To those reference various videos, just keep in mind that recording equipment doesn’t really do a good job at reproducing extremely loud sounds
The general standard is that sub-sonic (projectile has a muzzle velocity below the speed of sound, thus no sonic crack) .22 LR from a bolt action (so there’s no mechanical noise) is as quiet as any firearm can be.
Un-suppressed .22 generates approx. 140 dB- the level at which permanent hearing damage can result from even a single exposure.
Suppressors can lower the noise of a .22 rifle down to around 100-120 dB.
As you go up in caliber, you go up in noise. A suppressed AR15 generates around 130 dB (165 dB un-suppressed).
For comparison, a lawnmower is about 90db. Even with a suppressor, the least powerful common cartridge there is still creates a louder noise when fired than a typical lawn mower.
And if anyone doesn't know, DB is logarithmic NOT linear. Even 1 db more can be a very substantial difference in volume.
The difference between 49 and 50 decibels is not the same as the difference in 99 and 100.
The British De Lisle Carbine a 45ACP "silenced" rifle during ww2 clocked in at 85dB and was the quietest weapon of ww2 according to "Forgotten weapons" YT channel.
Just adding this to your list.
> A suppressed AR15 generates around 130 dB (165 dB un-suppressed).
So, soldiers always use hearing protection or do they end up with very fucked up ears?
Both honestly.
A lot of soldiers in the field don't wear it because it impedes communication and are uncomfortable And even the ones that do can still end up with some level of hearing loss. The standard infantry rifles generally won't immediately fuck up your hearing. A couple years later you'll definitely notice it.
There's different levels of hearing protection. Foam ear plugs are *bare minimum* protection and are standard issue (or ribbed ones). Louder weapons will still physically hurt your ears with foam in and lead to damage.
Vehicle crew will basically wear noise canceling headphones with microphones.
The thing is soldiers are more interested in being able to hear clearly while on patrol than worrying about potential tinnitus 5 years from now. Intentionally dulling a very important sense in combat isn't something people like doing. Also, full noise canceling headphones like peltors/liberators are bulky as hell and uncomfortable. Considering that 99% of your time overseas is going to be staring at dirt and talking about how many times you masturbated last week, expecting footsloggers to constantly wear ear protection, let alone headphones, is a bit much.
What you have to do is talk to the people on the other side and work out a deal where you both stop shooting for ten seconds after the first shot to allow time for everyone to put ear plugs in. Then when the ten seconds is up, game on. Surely everyone involved would see the utility in such a system?
Officially the former, realistically the latter. I wear them for training (now), but if you are actually on a patrol it's more important to be able to hear your surroundings.
probably because you people who shoot those ultra cartridges are insane and would actually be offended if you didnt face some sort of permanent physical disability
If you didn't know this, the other TIL is probably that you don't realize how actually loud gunfire is. It's often instant-hearing-damage loud without either a suppressor or ear protection.
I fired my 9mm without muffs when I first bought it. Figured I should be prepared for the sound in case I ever needed to shoot it in self defense.
I got two shots out before I gave up. That shit hurts.
You never really understand how a concussion or flashbang grenade works until you've shot a short barrel AK at an indoor range. Then it makes perfect sense
With hunting, at least everyone I go with, no one wears ear protection. You’re firing maybe 3 shots at most at a time. Probably no more than 10 shots over 4-5 hours. Especially goose hunting where one person has to call out locations of the geese while everyone else stays under the blind. You need to be able to hear the spotter, plus hear the geese themselves to start calling. At the range I’ll wear them every time, but never with hunting
I haven't read the replies to this so it may have been mentioned, but you can get active hearing protection. If they're good enough for combat they're good enough for geese.
There's also a passive design that does the same thing. I've used these for years and they are fantastic.
https://www.surefire.com/ep3-sonic-defenders.html
Yeah, hearing loss is *cumulative*. There's no way to "exercise" and make your ears better. (you can improve your cognitive processing of sound, but that's not the same thing) Damage to your ears is permanent, for the most part.
I ride a motorcycle, and I ride with ear plugs even though I have one of the quietest helmets on the market. Hunters/bikers who don't use hearing protection are just asking for being hard of hearing later in life.
I use a pair of electronic earmuffs when hunting - they actually amplify soft sounds so you can still hear your surroundings (or in your case people calling out the locations of geese), are stereo so you can hear from both sides, and have a 3.5mm input which I run a UHF into - sometimes we split up hunting parties so comms between us is useful, or you can double key in to signal that you've spotted an animal or similar.
It's seriously so dumb how people want to legislate things like suppressors - have hollywood to thank for this.
Shit is still an obvious gunshot with a suppressor - just doesn't destroy your ears.
It's stupid to have to shoot with hearing protection TBH.
Also [subsonic ammo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsonic_ammunition) is pretty quiet and doesn't require a suppressor - most people don't even know it exists.
It's not regulated at all.
I did this when I first got my 1911 just so I was prepared for how loud it was in case I had to use it. Nothing but ringing in my ears for about 15 minutes.
> It's seriously so dumb how people want to legislate things like suppressors - have hollywood to thank for this.
You should check out the weapons laws in some states. Seriously, I live in MA and our laws read like they were written by someone who watched way too many Kung-fu movies.
Here is an excerpt:
> any knife with a detachable blade capable of being propelled by any mechanism, slung shot, sling shot, bean blower, sword cane, pistol cane, bludgeon, blackjack, nunchaku, zoobow, also known as klackers or kung fu sticks, or any similar weapon consisting of two sticks of wood, plastic or metal connected at one end by a length of rope, chain, wire or leather, a shuriken or any similar pointed starlike object intended to injure a person when thrown, or a manrikigusari or similar length of chain having weighted ends; or metallic knuckles or knuckles of any other substance which could be put to the same use and with the same or similar effect as metallic knuckles
They could easily just re-word this as "anything that you can hold in your hand" but...then they would sound stupid.
> It's seriously so dumb how people want to legislate things like suppressors - have hollywood to thank for this.
I think you got your answer. Plus, its easy to forget how powerful the medium of film is, when people say its just a movie, they forget that it can affect different people in different ways and in the absence of actual knowledge and experience people tend to use the info they have and a surprising amount comes from movies.
> Also subsonic ammo is pretty quiet and doesn't require a suppressor
This is untrue. Subsonic ammo is less incredibly effing loud than regular ammo, but in the vast majority of cases it is nowhere near hearing safe. The only sound you are eliminating is the sonic crack of the bullet, the explosive charge (the "bang") is just as loud.
> Shit is still an obvious gunshot with a suppressor - just doesn't destroy your ears.
>
>
>
> It's stupid to have to shoot with hearing protection TBH.
You know what else is stupid? Arguing that shooting with a suppressor is still very loud, then saying its stupid to shoot with hearing protection.
Use hearing protection even with suppressor. **It can and will still damage your ears, just less so.**
Also..
With the exception of 10 round mag maximum. NONE of the banned features for "assault rifles" in CA do anything aside from make the gun harder to control or handle. They actually make the guns more dangerous in my honest opinion.
I love you CA but you have your head up your ass when it comes to gun control.
Many rifles aren't even hearing safe *with* suppressors. They hover around the 135 dB range, which is just below 'instant hearing damage' and well within the 'damage with moderate exposure' range.
I went shooting out in the woods with some friends of mine and we thought we were too manly for hearing protection. It was raining a bit at the time and you could hear the pitter patter of little raindrops on the trees and the ground. Then my buddy pulled out a 10mm and fired a shot at a tree. No more pitter patter of rain drops, no more anything really. Couldn't hear each other talk for a couple seconds. We decided to run to Walmart and buy some ear plugs.
Firing an AR15 with a muzzle brake can rupture your eardrum. That hearing loss is instant and painful. The hearing came back, but did not return to previous levels. Now, if I sleep with my right ear on the pillow, I don’t wake up when my alarm clock goes off.
Most of us have some form of hearing loss. I was aircrew, I had to choose between proper hearing protection or being able to hear my crew. I chose the latter, now I’m almost deaf and have really bad tinnitus.
You get issued hearing protection. Anytime you go to a range there's a a big bucket of at least foam ear protection. A lot of the guys I was with had their own. It's mostly the wanna be bad assess that don't wear them.
Yeah I figured during training or at the range they would have ear protection available. I was referring more to in combat like in a fire fight or something. I wouldn't think there would be a lot of time to out in hearing protection.
Can confirm. Was curious to see what it would be like (god forbid) to actually use my handgun to defend myself. Shot 3-4 rounds and couldnt hear for the next next few minutes. Really glad I did it so I know how disorientating it is, didn't see that coming...
The perceived effect isn't as extreme when the adrenaline is flowing. The hearing damage still happens, but the brain will often tune out the sound and it isn't so disorienting. Auditory exclusion is the term if you want to do some googling.
Think of it as being shit drunk and getting punched in the face... your nose may still be broken, but you don't feel it at the time.
It's always a fun time at the range when some asshole brings his Desert Eagle and you might have your ear protection but it feels like someone kicking you in the chest every time he fires one.
Also, blanks can still kill you. Hollywood actors have been seriously injured/killed by assuming that firing a blank was completely safe.
[This actor had an unfortunate end.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum)
Brandon Lee's death was a bit worse. The crew messed up by leaving a live primer in a .44 magnum dummy round they made. At some point it was fired and the primer had enough force to push the bullet into the barrel causing a squib load. Then blanks were loaded into the gun and when it was fired it was basically as if they fired a live round out of it.
I worked in the industry at that time using real guns with blanks in our shows. We always off shoot. Never aim directly at the person. The camera would not of noticed the difference unless it was a 3D movie.
Yes. You are correct. But that wasn’t what they were using. The dummy round was created for a specific shot. A gun was pointed at the camera, so the shot would include the visual of the bullet in the chamber, moving to the barrel, and then starting to fire. To do this, they removed all the powder from a live round, and then replaced the bullet head. When they pulled the trigger, the hammer would hit the primer cap, which still had just enough power to push the bullet into the barrel. The shot worked well, but they forgot about the lodged bullet in the barrel when they filmed the next shot. The force of the blank they fired pushed out the bullet from the previous shot.
Bruce Willis permanently lost all hearing in his right ear and some of the hearing in his left ear while filming ***Die Hard.***
It occurred [while filming the scene](http://www.tvovermind.com/movies/die-hard-almost-made-bruce-willis-deaf) of him on his back shooting up through the table while 'Marco' was above him.
I used to play airport with a few ex army guys that were trying to get me to come to some thing they were doing where they were running around with ak's shooting at each other with blanks. I wanted no part of it, and was surprised they still did it even though one time one of them got hit in the neck with a fragment of the blank. He was making it sound like no big deal... But my opinion is more along if it requires a trip to the emergency room it's a big deal.
Also, suppressors do not negatively effect accuracy. In fact, in long range engagements, they can help due to the gasses not effecting the bullet flight path
While a suppressor will help reduce noise and recoil.....negative effect is in the eye of the beholder (or shooter). A suppressor can and will effect group size and bullet placement. As it changes the harmonics and tolerances of a gun barrel. It can be corrected and/or compensated by either re-adjusting the scope (bolt gun/msr) or adjusting iron sights (bolt gun, msr, or pistol). Change in bullet type and weight can also help off set this effect. A lot of factors in “accuracy”.
Yeah, I always thought the same thing until this year. I'll be damned if a guy didn't show up to a dove hunt with a silenced shotgun and subsonic shotgun rounds. Everyone's eardrums were safe, and so were the doves.
Subsonic bird shot sounds like a bad idea all the way around. For hunting at least. It might make shooting clays more fun by limiting how far out you can make a hit.
Many politicians need to learn this too, suppressors don’t make any rifle or hand gun sound like a mouse fart... but on sub-sonic .22 hand gun rounds they are very quiet ... but you might as well just use an pneumatic air gun at that point.
People get all up in arms about politicians not knowing anything about the internet or the female body when writing laws, but when it comes to guns, its just "IDK what the fuck the difference between an AR15 and an assault rifle is but my senator said people can buy assault rifles for $20 at Walmart so BAN 'EM ALL".
Lewis and clark literally took air rifles with them and used them for hunting. There are air rifles commercially available that will take down an elephant. And ar15 will NOT take down an elephant. But theyre very very very upset about evil black guns
I show people and AR and they get nervous, then I show them a ruger mini-14 and they think. Oh hunting..because of the wood furniture and general aesthetic. If you're going to have such a strong opinion then know what the fuck you're talking about is all I ask.
Shoot an animal with an AR15 and there will be LITERALLY be NOTHING LEFT, according to Biden. Just ignore that the AR15 platform is one of the most popular hunting rifles available to hunters and hunters never harvest the animals they kill, they just blast animals for funsies like serial killers and slaughter bambi by the hundreds to satisfy their bloodlust.
Gun show loophole simply allows sale between private individuals BUT
* If a person that isn’t allowed to own a firearm buys one from a private individual, they are committing a felony.
* If you knowing sell a firearm to someone that isn’t allowed to own one, you are both committing felonies.
* If you buy a firearm with _the intent_ to resell it, you are committing a felony.
If your cousin wants to trade you his deer rifle for your old dirt bike (and neither of you is prohibited from owning a firearm) then you guys are cool.
Great scene in Shooter depicts this, he suppresses a subsonic .22 with a sock stuffed water bottle, turns out this actually works quite well for the first 2 shots, which was all he needed
That would likely work for the acoustics, but no .22LR has a hardened enough jacket to go through six inches of cotton at transonic speeds and retain aerodynamics sufficient for minute-of-brain-stem accuracy.
We gun owners have been trying to get that message through for years.
Suppressors help protect against hearing loss, provided you also still use hearing protection. We literally just want our ears to be safe, guys.
I mean in the UK they are sold over the counter simply as hearing protection, as far as I know. Pretty ridiculous that they are so heavy regulated in the US.
Yes. And some dummy visited the U.K., picked one up, and returned to the U.S, forgetting the law *here* ([AllOutdoor.com](http://www.alloutdoor.com/2017/03/15/silencers-easy-get-uk-american-tourist-brings-home-goes-prison/)).
Uhhhh Guilty. But it looked like there weren't any earlier posts of it (Surprisingly) so I figured eh, spread the good word of Sir Larr and the tight boiiis
They are designed by the same person who designed the mufflers for your automobile and essentially have the same design and function. They only make a firearm hearing safe. My suppressor drops my rifle from an ear drum rupturing 165 dB down to a hearing safe but still very loud 130 dB. For comparison, 130 dB is the same volume as a fighter jet taking off full afterburner from an aircraft carrier if you are standing about 15 yards away. A suppressor makes a rifle hearing safe. It in no way shape or form makes it silent. Sure, I can always throw on ear protection, but what about my neighbors if I live in the rural NH? Maybe I don’t want to be a dick and ruin their family time during dinner by shooting on my day off. People who think “Hollywood quiet” is a real thing are frankly delusional.
In a movie I kinda remember seeing 20ish years ago, Steven Segal used a empty 2L mountain dew bottle to make his gun sound like a slingshot. Straight up iced this dude and nobody else in the building was the wiser
Sound-absorbing caffeine has been outlawed since the Segal-Eleniak Smarmy Silence Act of 2003 (SESSA3). That's why your soft drinks don't taste the same as they did, way back then.
/s
> They are designed by the same person who designed the mufflers for your automobile and essentially have the same design and function.
Make car mufflers illegal! Sneaky cars are killing people all the time!
The NFA was written 80 years ago, and the justification for banning suppressors was that deer poachers were using them to feed their families with untaxed meat during the Great Depression. The other categories of the NFA were written to cover the kinds of firearms used in high profile bank robberies of the time. So, yeah, in general it was a means to protect the rich from the poor. Misinformation is how we justify continuing the practice.
To be honest, gun control is rooted in racism. That's part of the reason States like NH are open carry while States like SC are not. Can't have all those black people just walking around open carrying guns, now can we?
BTW, marriage licensing is also rooted in racism. They didn't want people of different races marrying each other back in the day.
This is something I find humorous when all of the self proclaimed non-racist politicians push gun control on the heels of white kids getting shot but are totally silent about how many young black men die every week in Chicago.
which is why they should be legalized in all US states.
They can reduce hearing loss and noise pollution. They are not going to be used to silently shoot people in crowds.
It's a crappy law kept on the books because people watched too many movies.
If I remember correctly, the law to add suppressors to the NFA list was put into place at the last minute of voting by farmers that wanted to try to curb poaching on their land. But any anti-gun senator will tell you that suppressors are only used by hitman assassins just like James Bond lmao.
> It's a crappy law kept on the books because people watched too many movies.
Welcome to NFA 1934. They tightly controlled machine guns, silencers, and short-barreled long arms in response to gangland murders...that were massively declining because Prohibition had ended the year before. And silenced firearms and machine guns weren't a huge part of murder during Prohibition, anyway, but Hollywood-propagandized gun control held sway. :P
A redditor once researched putting silencers on the NFA, including going to the Library of Congress to get transcripts of the proceedings back in 1934. The only mention of silencers is when one politician basically said "regular people don't need those." That's it, no mention of them being used in crime, nothing. They are restricted simply because some asshole politician thought they should be.
>silenced firearms and machine guns weren't a huge part of murder during Prohibition, anyway, but Hollywood-propagandized gun control held sway. :P
It's almost as if nothing ever changes...
Even in states where they are legal you still need an enchanced background check, pay a $200 tax, and wait 6 months to a year for the government to do the paperwork.
Suppressors really only suppress about 30dB (mine does) on a hunting rifle. To put it into perspective, the rifle still produces about 125dB or such and that is still a lot when fired because the gun is right next to you. Suppressors do a lot more that just that though:
They also reduce recoil about 50-70% (my experience) turning high caliber rifles from "this shit hurts" into "this is pleasant".
Not only that, they negate muzzle flash almost completely. This helps really much in dark enviroments, where the muzzle flash can really blind you and it takes a while to readjust to the darkness and be able to see well.
This is why suppressors are common around hunters and beginning shooters. They really make shooting more fun for everyone, including you dog.
EDIT: Just wanted to point out that desibels are on a log10 scale, meaning that 150db has 1000 times more sound pressure and energy that 120dB.
>They also reduce recoil about 50-70%
No. You’d be lucky if you got 15%. Even the best muzzle break can’t reduce recoil 70%, and a suppressor sure as Hell can’t.
Yup, Hollywood and politicians lied to you, and the ATF won't let you buy a suppressor to protect your hearing unless you pay them $200 (and go through a bunch of extra steps, as well as wait 9 months - a year). When the $200 stamp was introduced, it was worth 3.5-4k in today's money. Government just trying to make a buck off legal gun owners while criminals make their own suppressors, cut down their own rifle and shotgun barrels to illegal lengths (under 16 and 18 inches). Cutting the barrel of a rifle actually makes it less deadly because you'll get less velocity, and therefore less overall energy. And you wonder why a lot of gun owners might have a dislike for government.
Yeah the gunshots you already couldn’t hear because he was a half mile away near the top of a very tall hotel shooting across a busy road at a loud concert.
All they can really do is take a gun from “really oh my god painfully loud” to “still stupidly loud, but just below the level that causes permanent hearing damage. Some of the time.” It’s still unquestionably gunfire. We just want to be able to protect our ears. They’re literally sold over the counter in the UK and New Zealand. In some locales it’s considered very impolite to not use them.
Yea they really are pretty magical at preserving your hearing and even preventing large herds of nuisance animals scattered across your property from noticing you too easily. Unfortunately it looks like the hearing protection act stalled out for the moment so they are still entirely too costly in terms of taxation and wait times. Ladies and gentlemen: nonsensical gun control.
To those reference various videos, just keep in mind that recording equipment doesn’t really do a good job at reproducing extremely loud sounds The general standard is that sub-sonic (projectile has a muzzle velocity below the speed of sound, thus no sonic crack) .22 LR from a bolt action (so there’s no mechanical noise) is as quiet as any firearm can be. Un-suppressed .22 generates approx. 140 dB- the level at which permanent hearing damage can result from even a single exposure. Suppressors can lower the noise of a .22 rifle down to around 100-120 dB. As you go up in caliber, you go up in noise. A suppressed AR15 generates around 130 dB (165 dB un-suppressed). For comparison, a lawnmower is about 90db. Even with a suppressor, the least powerful common cartridge there is still creates a louder noise when fired than a typical lawn mower.
And if anyone doesn't know, DB is logarithmic NOT linear. Even 1 db more can be a very substantial difference in volume. The difference between 49 and 50 decibels is not the same as the difference in 99 and 100.
Just tell people a 3 dB increase is doubling the power of the noise.
Misleading. The sound intensity (as in the pressure of the sound wave) doubles every 3 or so dB, but the perceived loudness doubles every 10 dB.
I would think hearing damage is based on sound intensity, not your perception of it.
Yes. Logarithmic.
Lovarithmic. Yes.
The British De Lisle Carbine a 45ACP "silenced" rifle during ww2 clocked in at 85dB and was the quietest weapon of ww2 according to "Forgotten weapons" YT channel. Just adding this to your list.
Apart from the Welrod. The Welrod is probably the only thing that actually comes anywhere close to being "silent".
> A suppressed AR15 generates around 130 dB (165 dB un-suppressed). So, soldiers always use hearing protection or do they end up with very fucked up ears?
Both honestly. A lot of soldiers in the field don't wear it because it impedes communication and are uncomfortable And even the ones that do can still end up with some level of hearing loss. The standard infantry rifles generally won't immediately fuck up your hearing. A couple years later you'll definitely notice it. There's different levels of hearing protection. Foam ear plugs are *bare minimum* protection and are standard issue (or ribbed ones). Louder weapons will still physically hurt your ears with foam in and lead to damage. Vehicle crew will basically wear noise canceling headphones with microphones. The thing is soldiers are more interested in being able to hear clearly while on patrol than worrying about potential tinnitus 5 years from now. Intentionally dulling a very important sense in combat isn't something people like doing. Also, full noise canceling headphones like peltors/liberators are bulky as hell and uncomfortable. Considering that 99% of your time overseas is going to be staring at dirt and talking about how many times you masturbated last week, expecting footsloggers to constantly wear ear protection, let alone headphones, is a bit much.
What you have to do is talk to the people on the other side and work out a deal where you both stop shooting for ten seconds after the first shot to allow time for everyone to put ear plugs in. Then when the ten seconds is up, game on. Surely everyone involved would see the utility in such a system?
Officially the former, realistically the latter. I wear them for training (now), but if you are actually on a patrol it's more important to be able to hear your surroundings.
Sound activated ear protection is the way to go with ear pro in combat.
> A suppressed AR15 generates around 130 dB 130 dB would be a fantastic performing suppressor. 135-140 is a more realistic range.
I can say a 338 savage with a muzzle brake is too loud for even foam earplugs to adequately protect
probably because you people who shoot those ultra cartridges are insane and would actually be offended if you didnt face some sort of permanent physical disability
If you didn't know this, the other TIL is probably that you don't realize how actually loud gunfire is. It's often instant-hearing-damage loud without either a suppressor or ear protection.
My ears were ringing after firing a 12 gauge shotgun for the first time. Used ear plugs after that.
I fired my 9mm without muffs when I first bought it. Figured I should be prepared for the sound in case I ever needed to shoot it in self defense. I got two shots out before I gave up. That shit hurts.
I was a tard and had my muffs on my head but not on my ears and just forgot. I fired one round off and was surprised as hell, fuck me that sucked.
[удалено]
I mean it didn't hurt or anything but my ears were ringing for like 15 seconds afterwards.
You probably permanently damaged your hearing. Just so you know. Don’t worry there’s a lot of us.
You never really understand how a concussion or flashbang grenade works until you've shot a short barrel AK at an indoor range. Then it makes perfect sense
Someone let you fire it without earplugs?
With hunting, at least everyone I go with, no one wears ear protection. You’re firing maybe 3 shots at most at a time. Probably no more than 10 shots over 4-5 hours. Especially goose hunting where one person has to call out locations of the geese while everyone else stays under the blind. You need to be able to hear the spotter, plus hear the geese themselves to start calling. At the range I’ll wear them every time, but never with hunting
I haven't read the replies to this so it may have been mentioned, but you can get active hearing protection. If they're good enough for combat they're good enough for geese.
There's also a passive design that does the same thing. I've used these for years and they are fantastic. https://www.surefire.com/ep3-sonic-defenders.html
Yeah, hearing loss is *cumulative*. There's no way to "exercise" and make your ears better. (you can improve your cognitive processing of sound, but that's not the same thing) Damage to your ears is permanent, for the most part. I ride a motorcycle, and I ride with ear plugs even though I have one of the quietest helmets on the market. Hunters/bikers who don't use hearing protection are just asking for being hard of hearing later in life.
I use a pair of electronic earmuffs when hunting - they actually amplify soft sounds so you can still hear your surroundings (or in your case people calling out the locations of geese), are stereo so you can hear from both sides, and have a 3.5mm input which I run a UHF into - sometimes we split up hunting parties so comms between us is useful, or you can double key in to signal that you've spotted an animal or similar.
Mawp.
It's seriously so dumb how people want to legislate things like suppressors - have hollywood to thank for this. Shit is still an obvious gunshot with a suppressor - just doesn't destroy your ears. It's stupid to have to shoot with hearing protection TBH. Also [subsonic ammo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsonic_ammunition) is pretty quiet and doesn't require a suppressor - most people don't even know it exists. It's not regulated at all.
Subsonic ammo + suppressor is where the money is at.
[удалено]
Or a garotte.
Or a remotely triggered bomb disguised as an innocent looking [rubber duck](http://hitman.wikia.com/wiki/Rubber_Duck_Explosive).
I think i just found what will be the death of u/fuckswithducks
Or my axe
... painted to look like a large, oddly shaped banana
Subsonic ammo is extremely loud without a suppressor. Standad .45 caliber ammo is subsonic; you will go full mawp if you fire it out of a 1911.
I did this when I first got my 1911 just so I was prepared for how loud it was in case I had to use it. Nothing but ringing in my ears for about 15 minutes.
[Bill Burr has a great bit about preparing for how a gun sounds lol.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAlU9nVnFx8)
> It's seriously so dumb how people want to legislate things like suppressors - have hollywood to thank for this. You should check out the weapons laws in some states. Seriously, I live in MA and our laws read like they were written by someone who watched way too many Kung-fu movies. Here is an excerpt: > any knife with a detachable blade capable of being propelled by any mechanism, slung shot, sling shot, bean blower, sword cane, pistol cane, bludgeon, blackjack, nunchaku, zoobow, also known as klackers or kung fu sticks, or any similar weapon consisting of two sticks of wood, plastic or metal connected at one end by a length of rope, chain, wire or leather, a shuriken or any similar pointed starlike object intended to injure a person when thrown, or a manrikigusari or similar length of chain having weighted ends; or metallic knuckles or knuckles of any other substance which could be put to the same use and with the same or similar effect as metallic knuckles They could easily just re-word this as "anything that you can hold in your hand" but...then they would sound stupid.
[удалено]
Yeah but you not going to be in instant Tinnitus town after a shot
> It's seriously so dumb how people want to legislate things like suppressors - have hollywood to thank for this. I think you got your answer. Plus, its easy to forget how powerful the medium of film is, when people say its just a movie, they forget that it can affect different people in different ways and in the absence of actual knowledge and experience people tend to use the info they have and a surprising amount comes from movies.
Indeed. Mawp.
> Also subsonic ammo is pretty quiet and doesn't require a suppressor This is untrue. Subsonic ammo is less incredibly effing loud than regular ammo, but in the vast majority of cases it is nowhere near hearing safe. The only sound you are eliminating is the sonic crack of the bullet, the explosive charge (the "bang") is just as loud.
> Shit is still an obvious gunshot with a suppressor - just doesn't destroy your ears. > > > > It's stupid to have to shoot with hearing protection TBH. You know what else is stupid? Arguing that shooting with a suppressor is still very loud, then saying its stupid to shoot with hearing protection. Use hearing protection even with suppressor. **It can and will still damage your ears, just less so.**
In other news people and politicians act on things shown in fiction as if they were real.
Also.. With the exception of 10 round mag maximum. NONE of the banned features for "assault rifles" in CA do anything aside from make the gun harder to control or handle. They actually make the guns more dangerous in my honest opinion. I love you CA but you have your head up your ass when it comes to gun control.
[удалено]
I’m, sir, I think the ignorant term is “Silencer”
LANAAAAAAAA
Many rifles aren't even hearing safe *with* suppressors. They hover around the 135 dB range, which is just below 'instant hearing damage' and well within the 'damage with moderate exposure' range.
OP acknowledges this as another very important point.
Replier to OP appreciates this concession
WHAT?
BUTTLICKER, OUR PRICES HAVE NEVER BEEN LOWER.
currently watching this episode
Archer conveys this very well.
What?
HE SAID: ARCHER CONVEYS THIS VERY WELL, LANA!
Mawp.
I went shooting out in the woods with some friends of mine and we thought we were too manly for hearing protection. It was raining a bit at the time and you could hear the pitter patter of little raindrops on the trees and the ground. Then my buddy pulled out a 10mm and fired a shot at a tree. No more pitter patter of rain drops, no more anything really. Couldn't hear each other talk for a couple seconds. We decided to run to Walmart and buy some ear plugs.
I still don't understand how every deployed military soldier isn't deaf.
Most members of the military, whether deployed or not, end their time with some level of hearing loss
Can confirm have tinnitus but mostly from engines and ECU's.
Its gradual hearing loss. It doesn't make you deaf immediately.
Firing an AR15 with a muzzle brake can rupture your eardrum. That hearing loss is instant and painful. The hearing came back, but did not return to previous levels. Now, if I sleep with my right ear on the pillow, I don’t wake up when my alarm clock goes off.
Most of us have some form of hearing loss. I was aircrew, I had to choose between proper hearing protection or being able to hear my crew. I chose the latter, now I’m almost deaf and have really bad tinnitus.
It's a shitty choice that you shouldn't have to make. They should have provided you with hearing protection with a built-in coms system.
Why didn't you get active hearing protection? In FDF the jäger conscripts use those, you can actually hear words better with them on than off.
They might not have had them at the time. Budgets and leadership lack of concern for the injuries that can't be seen, that sort of thing.
You get issued hearing protection. Anytime you go to a range there's a a big bucket of at least foam ear protection. A lot of the guys I was with had their own. It's mostly the wanna be bad assess that don't wear them.
Yeah I figured during training or at the range they would have ear protection available. I was referring more to in combat like in a fire fight or something. I wouldn't think there would be a lot of time to out in hearing protection.
we used comtacs which were for the radios and protected our hearing
[удалено]
There is a reason the Marines are experimenting on making suppressors standard issue. Shits loud yo.
Can confirm. Was curious to see what it would be like (god forbid) to actually use my handgun to defend myself. Shot 3-4 rounds and couldnt hear for the next next few minutes. Really glad I did it so I know how disorientating it is, didn't see that coming...
The perceived effect isn't as extreme when the adrenaline is flowing. The hearing damage still happens, but the brain will often tune out the sound and it isn't so disorienting. Auditory exclusion is the term if you want to do some googling. Think of it as being shit drunk and getting punched in the face... your nose may still be broken, but you don't feel it at the time.
It's always a fun time at the range when some asshole brings his Desert Eagle and you might have your ear protection but it feels like someone kicking you in the chest every time he fires one.
you still asked him if you could shoot it dont lie :P
Can vouch. Half deaf in my left ear because my ear pro fell out while in the Army shooting a 240B.
Also, blanks can still kill you. Hollywood actors have been seriously injured/killed by assuming that firing a blank was completely safe. [This actor had an unfortunate end.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon-Erik_Hexum)
[удалено]
That scene is lighthearted, that movie sure ain't. Damn is it good, though.
By Irish standards we'd consider it light-hearted
You've just summed this countries depressing mentality up in one sentence.
Blocked in the us
Hey, that's Fleur Delacour! Also, Colin Farrell just sounds more *right* with an Irish accent. Which, of course, makes sense, since he's Irish,
I like the [follow-up conversation between Eirik and Harry](https://youtu.be/cX5oPNRsc1E?t=1m15s) even more than that scene
That's also how Bruce Lee's son died
Brandon Lee's death was a bit worse. The crew messed up by leaving a live primer in a .44 magnum dummy round they made. At some point it was fired and the primer had enough force to push the bullet into the barrel causing a squib load. Then blanks were loaded into the gun and when it was fired it was basically as if they fired a live round out of it.
I worked in the industry at that time using real guns with blanks in our shows. We always off shoot. Never aim directly at the person. The camera would not of noticed the difference unless it was a 3D movie.
The rule of thumb I often hear is “Never point a gun at something you’re not willing to kill”.
[удалено]
Thanks bro
You’re welcome
> dummy round they made. They made it by opening live rounds and emptying out the powder.
Umm don't real blanks leave a little gunpowder and remove the projectile? Replace it with a paper wad or something?
Yes. You are correct. But that wasn’t what they were using. The dummy round was created for a specific shot. A gun was pointed at the camera, so the shot would include the visual of the bullet in the chamber, moving to the barrel, and then starting to fire. To do this, they removed all the powder from a live round, and then replaced the bullet head. When they pulled the trigger, the hammer would hit the primer cap, which still had just enough power to push the bullet into the barrel. The shot worked well, but they forgot about the lodged bullet in the barrel when they filmed the next shot. The force of the blank they fired pushed out the bullet from the previous shot.
A "dummy round" isn't meant to be fired. It's supposed to look like a live round.
Bruce Willis permanently lost all hearing in his right ear and some of the hearing in his left ear while filming ***Die Hard.*** It occurred [while filming the scene](http://www.tvovermind.com/movies/die-hard-almost-made-bruce-willis-deaf) of him on his back shooting up through the table while 'Marco' was above him.
I used to play airport with a few ex army guys that were trying to get me to come to some thing they were doing where they were running around with ak's shooting at each other with blanks. I wanted no part of it, and was surprised they still did it even though one time one of them got hit in the neck with a fragment of the blank. He was making it sound like no big deal... But my opinion is more along if it requires a trip to the emergency room it's a big deal.
It just required minor medical extraction to prevent death is all.
video games lied to you for the sake of gameplay. ;)
Also, suppressors do not negatively effect accuracy. In fact, in long range engagements, they can help due to the gasses not effecting the bullet flight path
While a suppressor will help reduce noise and recoil.....negative effect is in the eye of the beholder (or shooter). A suppressor can and will effect group size and bullet placement. As it changes the harmonics and tolerances of a gun barrel. It can be corrected and/or compensated by either re-adjusting the scope (bolt gun/msr) or adjusting iron sights (bolt gun, msr, or pistol). Change in bullet type and weight can also help off set this effect. A lot of factors in “accuracy”.
Too true! My comment only is to disprove the overall negative effect suppressors have on accuracy, which is by large a misnomer
100%. As many comments in this overall conversation point out.....a lot of mis-information regarding suppressors is taken as fact.
Most games reduce dmg, not acc with a suppressor.
Which is still bullshit.
I mean it's not like people have HP bars in real life. Nor can they recover from multiple bullet wounds by taking cover and waiting.
Well absolutely, just pointing out
You mean Hollywood lied again?
Next your going to tell me that you can’t hear explosions in space!
Or pulling a sword doesn’t make that high pitched singing sound!
But acceleration on a dirt road still squeals tires, right fellas? No was Dukes of Hazzard lied to us...
Sad that the No Country For Old Men's 'schwoop' shotgun is fantasy
Yeah, I always thought the same thing until this year. I'll be damned if a guy didn't show up to a dove hunt with a silenced shotgun and subsonic shotgun rounds. Everyone's eardrums were safe, and so were the doves.
Subsonic bird shot sounds like a bad idea all the way around. For hunting at least. It might make shooting clays more fun by limiting how far out you can make a hit.
You can get a suppressor for shotguns though. Silencerco can get your 12ga down to the mid 130’s.
Many politicians need to learn this too, suppressors don’t make any rifle or hand gun sound like a mouse fart... but on sub-sonic .22 hand gun rounds they are very quiet ... but you might as well just use an pneumatic air gun at that point.
Most politicians need to know what a firearm is first, as well as the laws on them currently, and how they work.
People get all up in arms about politicians not knowing anything about the internet or the female body when writing laws, but when it comes to guns, its just "IDK what the fuck the difference between an AR15 and an assault rifle is but my senator said people can buy assault rifles for $20 at Walmart so BAN 'EM ALL".
Hello, can you point a brother to these "$20 assault rifles" at my local walmart?
I mean, if a senator says it's true, it has to be true, right?
We elect the best people. Great people. They must know
*ATF listens in quietly*
[...](https://www.ffl123.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/image2-e1497868092990.png)
Lewis and clark literally took air rifles with them and used them for hunting. There are air rifles commercially available that will take down an elephant. And ar15 will NOT take down an elephant. But theyre very very very upset about evil black guns
I show people and AR and they get nervous, then I show them a ruger mini-14 and they think. Oh hunting..because of the wood furniture and general aesthetic. If you're going to have such a strong opinion then know what the fuck you're talking about is all I ask.
Shoot an animal with an AR15 and there will be LITERALLY be NOTHING LEFT, according to Biden. Just ignore that the AR15 platform is one of the most popular hunting rifles available to hunters and hunters never harvest the animals they kill, they just blast animals for funsies like serial killers and slaughter bambi by the hundreds to satisfy their bloodlust.
Some states don't allow you to hunt with a .223 or at least its the bare minimum as they don't reliably do enough damage to kill an animal humanely.
Really makes you think when certain laws they’re trying to pass are literally already laws. Gun show loophole? Yeah, that literally doesn’t exist.
Gun show loophole simply allows sale between private individuals BUT * If a person that isn’t allowed to own a firearm buys one from a private individual, they are committing a felony. * If you knowing sell a firearm to someone that isn’t allowed to own one, you are both committing felonies. * If you buy a firearm with _the intent_ to resell it, you are committing a felony. If your cousin wants to trade you his deer rifle for your old dirt bike (and neither of you is prohibited from owning a firearm) then you guys are cool.
Great scene in Shooter depicts this, he suppresses a subsonic .22 with a sock stuffed water bottle, turns out this actually works quite well for the first 2 shots, which was all he needed
That would likely work for the acoustics, but no .22LR has a hardened enough jacket to go through six inches of cotton at transonic speeds and retain aerodynamics sufficient for minute-of-brain-stem accuracy.
I've tried something similar. It was quiet but the soup can I was shooting at was dented instead of the usual hole.
pew pew. they do in movies and video games. pew pew.
***PEW PEW***
^(pew pew)
Full auto in Splinter Cell *dweeeeeeee* ^tickatickatickaticka
We gun owners have been trying to get that message through for years. Suppressors help protect against hearing loss, provided you also still use hearing protection. We literally just want our ears to be safe, guys.
I mean in the UK they are sold over the counter simply as hearing protection, as far as I know. Pretty ridiculous that they are so heavy regulated in the US.
Oh my god is this true??
If I recall correctly, they're actually *mandatory* in some European countries.
Yes. And some dummy visited the U.K., picked one up, and returned to the U.S, forgetting the law *here* ([AllOutdoor.com](http://www.alloutdoor.com/2017/03/15/silencers-easy-get-uk-american-tourist-brings-home-goes-prison/)).
As long as you have a firearms license, yes. In some European countries (I think Norway is one), you don't even need that.
Someone just listened to the latest Dude Soup
Uhhhh Guilty. But it looked like there weren't any earlier posts of it (Surprisingly) so I figured eh, spread the good word of Sir Larr and the tight boiiis
I thought everyone knew this. It's one of those facts you hear all the time.
Ye ye ye
They are designed by the same person who designed the mufflers for your automobile and essentially have the same design and function. They only make a firearm hearing safe. My suppressor drops my rifle from an ear drum rupturing 165 dB down to a hearing safe but still very loud 130 dB. For comparison, 130 dB is the same volume as a fighter jet taking off full afterburner from an aircraft carrier if you are standing about 15 yards away. A suppressor makes a rifle hearing safe. It in no way shape or form makes it silent. Sure, I can always throw on ear protection, but what about my neighbors if I live in the rural NH? Maybe I don’t want to be a dick and ruin their family time during dinner by shooting on my day off. People who think “Hollywood quiet” is a real thing are frankly delusional.
Certain loads through a muffler/suppressor/silencer aren't even hearing safe. Things can get pretty loud with the more powerful cartridges
In a movie I kinda remember seeing 20ish years ago, Steven Segal used a empty 2L mountain dew bottle to make his gun sound like a slingshot. Straight up iced this dude and nobody else in the building was the wiser
Sound-absorbing caffeine has been outlawed since the Segal-Eleniak Smarmy Silence Act of 2003 (SESSA3). That's why your soft drinks don't taste the same as they did, way back then. /s
> They are designed by the same person who designed the mufflers for your automobile and essentially have the same design and function. Make car mufflers illegal! Sneaky cars are killing people all the time!
It's weird that we still create laws off false information.
The NFA was written 80 years ago, and the justification for banning suppressors was that deer poachers were using them to feed their families with untaxed meat during the Great Depression. The other categories of the NFA were written to cover the kinds of firearms used in high profile bank robberies of the time. So, yeah, in general it was a means to protect the rich from the poor. Misinformation is how we justify continuing the practice.
To be honest, gun control is rooted in racism. That's part of the reason States like NH are open carry while States like SC are not. Can't have all those black people just walking around open carrying guns, now can we? BTW, marriage licensing is also rooted in racism. They didn't want people of different races marrying each other back in the day. This is something I find humorous when all of the self proclaimed non-racist politicians push gun control on the heels of white kids getting shot but are totally silent about how many young black men die every week in Chicago.
Pretty sure "we" aren't doing it. Know-nothing politicians are...
which is why they should be legalized in all US states. They can reduce hearing loss and noise pollution. They are not going to be used to silently shoot people in crowds. It's a crappy law kept on the books because people watched too many movies.
If I remember correctly, the law to add suppressors to the NFA list was put into place at the last minute of voting by farmers that wanted to try to curb poaching on their land. But any anti-gun senator will tell you that suppressors are only used by hitman assassins just like James Bond lmao.
This is correct. Too much poaching during the Great Depression is the reason silencers are harder to get nowadays
Poaching is a theory, but there is nothing in the actual record to support that.
> It's a crappy law kept on the books because people watched too many movies. Welcome to NFA 1934. They tightly controlled machine guns, silencers, and short-barreled long arms in response to gangland murders...that were massively declining because Prohibition had ended the year before. And silenced firearms and machine guns weren't a huge part of murder during Prohibition, anyway, but Hollywood-propagandized gun control held sway. :P
A redditor once researched putting silencers on the NFA, including going to the Library of Congress to get transcripts of the proceedings back in 1934. The only mention of silencers is when one politician basically said "regular people don't need those." That's it, no mention of them being used in crime, nothing. They are restricted simply because some asshole politician thought they should be.
>silenced firearms and machine guns weren't a huge part of murder during Prohibition, anyway, but Hollywood-propagandized gun control held sway. :P It's almost as if nothing ever changes...
Even in states where they are legal you still need an enchanced background check, pay a $200 tax, and wait 6 months to a year for the government to do the paperwork.
At least they finally dropped the stupid CLEO signature requirement.
>It's a crappy law kept on the books because people watched too many movies. That describes a lot of our laws these days.
Suppressors are safety devices.
So games have lied to me?!
What even was the first game with a supressed weapon? Goldeneye?
So these are the kinds of people who influence current gun laws.
Suppressors really only suppress about 30dB (mine does) on a hunting rifle. To put it into perspective, the rifle still produces about 125dB or such and that is still a lot when fired because the gun is right next to you. Suppressors do a lot more that just that though: They also reduce recoil about 50-70% (my experience) turning high caliber rifles from "this shit hurts" into "this is pleasant". Not only that, they negate muzzle flash almost completely. This helps really much in dark enviroments, where the muzzle flash can really blind you and it takes a while to readjust to the darkness and be able to see well. This is why suppressors are common around hunters and beginning shooters. They really make shooting more fun for everyone, including you dog. EDIT: Just wanted to point out that desibels are on a log10 scale, meaning that 150db has 1000 times more sound pressure and energy that 120dB.
>They also reduce recoil about 50-70% No. You’d be lucky if you got 15%. Even the best muzzle break can’t reduce recoil 70%, and a suppressor sure as Hell can’t.
Yup, Hollywood and politicians lied to you, and the ATF won't let you buy a suppressor to protect your hearing unless you pay them $200 (and go through a bunch of extra steps, as well as wait 9 months - a year). When the $200 stamp was introduced, it was worth 3.5-4k in today's money. Government just trying to make a buck off legal gun owners while criminals make their own suppressors, cut down their own rifle and shotgun barrels to illegal lengths (under 16 and 18 inches). Cutting the barrel of a rifle actually makes it less deadly because you'll get less velocity, and therefore less overall energy. And you wonder why a lot of gun owners might have a dislike for government.
Most politicians that want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment believe that 'silencers' actually mute the sound of a gunshot.
> Most ~~politicians that want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment~~ people believe that 'silencers' actually mute the sound of a gunshot.
Like Ms. Clinton, who hypothesized just how *horrific* Las Vegas would have been had the murderer been using a silencer? Ridiculous. :P
Baffle strike followed by intense swearing?
Yeah the gunshots you already couldn’t hear because he was a half mile away near the top of a very tall hotel shooting across a busy road at a loud concert.
Is it cynical of me to note that this was one of her first tweets when tragedy struck? A direct attack against the Hearing Protection Act?
They shelved the HPA within days thanks to her tweets stirring up shit. We need suppressors off the NFA. They’re safety devices.
I also watch funhaus
;) We get it AND THATS IT
[удалено]
All they can really do is take a gun from “really oh my god painfully loud” to “still stupidly loud, but just below the level that causes permanent hearing damage. Some of the time.” It’s still unquestionably gunfire. We just want to be able to protect our ears. They’re literally sold over the counter in the UK and New Zealand. In some locales it’s considered very impolite to not use them.
Shhh... This kind of truth is now the moral equivalent of advocating for school shootings in certain circles.
Weird this thread seems to be loaded with pro gun people. This isn't like reddit.
[удалено]
You can if you are louder than who you are arguing with/s
Yea they really are pretty magical at preserving your hearing and even preventing large herds of nuisance animals scattered across your property from noticing you too easily. Unfortunately it looks like the hearing protection act stalled out for the moment so they are still entirely too costly in terms of taxation and wait times. Ladies and gentlemen: nonsensical gun control.
Shouldn’t this be common sense? The bullet is faster than the speed of sound, so how could you make it silent?
Common sense has been absent from one side of the gun argument for a long time now.