went to they reviewed a study that showed that lead bullets fragment and shed when they hit the target. The study shot a hog cadaver (iirc), and noted that when they scanned the result they found lead up to 16" away from the impact point and that it was probably even further but their scanner was limited to scanning just that size. The class then demonstrated shooting an all copper bullet at a series of water jugs in a bullet trap to show how it petals.
All that to say, this is a current topic in the hunting community and people are switching away from lead. More and more manufacturers are making copper core bullets and they’re coming down in price. If you’re interested Barnes is the go to manufacturer for these right now.
Edit: Also bird shot moved away from lead a long time ago. It’s not even legal to use it anymore.
Edit 2: Turns out lead bird shot isn’t illegal to use, it’s only outright banned for water fowl hunting. https://www.fws.gov/story/2022-04/nontoxic-shot-regulations-hunting-waterfowl-and-coots-us. You should also check your local laws, here in Wisconsin it’s also banned for mourning dove hunting.
In 1991, the US Fish and Wildlife Service launched a nationwide ban on lead shot for waterfowl hunting to reduce the number of lead shot falling into waterbodies. Since the inception of dove hunting in Wisconsin in 2003, the DNR has prohibited the use of lead shot for hunting mourning doves on state-managed lands.
In my mind I just equated that with being banned all together. Who wants to study the law just to find out when they can use toxic shot?
Lead ammunition is harmful to predator and scavenger species.
FYI, a significant amount of lead exposure from shooting isn’t really from the bullets but from the primers which contain lead compounds.
The lead in the bullet is going downrange, and is often jacketed in something like copper, you’re not gonna come in contact with a whole lot of lead from handling most ammo, and there’s absolutely some amount of fragmentation and fouling and such happening, but lead from the bullet isn’t exactly getting sprayed all around.
But the primer absolutely does vaporize a bunch of lead compounds and you can inhale those fumes and particles settle on your clothes and such. Lead free primers are out there, but they’re not very common, and a lot of people find them to be more unreliable.
Now lead exposure from the actual projectiles isn’t zero, and there’s no real safe level of lead exposure, so don’t get complacent about that either, but in the grand scheme it’s often not the biggest issue
Lead from the bullet does actually come out of the barrel in a particularly impressive plume of particulate matter that you then breathe in. It’s caused by friction with the barrel and cuts from the rifling, but it’s very effectively reduced by using jacketed bullets. Just FYI.
You can 1000% still get lead birdshot and it is 100% legal to use in most states, with the exceptions being for a statewide ban in California, and waterfowl where it is illegal to use nationwide.
Edit: Spelling
Dang, I guess you’re right. What I was thinking of is the ban on hunting water fowl with lead shot
https://www.fws.gov/story/2022-04/nontoxic-shot-regulations-hunting-waterfowl-and-coots-us
Man I love when someone admits they were wrong and doesn’t double down. I like you.
I’m using lead free ammo since last year and I’m content with the results. Many conservative, mostly older hunters claim that the killing power is inferior. But in my experience, even with a lead-free deformable bullet, the killing power is still perfectly adequate, even for smaller game. Killing power depends largely on the point of impact, so if the animal runs a long way, it’s the hunter’s fault, not the ammunition’s.
I’ve always been confused by the killing power argument.
A sufficiently high velocity impact to the correct location kills regardless of the material in question typically.
So as long as the material does not cause fov to go to absolute shit or something then functionally it shouldn’t matter.
Yes and no. I think the reasoning behind this often has to do with how the projectile behaves after striking the target. Generally speaking, a distinction is made between deformation-type and fragmentation-type projectiles, and, if I understand the arguments correctly, it’s assumed that lead-free projectiles don’t fragment as effectively or, in the case of deformation-type projectiles, don’t mushroom as well as lead-based ones do. I don’t know if there was any truth to that when lead-free ammunition was first developed, but today that’s definitely no longer the case, and that argument is therefore invalid.
The deformation is exactly it. That’s why I’m that class I went to they demoed out. The copper bullet perfectly petaled the way it was supposed to into a star like pattern. That would leave a serious wound channel to bleed out of.
Lead is very dense, so a bullet the same size delivers more force. Steel was an early alternative, and in addition to being less dense, it also tends not to deform into a mushroom shape during impact like lead and copper do. So a steel bullet can penetrate cleanly through a target leaving a narrower path and have a slower penetration and exit velocity, all combining to do less damage.
The density benefit is the same reason some high end rounds use tungsten and even depleted uranium. Heavier bullets of the same size fly straighter and hit harder.
Steel and copper also tend to cause more barrel wear than lead. Probably tungsten does too, but I don’t have experience with it, let alone depleted uranium, lol.
It’s still worth switching away from lead though.
The force difference would be absolutely miniscule. The energy comes from the powder, not the bullet material. Denser cores increase penetration by concentrating the force, not magically delivering more force.
You’re correct, but also completely wrong at the same time. Yes, you can have a lighter bullet that is faster that carries the same kinetic energy. It might even hold its energy longer if it’s more aerodynamic. Where you are wrong is the ability to transfer that energy. A full metal jacket would pass clean through the target without transferring most of its energy into the target. A lead bullet that deforms is going to dump a lot more energy into the target. That’s why you have hollow points and other bullets that are designed to petal and fragment on impact. For hunting the goal is a bullet that does pass all the way through creating two wounds to bleed out and cutting as large of a wound channel as possible. Which is different than say self defense where you want a bullet that dumps all of its energy as fast as possible so you don’t over penetrate and hit your neighbor.
I guess all of that falls in line with the force being concentrated. It just really isn’t related to density as much as you’re implying. Unless I misunderstood what you’re saying.
This isn’t a discussion of lead vs some stupid-ass strawman you all imagine. This is about lead vs literally anything possible.
If you think copper or other heavy-ish metal bullets could never compete with lead, even on spread and delivered damage, then you are just stupid.
What strawman did I present? Go ahead, find one.
That’s literally the opposite of what I have said in this thread. I’ve repeatedly said copper is just as effective with the only downside being that it is more expensive. Why don’t you calm down and actually read what was said instead of reacting defensively.
Kinetic energy from a projectile is equal to the mass of the projectile times the square of the velocity, but air resistance saps velocity off quite rapidly and independently of the mass. So a heavy projectile will deliver more kinetic energy to a target than a lighter one with the same initial velocity.
A lighter projectile can be driven faster by the same charge of propellant, but air resistance increases with the cube of the velocity so delivering more energy through increased velocity is a losing game. You can decrease air resistance by decreasing the cross section of the projectile, but that requires dense materials like lead.
tldr: the difference is absolutely not minuscule. There’s a reason why bullets are made of dense materials.
The force difference for rounds made to similar WOULD be miniscule, because they’d be made to be similar. OFC you cannot cheat physics. I’m not trying to defend bullets made of fucking feathers here…
Since a few people in the thread seem to think lead ammunition is illegal in the US, it’s not. It’s only illegal for shooting waterfowl nationwide, and entirely banned in the state of California.
it would be weird if a historically common ammo type was illegal for a reason as silly as health, that would be like making using leaded gasoline illegal
I think the irony would be in legislating the material bullets are made of because of health concerns. The purpose of a bullet is to kill.
And not to harm the person shooting it. Lead does that.
Yeah, tbh it’d be pretty immoral if someone gets lead poisoning just because they shot up an elementary school. Big Gun really needs to be taken to court over this scandal.
The receiver, not the owner. And also it doesn’t kill him but turns him dumb. But you’ll also breath vaporized lead in, washing does little to prevent that.
The receiver, not the owner.
Incorrect. Most gun deaths are suicides.
That still makes them the recipient of the bullet.
Shooting firearms is messy and dirty. You get all kinds of oils, fouling, lead, particulates on your upper body and hands. If there’s no room at the range, I go home, clean my guns up depending on how much shooting was done, then wipe up and shower. My hands are visibly soiled after shooting a few dozen rounds.
The fuck are you shooting, that you’re hands are soiled after a few dozen rounds?
I can shoot for hours and not have anything on my hands.
Sounds like you’re shooting muzzle loaded pistols or some really shit ammo.
What? You’ll have gpr on you with a single round. You will absolutely have something on you after hours of shooting.
Yea…but it’s not going to be visibly all over you like you’ve been mining coal with your hands. As I pointed out. Sorry that you people are arguing against this, thinking that after a range day we firearm owners look like we’ve been shoveling coal into a steam locomotive.
https://www.tdcaa.com/journal/gunshot-residue-not-the-smoking-gun-tv-makes-it-out-to-be/
I’m quoting you here:
I can shoot for hours and not have anything on my hands.
It’s fine that what you meant was not having enough to be grimy. Nothing wrong with a little hyperbole. But that isn’t what you said, or I wouldn’t have bothered to leave the comment.
Secondary to that, your unfortunate choice to try and relegate people into in and out groups with “you people” is not just shitty in general, it’s so far off the target in this case as to approach absurdity. Elsewhere in this thread and comment section, it’s made very clear I own and practice with firearms. Your assumptions are as bad as your ability to communicate what you actually mean.
So, you know, maybe slow your roll a little, realize that your own word choices led to the wave of objections, and chill the fuck out. Or, keep being argumentative and end up with nobody willing to talk to you at all.
For real my fellow netizen, go back, ~~ ~~ put those around your original comment and add in what you really meant. Chances are high that people correcting you will dry up to nothing.
My hands are visibly soiled after shooting a few dozen rounds.
And here is the comment that I replied to.
I don’t know how it’s a “yea the comment that agrees with my bias about firearm owners being idiots because of lead poisoning” but the guy saying “what are you shooting that’s causing that much gpr buildup” gets dog piled on because it’s not fitting peoples bias.
The original comment, is what I called out and it snow balled into a bunch of people who don’t shoot firearms, trying to tell me, the guy who has his own range and shoots a lot, is wrong…
I honestly don’t give a shit that people disagree with me, but people who are antigun are just as bad as the pro-life people…they will not listen to literally anything but shit that gives them a bias feedback.
Sounds like a self-correcting problem
It’s not though. These people take their weapons home and hang up their coat or sweater in the same closet their kids’ jackets hang in, they go sit down in the family lounge and get lead dust on the furniture, then they go to the fridge, getting lead dust on the fridge door handle and surfaces they prep food on…
…you get the idea I’m sure.Additionally, it’s low doses. This lead dust isn’t going to be causing acute lead toxicity, just slow small buildup resulting in worse decision-making and increased aggression.
If it was going to cause acute toxicity soldiers would have wear respirators when firing. Well, unless it was slow to grow to acute danger.
Reddit’s liberal gun owners community talks about this a lot. Anecdotally, a lot of casual shooters have surprisingly high levels, even if they’re changing clothes and washing after.
Seems like just being around it has a strong effect, especially shooting indoors without a mask.
I ate leaded solder. Is this why I am stupid?
Probably the paint chips
Yes, well, gun owners are a special kind of stupid.
I don’t know man. I hunt and like to have some way of protecting myself in increasingly hostile times here in America. I know I’m not the smartest rocket in the tool box but you’re dismissing a lot of valid reasons for gun ownership and people.
All the libs and lefties I shoot with know about d-lead wipes and proper firearms hyegene and safety.
Count me in this category, too
I am almost 40, I’ve been around guns since I was maybe 7 and I have never been warned about this before. I also have a PhD and am happy to make you feel stupid if that’s your jam, but it seems like something we should be taught but aren’t?
Of course we clean ourselves and our guns but I would never have said “hey hold on, I need to use an extra product before I eat my turkey sandwich”. I don’t prefer to smell like gunpowder, but I don’t like smelling like a cow either and the cleanup was similar.
…and am happy to make you feel stupid if that’s your jam…
You obviously didn’t get a PhD in not being a douche I guess.
a funny thing happens once your education and intellectual levels reach a certain point. you just get sick of dealing with everyone’s shit.
Imagine being stuck in a room full of rude 5th graders that keep telling you that you’re wrong about the things you studied for half your life. now imagine you’ve been stuck in that room with a rotating selection of rude 5th graders for decades.
would you be nice to them?
People who say unprompted that they have a PhD as proof of their intelligence probably don’t, and most likely don’t spend much time dealing with PhDs either.
why shouldn’t they promote their state of education to relay their level of comprehension and intellect? they worked hard for it. it’s not like they hand them out to everybody.
the use didn’t even use it as a power move, simply said it as a way to reject idiots from challenging their statements.
that’s the real shame here, but I get it. that’s why when idiots often open their mouths I have zero inclination to correct them.
you can fix ugly, you can fix ignorance, but you can’t fix stupid.
why shouldn’t they promote their state of education to relay their level of comprehension and intellect?
People with PhDs generally have a deep understanding of a narrow subject. And outside of that narrow scope, some of them do things like try to fill a bucket with more water by extending it at the top with cardboard. And that type are the most likely to compensate for their other inadequacies by relying on their academic achievement.
In my experience the people with PhDs whose intellects I have the most respect for are the ones I’m least likely to hear about their doctorate from. It’s not a marker for comprehension and intellect, it’s a marker for obsessive perseverance and interest in an academic field, plus an ability to write technical language in that field.
Dude you don’t have to white knight for the douchey PhD guy. Saying shit like that, even if you are really super duper smart, is incredibly arrogant. People that say shit like, “I’m super smart and you’re super dumb and I have a piece of paper to prove how super smart I am.” Are gigantic douche bags. It ranks up there with, “I have a huge IQ.” In levels of douche-dom. In fact, the more I think about it the more I think this is some shit that Trump would say. Just outrageously, fart smellingly, douchey.
So no I’m not gonna imagine the scenario where you somehow think I’m a 5th grader and you and PhD guy are the only super smart people on the entire internet. Not only is it a douchey thing to say, but also would make me a douche, and I really don’t wanna be a douche.
Dude you don’t have to white knight for the douchey PhD guy.
not white knighting. it’s just personal experience.
Saying shit like that, even if you are really super duper smart, is incredibly arrogant.
you clearly have no idea how draining it can be to deal with idiots. the mental fatigue alone is depressing.
besides they didn’t say you were stupid, they said they are free to make you feel stupid. you clearly are dealing with some feelings of inadequacy and felt threatened by that statement.
I have multiple pieces of paper that say I’m smart too. Some of those pieces of paper are even college ruled! I also have been on the internet since you had to make funny phone sounds to log on. I don’t think I’ve ever been like (in my best nasally Ben Shapiro voice), “Everyone is stupid and a 5th grader. Also I’m smart so I don’t want to deal with stupid people cause you’re all stupid.” I don’t think it’s helpful, it’s thought terminating, and is often said by people that are super wrong and they say it so they won’t be challenged.
I’m just a guy here challenging those douches and you gotta come in here and try to white knight for them. I seriously don’t get it unless…
besides they didn’t say you were stupid, they said they are free to make you feel stupid. you clearly are dealing with some feelings of inadequacy and felt threatened by that statement.
Totally got me pegged on that huh? Not projecting in the slightest are we? Maybe I just think douchebags should be called out so they stop being douchey? But maybe you’re right and it was a personal challenge to PhD guy and you had to come along and ruin it. I guess we’ll never know now will we?
Maybe I just think douchebags should be called out so they stop being douchey?
the irony is, I’m doing the same thing.
are you equating PhDs with overall intelligence?
that would be ironic
No, that would be something you would expect Alanis Morissette to put in her song “Ironic” but in reality she doesn’t know how to define ironic either.
Yes I am here to tell you that those things are correlated. I have been outside where it is peopley.
oh, man
have a good one, dude. I don’t want to waste more time talking with idiots
You know, I feel exactly the same way.
but I never would have said “hey hold on, I need to use an extra product before I eat my turkey sandwich”.
It’s amazing how many things we completely fail to question. Your parents said or didn’t say something, showed the action or inaction was completely normal, and then you autopiloted indefinitely until something is specifically called it out. I continue to find new things wrong with my dad’s statements. It’s… Infuriating when I figure it out. Usually happens when I go to say it out loud as fact to someone else. That triggers the internal fact check mechanism.
This has been going on for decades.
This is the most accurate thing I have read in a long time.
This is exactly how it happens.
I’ve been around guns since I was maybe 7
The real WTF.
Meh. I held my first firearm when I was 3, couldn’t even pull the trigger.
Just so I can pitch the reply correctly - is it the bad parenting, or the failed state you were born into, that you’re looking for pity for here?
Bad parenting is teaching your kids abstinence-only gun education. If you live in a country where half the people have guns, your kid should have a basic understanding of them. If you live in a household that has guns, your kid should have an avanced understanding of them.
Thank you, your vote for “failed state” has been counted.
I mean, we are definitely a failed state. You can accept that and try to keep your kids alive the best you can, or pretend everything is fine and assume they’ll never find themselves near a gun in their lives
