Red Flag Warning EPA Ammunition Ban

By: T F Stern
T F Stern’s Rantings

There is yet another assault on an individual’s God-given right to bear arms. This one coming from of all places, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). First let me give a tip of the hat to Say Uncle and by extension the National Shooting Sports Foundation where I first learned of an underhanded attempt to ban traditional ammunition set in motion by an environmental group called the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD).

“With the fall hunting season fast approaching, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Lisa Jackson, who was responsible for banning bear hunting in New Jersey, is now considering a petition by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) – a leading anti-hunting organization – to ban all traditional ammunition under the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976, a law in which Congress expressly exempted ammunition. If the EPA approves the petition, the result will be a total ban on all ammunition containing lead-core components, including hunting and target-shooting rounds. The EPA must decide to accept or reject this petition by November 1, 2010, the day before the midterm elections.”

Let that sink in for a moment, “the result will be a total ban on all ammunition containing lead-core components.” More than hunters and sports enthusiasts should be concerned the EPA could conceivably make it impossible to buy ammunition for almost any weapon, to include those used for self-defense. I don’t know about you, but red flags began waving the moment I read that paragraph. Something about the 2nd Amendment, or am I mistaken?

I looked up the Center for Biological Diversity and was impressed with their staff’s credentials. Unfortunately I’d have to classify the entire group of well-educated individuals as extremists who actually believe they’ve earned the right to tell the rest of us how to live our lives. These folk’s agenda supposedly is saving the earth while ignoring individual God-given rights protected by our constitution; an interesting paradox.

I remember seeing an explanation, the difference between a conservative’s take on issues compared with a progressive’s take. Say for instance, if a conservative doesn’t like hunting, he simply doesn’t hunt while a progressive who doesn’t like hunting, will do his level best to make sure nobody else can go hunting.

Never mind, “There is no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations,” environmental progressives really don’t give a hoot (I couldn’t resist; my apologies), about facts as long as their agenda moves forward.

The CBD lists its primary mission on its website and expects the broad-natured statement to exempt it from criticism due to the lofty expression of purpose.

“At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law, and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters, and climate that species need to survive.”

If this were Saturday Night Live I’d be looking for Church Lady to use her favorite line, “Well isn’t that special.” I particularly like their inclusion of “creative media.” Creative media, that’s where feelings and good intentions outweigh facts and individual rights. Its no different than the EPA’s claim that CO2 is a hazardous gas which must be regulated regardless of whether or not Congress acts on Cap & Trade legislation.

Never mind that “a 2008 study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on blood lead levels of North Dakota hunters confirmed that consuming game harvested with traditional ammunition does not pose a human health risk.” The EPA isn’t interested in facts which run contrary to their agenda. In this particular case they want to outlaw traditional ammunition, purportedly to save the environment.

I’ll be the first to admit lead ammunition is dangerous. Standing on the wrong side of the ‘bang switch’ is often fatal. I read an autopsy report, written with a certain amount of sarcasm, in which a gunshot victim reportedly died of lead poisoning.

One more point from the article posted on the National Shooting Sports Foundation site, “Wildlife management is the proper jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the 50 state wildlife agencies.” What in thunder does the EPA have to do with regulating ammunition unless, once more for effect, unless (let that word elongate and extend musically), unless the EPA has an ulterior motive for wanting traditional ammunition banned?

The Obama administration has shown its displeasure with our constitutionally protected God-given right to own and bear arms. They have expressed this displeasure by preparing to have Congress approve the UN Gun Treaty which would get around the 2nd Amendment by turning gun control over to the United Nations.

“Once the US Government signs these international treaties, all US citizens will be subject to those gun laws created by foreign governments.”

The EPA’s involvement in banning traditional ammunition is yet another aspect of running our nation into the ground. The EPA and other so-called environmental organizations, specifically the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), have shown contempt for property rights. Which are inseparable from our God-given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The EPA would put the Declaration of Independence and Constitution in a plastic garbage bag and bury them in a landfill rather than individual citizens have ammunition for their guns.

Please direct your letters of opposition directly:

Lisa P. Jackson
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-4700
Fax: (202) 501-1450
Email: [email protected]

I recommend finding a way to ban the EPA, either through cutting its funding or some other means of removing their influence. They represent a threat to traditional American individuals, much the same as they claim humans threaten the environment. Their existence alone represents a threat to our way of life. When you hear the EPA is involved in almost anything, red flags should start waving.

This article has been cross-posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government & The American Constitution.”

4 thoughts on “Red Flag Warning EPA Ammunition Ban

  1. Unbelievable that these communists have intruded into our lives that deeply…2nd admendment guys…right to bear arms…a weapon is not a arm without the ammunition..It is time for all Americans gunowners or not to stand up to these out of touch regulators…they have no authority to regulate my life or any bodys life in this country…

  2. This whole scenario is so incredulously brash and so obviously against what this country is and has always been about, that most readers will naturally expect persons in positions able to do something about it TO DO SOMETHING about it. Yet that is the very reason why no one (any individual) will stand up alone against a bureaucracy prepared to punish “the individual” for his or her disloyalty to the reigning status quo.
    EVERY INDIVIDUAL can do something about this by writing …
    1)
    Lisa P. Jackson
    Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
    Washington, DC 20460
    (202) 564-4700
    Fax: (202) 501-1450
    Email: [email protected]
    2)
    your State’s SENATORS
    LET THEM KNOW HOW YOU FEEL
    AND THEN
    VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE ON THE 1ST TUESDAY IN NOVEMBER.
    3)
    COPY ALL OF THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
    4)
    insist to your representatives and senators that they pass no laws and approve NO TREATIES which will act against this country’s constitutionally guranteed rights to its citizens.
    5)
    work to have a constitutional Amendment passed which prohibits and invalidates any laws or treaties which result in the imposition of any limitations to our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
    6)
    Support your national and State Rifle & FIRE ARMS Associations who are joined in this action to protect our rights.

  3. TW and Boozy; One way to take action would be to share this information via your email contacts and other spheres of influence. The idea of the EPA expanding its powers unchallenged is frightening.

  4. I fully agree with your sentiments, but thought I’d post a comment from another blog so that everyone will know the arguments that the CBD will raise:

    The Center for Biological Diversity, an excellent group that encourages positive change in the natural world by peaceful, legal means has no interest in gun control. I find the whole accusation rediculous. (Not entirely sure why “do-gooders” is a bad thing to be, either). Lead in the natural environment is a threat to over 130 species, some of them endangered. The Federal government has implemented regulations to reduce the exposure of human beings to lead in drinking water, paint, gasoline, toys, toxic
    dumps, and shooting ranges. Strict
    recycling regulations are in place regarding disposal of lead/acid batteries. However,
    the types of lead in question here are uncontrolled and lead remains prevelant in the environment in some places, routinely turning up in the guts of prematurley killed animals, that then are eaten by other animals, and the lead spread continues.
    There has been federal law on the books since the early 90’s that outlaw the use of lead as a means to hunt waterfowl to avoid poisoning. Was that “gun control” too?
    Several states have already mandated the use of non-lead/toxic bullets, shot, and fishing sinkers. These states continue to have active hunting and fishing communities that
    have successfully transitioned away from lead products. It isn’t true that there is no alternative ammunition. It;s already in place, and being used. This is a common sense petition to the issue of poisoning the environment and preventing the unneccesary killing of animals. Calling it an attempt at gun control is absurd.
    Written by: Scout on Friday, Aug. 27, 2010 at 7:51 AM — Report abuse

Comments are closed.

Donate to
NoisyRoom.net

Support American Values...