Good discussion! Most ammo is jacketed these days, but if you ever shoot any non-jacketed ammo you’ll get lead coming out of the barrel for a long time afterwards. Even after pretty thorough cleaning.

The stuff on .22 bullets is plating, not jacketing, and doesn’t really cut down on the lead plume at all. It’s nowhere near as thick as the depth of the rifling. Shooting .22 is like huffing lead plume, with a side of dirty primer and powder smoke. It’s so good for plinking though.

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.

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.

I was actually thinking of turkey, but wrote duck instead. I laughed out loud at the thought of my cat trying to take down a wild turkey.

Ha, I forgot about insects! We also need to add spider and house centipede to the lineup.

Which is extra ridiculous after having just gone through the same thing with (much smaller) Japan only a couple of decades prior and having domestic auto, heavy and precision machinery markets trounced.

Once they see a few dollar signs in the short term, all long term vision becomes blind.

I don’t think there’s no way forward short of revolution yet, but I think your criticism is overly harsh. The first step toward change is recognizing that there is a problem and assessing the magnitude of the problem. Most normal people are still grappling with this step, so expressing the facts (and your opinions) about the problem and need for a solution is important for convincing others.

The next, and assuredly harder, step is coming up with an effective and lasting solution. A realistic solution depends on widespread support, so you can’t really jump to this step without knowing what sort of support you have behind your cause.

Support is building for change, but there’s still enormous value in these sort of posts. Making calls for change seem like a normal thing that normal people do will make actual change more likely to happen and stick.

Edit: wording Edit again: why was the post I responded to removed? I didn’t agree with it, but we want to be able to have a discussion here not be in an echo chamber.

Some people like doing those other tasks and the owner/boss doesn’t do them but pays others to (while still taking the biggest chunk of the proceeds).

There are other forms of organization than capitalistic corporations with a parasite at the top. Cooperatives, collectives, and other organizations like that even exist today and are successfully functioning. The parasite serves no vital function and can be cut out to the benefit of everybody else.

If you’re one of the people tasked with enforcing the law, then yes you are not expected to know it. If you are a mere citizen, then you are expected to know the law inside and out.

Yeah, I’m having a hard time being upset about this. Of course, it depends on the FL and municipal governments having correctly done the revenue math and being responsible enough to handle the transition and long-term spending well enough, which are probably pretty tall orders for them.

This could just be a poorly planned play to cut services, in disguise.

Check your local regulations also. In some localities, diverting and collecting rainwater is not legal. Some places where it isn’t legal have exceptions for irrigation though.

Just be aware before spending a lot of time and money on a project.

I agree, but I think there should be overwhelming evidence of endemic society-wide danger to support the banning of things instead of needing overwhelming evidence of the safety of things for them to be allowed.

Most drugs, like alcohol, have the potential for abuse but aren’t abused (to the detriment of others) by the vast majority of the population. The minority of people who have problems with them should have mental heath support available (if we actually did that in most countries) or be helped by a reformative (or isolating) legal system if the drug use enables violent tendencies.

The fact that a few people abuse anything doesn’t mean that we need to, by default, outlaw that thing. There should have to be a really good reason for it (e.g., garage bioweapon research)