this post was submitted on 16 Jun 2026
319 points (99.4% liked)
Not The Onion
21738 readers
1148 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That almost certainly has nothing to do with storage and instead is about frequency of shooting.
People that have one gun locked in safe that never gets open, aren't shooting it.
Someone doing a weekly range trip is going to bring home a bunch of lead dust regardless of how they store the gun.
We really need to get away from lead in firearms
We also really need to normalize lead management. When I went shooting in scouts as a kid I learned all the responsible gun operation saftey stuff, but never even thought about the lead exposure till I was an adult
I'd never even heard of de-leading products for getting yourself cleaned up after shooting until deviant ollam on YouTube talked about them in passing in a video
(great channel by the way, it's hard to find any folks who talk about guns online that a turbo chud)
Edit: misspelled "deviant" lol
JaredAF has really good videos on this, and he measured his lead exposure - it was scary!
Link?
Sorry I misspelled deviant lol
https://youtube.com/@deviantollam He's mostly big in the physical security world and has a lot of crossover with hacker community stuff, but regularly talks firearms. Cool dude, hes on mastodon
If you want another cool leftwing guntuber tacticool girlfriend was rad, she doesnt do YouTube anymore but still has a whole backlog of videos and is a transfem immigrant who always had a perspective on guns I appreciated
Deviant ollam also mentions a handful of others in his super old video on preparedness (I believe its this one https://youtu.be/6ihrGNGesfI), which if you see his videos on his friend Kara (transfem hacker friend of his currently in federal prison), if I remember right thats also the video where he gives the back story needed to follow the updates on how she's doing
Link to the specific video about de-leading?
Sorry, I think he just mentioned he thought it was cool seeing some de-leading products at Shot Show
I don't remember the video (it probably would have been one of his "best and worst of shot show" videos) and it wasn't really a guide or anything, so much as just him talking about his experience at the convention and more de-leading products getting visibility being something he thought was positive
Copper for slugs, while more expensive has a risk level close to 0 in comparison to lead. It also has excellent ballistic properties and will expand properly with designs like hollow points
It's actually not the projectile that causes most of the lead exposure for shooters. It's the cartridge primers, they use lead styphnate for their explosive. Copper bullets are mainly to not spread lead through the environment where it can harm wildlife, and to avoid the risk of consuming lead in shot animals.
Tungsten, too.
The problem is really the cost. To go to the range and spend $30 would instead cost $150. I think the average person would buy the lead.
I'll ask a friend of mine who worked at a range recently to see what people are spending.
Shooting a gun probably "should* cost more money
Per friend: -$35 a person $12 for the second and ammo varies wildly. They start about $20/$30 a box for 9mm 50 rounds, but most people use 1/2 boxes ler trip"
Also, per them, tungsten is a no-no due to its armor-piercing abilities.
$20 for 50 rounds of 9mm is exceptionally high. 20-25 cents per round for target ammo is closer to reality. https://ammoseek.com/ammo/9mm-luger
It's probably the cost buying from the range. Might also be regional. I'm going to keep replying to myself.
It is, the ranges mark up the ammo (what business doesn't) as they sell small quantities to a captive audience who will pay. Ammoseek represents the other end of the spectrum, ppl buying wholesale in larger quantities. Not represented are the hand loaders, typically sports-oriented going through a thousand a week in practice buying components at cost.
That is fair, you can expect to pay double for the convenience of buying on site at a staffed range.
As a company man, he says it "might be a little cheaper elsewhere," but they are the lowest price around for admission.
Is tungsten a no-no to carry around loaded, or is it simply unavailable?
I'm not a gun guy, but I've never heard of tungsten being used in bullets, and AFAIK it would severly damage the barrel, right?
I don't know about tungsten bullets, but I have heard of tungsten shot.
You could probably jacket a tungsten bullet in a softer metal like copper to mitigate the damage to the barrel, but I feel like that's also gonna run up against armor piercing regulations
I think, from a report I did in middle school, that you have just described how armor piercing bullets function.
Yeah, that's basically the gist of it, jacket a hard, dense penetrator in a softer metal so it doesn't damage the barrel
But there's some edge cases like with m855 "green tip" 5.56 ammo which has a steel core inside a lead bullet and copper jacket, but generally isn't considered "armor piercing" even though it does penetrate armor slightly better than most other standard 5.56 rounds
So I'm gonna hedge me bets and say there may be a case where a tungsten bullet may not be considered armor piercing but I don't know the specifics of where that line would be drawn.
Aren't expanding bullets horrible and should be illegal?
No. They keep the projectile from over-penetrating the intended target.
Isn't it better to have penetration without a bunch of shards?
Most traditional hollowpoints aren't designed to break apart into shrapnel. They're designed to expand in a controlled manner. The FBI protocol is that it should expand after passing through four layers of cloth (denim, fleece, cotton, and something else), then penetrate between 12 and 18 inches through standardized ballistics gel.
A non expanding bullet might get double that much penetration if it doesn't start tumbling. Projectiles designed for large, dangerous game are designed for no expansion and maximum penetration. It all depends on what the goal is.
There's a lot of youtube where people have put that kind of stuff to the test if you want to dig. There are a few results out there that are non-intuitive. For example, a regular 38 special hollow point out of a modern revolver often doesn't get enough velocity to expand, so the cavity will fill up with cloth and over penetrate the gel even though it's substantially less powerful than a 9mm.
Sounds expensive
Why not just get rid of firearms completely?
Well one would take a single federal law to change. Simple majority and signed by the president. The other requires 2/3rds of congress to agree or 2/3rds of states to agree. Nearly impossible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYOjWnS4cMY
I’m surprised that song didn’t anger gun owners.
In a country with more guns than people, that's like saying you're surprised people with a driver's license don't all drive F350 super duty's...
Even worse, because when push comes to literal shove, the people with the most guns make the decisions. January 6th should have proved that if nothing else did, if they had showed up with guns they'd have accomplished their goals easily.
Don't take it for granted that America will never need another revolution, or that a couple thousand armed people can't accomplish anything.
Fuck man, now more than ever it's the responsibility of every good American to own and be proficient with a rifle.
Take a fucking look around, you think trump is handing the White House to anyone in 2.5 years?
Buy a fucking rifle while you can if you haven't already, or at least stop shit talking people who take logical precautions with our current reality.
I have been getting the lgbt+ people in my area acquainted with firearms, and while some of them aren't mentally in a place where they can join us, they will be protected if needed.
Already this year one of my "students" has had to defend themselves in an alley while walking home. Guy made transphobic comments, waited outside and followed. Security cameras managed to catch everything but in this city if there hadn't been cameras, she'd be tossed in a cell with a bunch of guys and then the cops would leave and hope something bad happens. It wouldn't be the first time.
When the people surrounding you would happily chuck a stone at you or hoist the rope into the tree with the rest of the lynch mob, and cops won't protect you, all the people trying to mock you for being prepared just look like naive children whose world view extends to the end of their HOA.
While I agree with you to an extent, I bet many people who use gun safes properly are also mindful of cleaning themselves and their clothing after shooting.
At least, that's what I do.
...
Yeah, no one ever said they didn't. Or that any group was the same.
My point was that storage method didn't matter.
Any correlation is likely because someone who buys a gun and only plans to touch it "when they need it" are going to likely keep it in a safe.
Regardless of how well you think you're cleaning yourself tho, you're being lead home from shooting. It takes a lot to actually mitigate it, and even if you think you are, you're not.
I know, I was just pointing out that there are careful gun owners out there who also take into account cleaning lead.
And yes, I'm aware it's not perfect, but it greatly reduces the exposure