We've received a number of responses to Anthony's editorial in the NY Times, most of them positive. We generally only receive negative comments, getting so much positive feedback over such a short period of time warranted posting. We have removed names to protect the privacy of the individuals who wrote. Below are a handfull of emails we received over the last two days. We'll continue to add to this post as the emails arrive......
--------------------------
Project Gutpile,
I read Anthony Prieto’s opinion in the New York Times dated December 15. 2010, or at least as much as I could stomach. You expect to be taken seriously when you kill animals with a rifle? At least play fair, and go out there with a slingshot. Give the defenseless animals a fair shot. And you worry about lead poisoning? I’m sure the elk appreciate your concern as they lay dying from a high-powered rifle bullet. I know I would be concerned in their position. Maybe you should extend your campaign to include the American police forces. You don’t want them killing people with lead bullets, do you? Taken in that context maybe it’s easier for you to understand. Or do you consider human life to be as expendable as non-human?
J.D.
--------------------------
Anthony,
After watching Jim Petterson's lead vs copper ballistics research on YouTube and reading your Op/ed in the NYT I would like to step into the fray as a spokesperson for the cause.
I live in Vermont and write monthly columns for two sporting magazines. I also run a guide service and a mentoring program for at-risk youth.
My constituency is comprised of those who vociferously support anything that the NRA claims and, with the exception of a few hunting partners, it appears that the entire state is against getting the lead out.
I know that expressing this opinion may cause many of my readers to be rather vocal and maybe even boycott my columns, but I believe this information MUST get disseminated and would like to add it to my blog and make mention of the column and research behind the issue.
May I have your permission to do so?
Thank You,
B.C.
--------------------------
Mr. Prieto,
I just read your piece in the NY Times. Though I can agree with your motives your demand for an outright ban is counter-productive. Why is there always such a knee jerk reaction when such a demand is made? The reason you get such a backlash is that you are trying to tell hunters that they will have to throw away all the ammunition they now own if a ban is passed. I still have boxes of lead #2 &4 shotgun loads for water fowl from years ago. Now you want to tell me I have to throw out all my stock of rifle ammo and start over? No way you're going to get my support. Ammo is an expensive part of hunting if one practices shooting enough to make a humane kill. I can easily shoot the equivalent cost of a Leupold scope in ammo each year practicing. And what of guys that just like to shoot?
Nope, you're on the wrong track.
You'd be much better off lobbying to mandate that the bullet manufacturers have to switch to copper by a certain date. All existing ammo would be grandfathered in, it could be used up until the shooter had to buy newer copper bullets. Eventually lead would be phased out. But if you insist on an outright ban, you will be fought every step of the way.
BTW, this ignores the fact that the evidence you speak of is strictly anecdotal. No study has ever proved that raptors are dying of lead poisoning. But if it makes you feel better to ban lead, this is how you should go about it.
Hey, what about all those lead wheel weights that fall off on the side of the road each year? Should we make those from copper also? And if you're serious about your blog you may want to post more often than every two years.
regards,
R.S.
South Salem, NY
--------------------------
Anthony,
Thanks for your oped piece in the NYTimes today. I'm 75, have never hunted before this year, but got a license to take some game/food on my Mendocino Co property. As the government taught me to shoot in the 1950's I thought I would give hunting a try. The fact that the EPA folded on this very obvious issue is amazing. Do you have support from Congressman Mike Thompson in my area? If not, I'll sign up to make contact.
Again, this is obviously a tough political, long term issue. I'll help if I can.
D.K.
--------------------------
Dear Mr. Prieto,
I just read your op-ed piece in the NY Times (online), and it was a rare pleasure to read something good in that venue!
I'm an NRA life-member and a Reagan Conservative, and I wholeheartedly agree with you on getting rid of Lead. As soon as Copper bullets became available, I switched. As an engineer, I find copper to be superior to lead in every way. Even its lower density I find to be advantageous: just use a longer, more streamlined bullet!
I don't really like the approach of using the EPA, but I do see the logic behind it.
I'd like to join Project Gutpile. As a Benefactor NRA member, I'll try to influence them to change their position on this. One thing you might want to consider is the economic impact this would have on the ammunition manufacturers. A bill to provide them with Federal funding (say, in the form of tax credits) to switch from Lead to Copper might allay some of their fears.
Regards,
Dan Nutley
--------------------------
howdy mr prieto et al,
out here in southern indiana, i'd be proud to use only non-lead ammo and fishing hardware. heck, i'll even proselytize-accordingly. u know of a web site where non-lead goodies can be ordered? especially fishing weights, 22LR, 44mag and 50cal muzzlelaoder bullets.
thx for all u do,
nathan pate
--------------------------
Note: I originally wrote this as a letter to the editor at the Times, then decided it would be better directed directly to y'all.
-Jeff Levene
Atlanta
Disclosure: I am not a hunter. Even so, it is obvious why vocal opposition to the proposed lead-bullet ban is inevitable: most bullets are not used for hunting. Most bullets are used at target ranges, or carried and (hopefully) never fired, for self protection. I know many firearm owners, and only a small minority of them hunt (granted, I live in an urban area), but they each use thousands of rounds per year at the target range. This proposal would increase their costs significantly, and unnecessarily.
The proposed regulation is a member of the extremely large class of regulation that goes far beyond what is necessary to protect what is ostensibly being protected.
Does everyone remember "killer air bags"? They were MANDATED by the original airbag regulation, because the bureaucrat who wrote the regulation decided they should be powerful enough to protect an unbelted large man, and did not realize that this was enough power to seriously injure or kill a smaller person.
Here, too, the proposal goes beyond what is required. Would not a simple ban on HUNTING with lead bullets or shot accomplish the stated goal? To go further, a ban on lead rifle ammunition and shotgun shells would fully accomplish the stated goals, while not forcing all handgun owners to likewise bear the higher costs, and reducing the costs for the majority of hunters who also own handguns. Since it is very unusual for the same ammunition to be used by handguns and rifles, this would be straightforward, enforceable, and effective.Mr. Prieto may find that the opposition to his proposal is based mostly on its simply being unreasonably heavy-handed.
--------------------------
Mr. Preito -
Saw your Op-Ed in the NYT. It makes sense to use copper. Or copper alloys. The cost difference is minimal for a hunter. There are a lot of choices already for a popular bore like the .30-06 bolt action that I use. Once your rifle is sighted in you just don't need to use that much ammunition. The NRA takes odd positions on many issues.
J.A.
Berkeley, CA
--------------------------
Anthony,
I live in Bucks County PA and my understanding is that you can only hunt with shotguns or bow. Do the gun companies produce any shotgun ammo without lead?
D
--------------------------
How exactly is enough lead getting in a gut pile to poison anything? It just isn't possible, even if it were, what animals are you talking about, coyotes? There doing more damage than lead ever will. As for Condors, there is no concrete proof that the lead that effected them came from bullets, in fact, it is statistically unlikely(look it up). Don't do your research on U-Tube! If you are really a hunter and shooter (which I doubt) you would never push an agenda that started with PETA and other anti-gun and anti-hunting groups. You, and people that follow you are working against the rights of the American hunter and shooter and must stop.
P.S.
