"Advice for Greenies in a Complicated World"

Dear JJ:

I've been trying in vain to locate guns and ammunition with less toxic materials, to use at work. Can you help me? I can't tell you what I do exactly (or I might have to kill you), but I can say that I work alone, that I use guns in a lethal manner on a regular basis, and that despite my commitment to "reduce, reuse, and recycle," I often have to discard a gun after I've used it.

J.N.
No home address

Dear J.N.:

Wow. Seriously, wow. A hit man?

OK, what a dilemma. On one hand, what you do for a living is reprehensible. OK, beyond reprehensible--It makes what's reprehensible seem mildly objectionable.

And yet, guns don't kill people, right? People do--as the NRA says--and in the U.S. alone, people are using guns to kill at least 12,000 people a year. That number isn't budging. The bullets often end up in the soils, and some of the guns end up in our rivers. So especially if people in the U.S. are going to keep killing so many people, shouldn't we at least act responsibly to green up all these guns and bullets?

For the earth. And, you know, for the people who aren't killed by the people who use guns that don't kill people to kill people.

The lead in the bullets, after all, doesn't poison the environment. People do.

And yes, J.N., the gun industry does seem to be quite far behind on the green curve. Which is pretty baffling, since the gun manufacturers introduce innovative new features every year, in their continuous quest to make their products both safer for people who shoot them and more lethal for anyone who gets shot. Why not greener, safer, and more lethal?

Glock did introduce green versions of seven of its popular handgun models in 2004--which seemed really exciting, until it turned out that the guns were actually just green instead of black.

And while there's been a big push to develop lead-free hunting ammo--and likewise to make the bullets at firing ranges more eco-friendly--the vast quantities of bullets used to shoot people continue to pump lead into the soil.

The good news is that the U.S. military, which uses guns to shoot a lot of people (and of course in many cases needs to), is showing a real and growing commitment to all kinds of sustainable practices, with major recycling programs and with water and energy conservation initiatives--which include solar-powered tents and the development of biofuels for fighter jets. The bad news is that it's moving slowly on technologies to green up firearms.

And the worse news is that we seem to be inexplicably losing the green arms race to the British. Yes, that's right. The British. Since 2006, the Ministry of Defence has contracted with the arms-manufacture titan BAE to develop green ammunition--explaining that the lead in bullets "can harm the environment and pose a risk to people."

They're moving, too, to develop greener, reduced-smoke grenades. Also greener, quieter bombs to reduce noise pollution. And also greener, compostable explosives that can break down into manure--apparently in a cutting-edge effort to enrich enemy soil.

Seriously, the British--whom the American army first defeated 235 years ago, in the very war that inspired the 2nd Amendment right to own guns because "a well regulated Militia [is] necessary."

Which is exactly what now guarantees the right to conceal a 9mm semiautomatic handgun with a 10-shot clip in your pocket so you can kill someone when they nab your parking space.

On the cool side, the U.S. Army did just deploy the Quantum Aggressor diesel-electric hybrid off-road reconnaissance vehicle, which has an all-battery silent mode that can be very useful in hostile territory.

Still, we'll need to see the U.S. government, which not only deploys more bombs and firearms than any European country but also controls 68% of the global arms trade, move a lot faster on green munitions.

Even more urgently, we need to see BAE and other companies move as fast as they can to develop low-toxic guns and ammo for the retail markets--since we all know that what will absolutely, ultimately, really make the difference is if each and every individual gun consumer can green up his or her own gun cabinet, at home and at work.

And we need to see this happen especially for the 68 million gun consumers in the United States--since people just don't kill such huge numbers of people in Britain, Australia, and other countries with gun-control laws that do more than require people without criminal records to wait up to three days before they can shoot someone.

Imagine if every single consumer who owns one or more of the 283 million guns that Americans use to kill 12,000 and injure 78,000 people each year--or who will use one of the roughly 50 million new guns since President Obama was elected--could buy lead-free bullets.

And yes, J.N., imagine if every hit man and woman worldwide could at least do their part to save the environment each and every time they buy another firearm--with Glocks made from plastics that are recyclable and AK47s made from metals that are sustainably mined.

Of course, I do have to encourage you at the same time--and seriously, please don't be angry now--to put as much consideration into reducing your impact not just on the environment but on people. Since the gun consumers in your profession also do, as you clearly must know, have a rather gigantic footprint in this regard.

Have you considered, for example, that for every person you shoot, you might make a substantial donation to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence? Or to the Violence Policy Center, which hasn't tried so hard to assure would-be homicidal maniacs that it's not trying to prevent them from buying a gun as long as they've committed no previous crimes, have never truly scared a psychiatrist, and have the patience to wait, you know, up to three days.

Or to the Gun Control Network in Britain--since they did have 51 gun homicides in the U.K. last year in England, Scotland, and Wales combined.

Or to Save Darfur. Or to the international Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers. Or to Amer-I-Can, Homeboy Industries, or one of the other excellent groups in Los Angeles, my hometown, that's working to reduce gang violence.

In other words, when one family grieves anywhere, it's enormously important that another should be spared anywhere else. Your personal actions in one place should in no way increase the total number of homicides across the globe. And more, if you donate enough to prevent more than one homicide for each one you commit, then you can actually even save lives every time you carry out a contract.

And best of all, once green guns become widely available, you'll be able to save the environment and people at the same time.

In the meantime, you'll want to focus on all the things you can do to reduce your environmental footprint. You'll need to dispose of your guns properly--which means to avoid dumping them in rivers or lakes (as opposed to dumping the bodies, which will in fact biodegrade far more effectively than in a formal burial)--or in dumpsters either, where they'll end up in landfills. You might find someone you trust who can melt the sniper rifles down for you and recycle them as scrap metal. Which also ensures they won't end up in an evidence room (since TV detectives, at least, always find the guns in the dumpsters).

If you travel often internationally, then purchase carbon offsets when you fly. Rent the fastest hybrids when you drive. Take public transportation, when speed really isn't of the essence. Shred and recycle your files after you're done with them. Just all the obvious stuff. You know what it is. Wow.

Green Me Up, JJ is an occasional advice column. You can e-mail JJ with your burning questions about how to act and think environmentally smart in our complicated 21st-century world.

For previous entries, click here.

E-mail JJ to be on the e-mail list for future columns.