Barnes bullets supporting lead ammunition bans!

[Yondering]

I don't believe it.

It's an old, unsubstantiated rumor.

It is what it is and went down exactly as I have said re: the important facts.  As for details, that was ~30 years ago.

This was happening 25-30 years ago. Is there evidence this is still going on today? It doesn't make any sense to get all balled up about something that happened 25 years ago. If it is still happening today, I know what bullets I will not be loading or buying.

I also would like to know if this is going on now, or if it was just an isolated thing from a couple decades ago. I certainly oppose any sort of lead ban, but if this isn't happening now, holding on to what happened in the 80's is in the same category for me as not buying Ruger products because of what Bill Ruger did.

[jackelope]

I cannot say anything about what they are doing today.  What went down when they were first pushing the X-bullet is fact.

OK. So it doesn't make any sense to me to badmouth or red flag a company for something that we don't even know whether or not is still happening.
My  .

[bearpaw]

I cannot say anything about what they are doing today.  What went down when they were first pushing the X-bullet is fact.

OK. So it doesn't make any sense to me to badmouth or red flag a company for something that we don't even know whether or not is still happening.
My  .

I agree, these results will come up in internet search results, it this happened decades ago but is not their position today I'm not sure this topic should remain?

[JDHasty]

Never said a thing about what they are doing today.  Did I? 

I will say that this http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2014/jan/14/california-lead-ban-copper-/
looks a lot like something that was not organic in nature.  There are quite a few companies who make non-lead bullets today and the focus of this "puff piece" seems to be on one single company. It has all the earmarks of having been planted by a PR firm.   

[theleo]

So a couple of points:

Saying they "do not fund or support lead bans" does not say they are against them. If a group with agenda wants push Barnes bullets Barnes will gladly show the traits of their bullets that they find superior while doing what they can to show the faults of the competition. Barnes is sitting happily on the side lines via no donations or press releases but showing the uneducated why they believe lead is inferior and can go the way of the dinosaur and no one would care. Lead bans favor Barnes and I have yet to see anything from them saying they viametly oppose them.

Mono bullets have there place but are also impractical in many situations. Pressures do run higher with them, they are not friendly to old firearms, they have a narrower window for optimum performance, they are not as balisticaly effecient as lead core bullets, and require a faster twist to stabilize compared to a lead core bullet of the same weight.

[Bob33]

Lead bans favor Barnes and I have yet to see anything from them saying they viametly oppose them.

I just posted one, five posts back.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,192456.msg2547704.html#msg2547704

"“When my father (Randy Brooks) went to all-copper, it had nothing to do with the environment,” Jessica Brooks-Stevens, daughter of X Bullet inventor Randy Brooks, said Monday at the 36th Annual SHOT Show in Las Vegas. “His reasons were so far from that it’s not even funny. It was more about performance. It only happened to work for the condor issue in California.

“We don’t support the legislation. We think this type of legislation is bad for hunting, bad for the base. People shoot lead-core ammunition because it’s cheaper to shoot. I know some hunters in California who have put their guns up over this. That’s not good for our sport. Bans like this hurt the future of the sport for everyone.”

[JDHasty]

So a couple of points:

Saying they "do not fund or support lead bans" does not say they are against them. If a group with agenda wants push Barnes bullets Barnes will gladly show the traits of their bullets that they find superior while doing what they can to show the faults of the competition. Barnes is sitting happily on the side lines via no donations or press releases but showing the uneducated why they believe lead is inferior and can go the way of the dinosaur and no one would care. Lead bans favor Barnes and I have yet to see anything from them saying they viametly oppose them.

Mono bullets have there place but are also impractical in many situations. Pressures do run higher with them, they are not friendly to old firearms, they have a narrower window for optimum performance, they are not as balisticaly effecient as lead core bullets, and require a faster twist to stabilize compared to a lead core bullet of the same weight.

What I personally witnessed was pretty transparent.  It was a long time ago, but I have clear recollection to my reaction as well as what the reaction of almost everybody who was in attendance from the industry and outdoor sportsman's side was. 

[JDHasty]

Lead bans favor Barnes and I have yet to see anything from them saying they viametly oppose them.

I just posted one, five posts back.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,192456.msg2547704.html#msg2547704

"“When my father (Randy Brooks) went to all-copper, it had nothing to do with the environment,” Jessica Brooks-Stevens, daughter of X Bullet inventor Randy Brooks, said Monday at the 36th Annual SHOT Show in Las Vegas. “His reasons were so far from that it’s not even funny. It was more about performance. It only happened to work for the condor issue in California.

“We don’t support the legislation. We think this type of legislation is bad for hunting, bad for the base. People shoot lead-core ammunition because it’s cheaper to shoot. I know some hunters in California who have put their guns up over this. That’s not good for our sport. Bans like this hurt the future of the sport for everyone.”

How much of that is sincere and how much was written by a PR firm? 

[Bob33]

JD, what happened? After 25 pages did you finally give up on bashing Reichert and decide to pick on a new target?

[JDHasty]

JD, what happened? After 25 pages did you finally give up on bashing Reichert and decide to pick on a new target?

So did you decide you could fit being a special pleader for a bullet company that I witnessed advocating on behalf of banning all use of lead for sporting purposes into your busy schedule of advocating on behalf of poachers? 

Two can play at that game.

[JDHasty]

https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Hunting/Nonlead-Ammunition/Certified

This is a list of all certified ammo suppliers and bullet suppliers that are certified by CA as lead free.   How did it come to be that Barnes Bullets was singled out top have a special puff piece written and published on their behalf.  Was this part of a backdoor deal?  I am not saying it was, but it sure could have been.  You scratch our back (by supporting a lead ban), we will scratch your back (by making sure you get good press) kinda' arrangement. 

Notice that the article does not mention any of Barnes competition in the certified lead free world.   

[theleo]

Lead bans favor Barnes and I have yet to see anything from them saying they viametly oppose them.

I just posted one, five posts back.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,192456.msg2547704.html#msg2547704

"“When my father (Randy Brooks) went to all-copper, it had nothing to do with the environment,” Jessica Brooks-Stevens, daughter of X Bullet inventor Randy Brooks, said Monday at the 36th Annual SHOT Show in Las Vegas. “His reasons were so far from that it’s not even funny. It was more about performance. It only happened to work for the condor issue in California.

“We don’t support the legislation. We think this type of legislation is bad for hunting, bad for the base. People shoot lead-core ammunition because it’s cheaper to shoot. I know some hunters in California who have put their guns up over this. That’s not good for our sport. Bans like this hurt the future of the sport for everyone.”

Here's my point, they blatantly push their bullets as superior to all others but gloss over their short comings. They are advocating their concept of their bullets as superior in all things. What if I own a a 358 win, 375 win, or  an old big bore rifle with a pre nickel steel barrel? What of the long distance guys that need energy down range and a bullet soft enough to epand? Barnes sells them selves as the future of hunting bullets but they do not support the argument for multiple kinds of bullets that are better suited for situations they don't find profitable to produce a bullet for.

[Yondering]

Here's my point, they blatantly push their bullets as superior to all others but gloss over their short comings. They are advocating their concept of their bullets as superior in all things.

Pretty much what all companies do, it's called marketing. If Barnes is really pushing for lead bans, I'd like to know, but I think it's important to stay realistic at the same time.

[JDHasty]

Here's my point, they blatantly push their bullets as superior to all others but gloss over their short comings. They are advocating their concept of their bullets as superior in all things.

Pretty much what all companies do, it's called marketing. If Barnes is really pushing for lead bans, I'd like to know, but I think it's important to stay realistic at the same time.

It is one thing to push your product.  It is quite another to be working in the shadows to implement legislation that cripples your competitors.  I know that a lot of companies are engaged in doing just that, and it is not the point I am making that this behavior is unique.  The point I was making is that this happened and it influences my decision on where to spend my money to this day.   

[jackelope]

Here's my point, they blatantly push their bullets as superior to all others but gloss over their short comings. They are advocating their concept of their bullets as superior in all things.

Pretty much what all companies do, it's called marketing. If Barnes is really pushing for lead bans, I'd like to know, but I think it's important to stay realistic at the same time.

It is one thing to push your product.  It is quite another to be working int he shadows to implement legislation that cripples your competitors.  I know that a lot of companies are engaged in doing just that, and it is not the point I am making that this behavior is unique.  The point I was making is that this happened and it influences my decision on where to spend my money to this day.

25-30 YEARS AGO!!!