Environmental Protection Agency considering outright ban on lead bullets. - Page 2 - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: Environmental Protection Agency considering outright ban on lead bullets.
Thursday, September 09, 2010 6:11 AM on j-body.org
bk3k wrote:

Quiklilcav wrote:

Take Back the Republican Party wrote:

Finding nefarious and sinister motivations behind their actions is downright silly. They are charged with protecting the environment. Lead is one of the most poisonous common compounds around. It's been eliminated from nigh every product it was found in previously, with a couple of notable examples including gasoline and house paint...
If you truly think the EPA is all on the up-and-up, how would you explain their supporting of CFL bulbs, which have more of a chance of causing environmental and health issues than lead?
You could argue incompetence with that(unless you think the energy saving benefits outweigh the potential harm aka pros outweigh cons), what would their agenda be? Holding stock in CFL bulb manufacturing companies? That's the best I could think of.
You bring up a good point, but this only leaves the following truth about their judgement: they either morally or intellectually unqualified to make these determinations. Either way, the result is the same. Personally, I believe the green movement (at the top, not the average Joe who feels that they're doing good by going green) is more about money and power than anything.

Maybe a link can be drawn to people in power that benefit through the increase in sales of CFLs, maybe not. This leads me to ask this: if legislators of such regulations and their friends are found to have such vested interests, will the same people screaming "Halliburton" about the Iraq war be willing to scream such conspiracy claims about the liberals who push the green laws?








Re: Environmental Protection Agency considering outright ban on lead bullets.
Thursday, September 09, 2010 9:33 AM on j-body.org
Quiklilcav wrote:

bk3k wrote:

Quiklilcav wrote:

Take Back the Republican Party wrote:

Finding nefarious and sinister motivations behind their actions is downright silly. They are charged with protecting the environment. Lead is one of the most poisonous common compounds around. It's been eliminated from nigh every product it was found in previously, with a couple of notable examples including gasoline and house paint...
If you truly think the EPA is all on the up-and-up, how would you explain their supporting of CFL bulbs, which have more of a chance of causing environmental and health issues than lead?
You could argue incompetence with that(unless you think the energy saving benefits outweigh the potential harm aka pros outweigh cons), what would their agenda be? Holding stock in CFL bulb manufacturing companies? That's the best I could think of.
You bring up a good point, but this only leaves the following truth about their judgement: they either morally or intellectually unqualified to make these determinations. Either way, the result is the same. Personally, I believe the green movement (at the top, not the average Joe who feels that they're doing good by going green) is more about money and power than anything.

100% agreed. However, I think you are making the common right-wing extremist mistake of associating all efforts to be environmentally aware with the "green" extremist movement. Not every aspect of protecting the environment is automatically your enemy due to your politics.

The EPA serves, and has served, a very substantial role in reversing heinous environmental abuse and improving the quality of life for nearly every organism that resides within our borders. I shudder to think what this nation might be like right now if not for this agency.
Quiklilcav wrote:

Maybe a link can be drawn to people in power that benefit through the increase in sales of CFLs, maybe not. This leads me to ask this: if legislators of such regulations and their friends are found to have such vested interests, will the same people screaming "Halliburton" about the Iraq war be willing to scream such conspiracy claims about the liberals who push the green laws?

Sure, this is a knife that cuts both ways...there is just as much extremism on that end of the spectrum as there is on your end. Nonetheless, two wrongs will never make a right. Those who blindly push back against anything the EPA does just because it's their preferred politics to do so are sorely missing the point.

God, we so need a voice for the middle in this nation. Partisanship is just ripping the heart out of any substantial pursuit.





Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search