Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 03-07-2014, 07:44 AM
C Taylor's Avatar
C Taylor C Taylor is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Viking
Posts: 1,220
Default

I always thought it was silly how the Europeans have them on huntin rifles. I had the opportunity to use one in Namibia last spring. I'd still want ear plugs when target shooting but I know if they were legal here 30yr ago, I wouldn't be wearing hearing aids!
Thinking that it's only good for poachers is like thinking all pistols are supposed to be shot sideways lol too many movies
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 03-07-2014, 07:49 AM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperMOA View Post
Just for the record I am not arguing this point with you. I have no experience or practical knowledge of a silencer. I have a question though. If a suppressor changes the point of aim would that not have changed either muzzle velocity or range of the rifle? Possibly an insignificant amount whether positive or negative?
No, it changes the harmonics of the barrel.

For instance I used a cz452 .22lr a lot with one in Europe. The point of impact moved by about an inch at 50m, but the group size reduced by about 1/3rd.

As for helping poachers, I can't emphasise this enough, they do not make your centre fire rifle quiet, they just make it safer on your ears. And when hunting honestly how many shots do you fire? Because if it's only one shot, how is the volume a safety factor for other people in the woods? It's not like you are making repeated shots so they hear you and know to avoid the area.

I bet if they were legal, 95% of hunters would be using them within 3 years.

Modern designs are not really heavy or cumbersome, and if you trim the barrel down a little you can keep the overall length the same.

Or the manufacturers would just start supplying the supressor ready models, like the sako fin light in 308 which comes with a factory threaded 16" barrel.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 03-07-2014, 08:42 AM
CptnBlues63 CptnBlues63 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Somewhere north of Edmonton
Posts: 616
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredo View Post
There won't be any coyote left in Alberta the week after suppressors get legal...
Well, I don't know about where you hunt, but where I hunt they run as soon as they hear a vehicle. This is because everybody around there carries a gun and if they see a coyote, they shoot him. So the coyotes there are well trained and a suppressor wouldn't make a bit of difference as you still have to get close enough to them to actually take a shot.......lol


Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger View Post
I have no issue with their use on ranges only.

For hunting...I feel that we have enough advantage over animals already and that loud bangs are a benefit from a safety perspective.

The fly in the ointment of course is that they would no doubt become very attractive to hoods and idiots... exposing us all to more bad press.
I agree 100% that they would be great to have at the range. I don't however see how having one on a hunting rifle would give a hunter an unfair advantage.

Let's say you're sitting in a blind and a deer you want to harvest walks into range. Your bullet is through him and gone before the sound ever makes it to him so where would the advantage be in that case?

If you drive around during the day looking for animals on a quad or in a truck, they'll hear your vehicle before you ever get out of it. So again, wher is the advantage to the hunter?

Yes, a loud bang can warn other folks that there's someone shooting in the area so I agree an unsuppressed rifle could be a safety factor.

I don't wear hearing protection in the field. So a suppressor in that sense would be helpful as it would save my already damaged hearing.

Not that I personally would want a suppressor on my hunting rifle while out in the field hunting. I wouldn't. I don't need the extra weight and length and in all honesty, the possible hearing damage from 1 or 2 shots isn't enough to matter.

As to the bad press aspect, well, that's why they're illegal now. Thanks to the BS in movies and TV and people's overactive imagination, the people that don't know any better think they make guns silent (ergo the incorrect term "silencer") and give criminals an advantage over cops. They do not in fact make guns silent (unless you're using subsonic rounds and then you can make your firearm almost completely silent....downside, your range is limited to a few feet or the bullet hits the ground before it hits the target........lol), but the same anti gun types don't care any more about the reality of a suppressor than they do about the reality that guns don't kill people.

FWIW, my brother is a LEO and a member of the tactical squad. He has taken sniper training and has a really, really, nice sniper rifle. He just informed me they now have suppressors on them. I can't wait to shoot it this summer and see how much it lowers the noise of a .308 I doubt it would be enough to allow me to remove my hearing protection under the roof over our shooting stands at the range. But it might allow you to do so out in the open. I guess we'll find out.
__________________
It matters not how straight the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

***William Henley***
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 03-07-2014, 09:24 AM
Roughneck Country's Avatar
Roughneck Country Roughneck Country is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
The way I see it, there's no reason to ban them being used by ethical hunters, but what about poachers?

It's bad enough the way things are, if suppressors/silencers were legal to use, I'd bet that every poacher would use them and that I suspect would make detecting illegal hunting activity just that much harder.

So my thought is, the advantages they offer ethical hunters are far outweighed by the disadvantages of having every poacher using them.

Now if we could keep them out of the hands of poachers, I'd be 100% for them.
I don't think increased poaching would be an issue, they reduce noise but not eliminate it like in the movies, also it is very easy to make a home made one out of an oil filter. Lots of you tube video's it looks like as well about how to make a home made one.

Lots of bennefit while hunting close to urban areas like has been mentioned as there is a lower probability of disturbing urban residents
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 03-07-2014, 11:45 AM
HyperMOA HyperMOA is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edmonton (shudder)
Posts: 4,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatboyz View Post
The reason the point of impact changes slightly is that the barrel harmonics are changed, same as when you add a brake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
No, it changes the harmonics of the barrel.
Makes sense guys. I never thought of that.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 03-07-2014, 12:30 PM
Fisherpeak Fisherpeak is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kimberley B.C.
Posts: 5,234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger View Post
I have no issue with their use on ranges only.

For hunting...I feel that we have enough advantage over animals already and that loud bangs are a benefit from a safety perspective.

The fly in the ointment of course is that they would no doubt become very attractive to hoods and idiots... exposing us all to more bad press.
Yup.Generally I only need one shot anyway so what is the point of a silencer?And they screw with accuracy.I really don`t care if all the other elk run away,just as long as mine is planted.
More toys for boys I guess.Not for me.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 03-07-2014, 12:36 PM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherpeak View Post
Yup.Generally I only need one shot anyway so what is the point of a silencer?And they screw with accuracy.I really don`t care if all the other elk run away,just as long as mine is planted.
More toys for boys I guess.Not for me.
You do realise hearing damage is cumulative? So damage is done if you shoot once per day for 100 days to a similar level to shooting 100 times in one day.

Honestly guys, you don't know what you're missing.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 03-07-2014, 12:46 PM
Fisherpeak Fisherpeak is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kimberley B.C.
Posts: 5,234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
You do realise hearing damage is cumulative? So damage is done if you shoot once per day for 100 days to a similar level to shooting 100 times in one day.

Honestly guys, you don't know what you're missing.
I shoot 6-10 rounds before the season to tune `er in and after that it`s pretty much a one deer/one shot deal.I wear hearing protection at the gravel pit sight ins but not in the field.
Besides,I played in a Rock band for 14 years,hearing`s pretty much screwed anyway.Handy in a way though,no matter how mad the old lady is her voice sounds soothing.Nice not having all that high range hearing.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 03-07-2014, 01:00 PM
Albertacoyotecaller Albertacoyotecaller is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,021
Default

I am all for it, both from a safety end, a community respect end and from the point that we don't need stuff regulated for the wrong reason.

I think it is a winnable fight and the positives outweigh the negatives. Just have to fight hard to overcome the bad laws and educate people.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 03-07-2014, 01:22 PM
j m's Avatar
j m j m is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rugatika View Post
Maybe we should pass a law that bowhunters have to yell BANG!!! in a bull horn when they shoot an arrow. To stop bowhunters from poaching ya know.
Or that poachers using suppressors now would be required to yell bang. Or hit the horn on their truck when shooting from the drivers seat.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 03-07-2014, 01:28 PM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by j m View Post
Or that poachers using suppressors now would be required to yell bang. Or hit the horn on their truck when shooting from the drivers seat.
Like everything else, the problem is not the tool, it's the person behind it that's the problem.

If we as a community can't stand together on these things it's no wonder we have such stupid laws.

Guys, scrapping c68 is on the table. Let's be united and push for change. Legalising suppressors will be a foregone conclusion once the ball starts rolling. The health and safety law is too strong not to allow it. It worked in Europe where it was even harder of a battle.

The people on here saying "I don't need/want one so no one should have one" are as bad as the antis.
I don't need/ want a 600hp sports car. Should I prevent others from owning one?

Banning everything won't stop crime. So why punish those of us who want things for lawful purposes.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 03-07-2014, 02:26 PM
Fisherpeak Fisherpeak is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Kimberley B.C.
Posts: 5,234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
Like everything else, the problem is not the tool, it's the person behind it that's the problem.

If we as a community can't stand together on these things it's no wonder we have such stupid laws.

Guys, scrapping c68 is on the table. Let's be united and push for change. Legalising suppressors will be a foregone conclusion once the ball starts rolling. The health and safety law is too strong not to allow it. It worked in Europe where it was even harder of a battle.

The people on here saying "I don't need/want one so no one should have one" are as bad as the antis.
I don't need/ want a 600hp sports car. Should I prevent others from owning one?

Banning everything won't stop crime. So why punish those of us who want things for lawful purposes.
I never said you can`t have one.I just said it seems pretty pointless for me to have one.If you want one then fill yer boots.Hell,get 6 or 8 of `em.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 03-07-2014, 02:52 PM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherpeak View Post
I never said you can`t have one.I just said it seems pretty pointless for me to have one.If you want one then fill yer boots.Hell,get 6 or 8 of `em.
Sorry, I wasn't referring to you.

But it's the same with every topic close to this. Look at the swiss arms and how many people said "why does anyone need a military rifle"

Especially as the irony is they likely own a hunting rifle which is considerably more powerful.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 03-08-2014, 12:03 AM
HyperMOA HyperMOA is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edmonton (shudder)
Posts: 4,591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
Especially as the irony is they likely own a hunting rifle which is considerably more powerful.
Or was once a military rifle itself. Lee Enfields were a military rifle too. Or an M-1.

Last edited by HyperMOA; 03-08-2014 at 12:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 03-08-2014, 12:07 AM
fish gunner fish gunner is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: on a mishn for fishn.
Posts: 8,790
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
Sorry, I wasn't referring to you.

But it's the same with every topic close to this. Look at the swiss arms and how many people said "why does anyone need a military rifle"

Especially as the irony is they likely own a hunting rifle which is considerably more powerful.
In what regards more powerful 5.56 vs 7.62 . from a human point of view there is Not much differance till 600 mtrs. Now if we compare rounds down range well semi vs bolt .. wel you know ...
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 03-11-2014, 09:46 PM
243 wild cat 243 wild cat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 776
Cool We think the same

Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarychef View Post
Just think how supressors would benefit the neighbours to gun ranges. I've used suppressed firearms in the UK and as pointed out they still make a big noise and would be little use to poachers. They would help my ears though! Honestly guns are a LOT more pleasant to shoot with them and I see NO. Reason to disallow them. I think we will see them legalised here before too long.
I really hope your right calgarychef they would be a great benefit to the noise. The poachers well what can you say if they kill for bad reasons what's the diff for them to use a bow -snare - a 22cal - cross bow - a truck. Its all BS to even think that way. I have seen and heard the shots from a suppressed rifle and I will say it one more time its BS that it would be a use for poachers the shot is still there its just less then what you would need for ear plugs. LOL It would be nice to see what would happen if they get legalised before my time is up too in joy them.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 03-11-2014, 11:46 PM
waterninja waterninja is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: edmonton
Posts: 11,434
Default

if put to a vote i would abstain. personally i don't see the need for one and i would'nt put one on any of my firearms.
on the other hand, some good points made to have them, such as hearing protection on the range.
quite honestly, don't think they will ever be legal in canada in my lifetime.

also i'm thinking that they would be costly and need to be replaced/refurbished fairly regularly, though i haven't seen any posts about that on this thread.
.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 03-12-2014, 07:51 AM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by waterninja View Post
if put to a vote i would abstain. personally i don't see the need for one and i would'nt put one on any of my firearms.
on the other hand, some good points made to have them, such as hearing protection on the range.
quite honestly, don't think they will ever be legal in canada in my lifetime.

also i'm thinking that they would be costly and need to be replaced/refurbished fairly regularly, though i haven't seen any posts about that on this thread.
.
In Europe, where they don't have the silly tax, they are not expensive. You can get effective rimfire ones for less than about $50 which last 10s of thousands of rounds.
Larger calibre ones obviously cost a bit more, but will last equally as long. Probably longer than the barrel of your rifle.

It saddens me that people won't support their fellow shooter, and even admit defeat before we've even started. For anyone here to immediately dismiss them is folly. If you shoot on a range, or varmint shoot, or shoot anywhere near other people I guarantee you would see a benefit if you actually tried one.

It's like the green vegatables when you're a kid, you don't know you'll like it until you try it.

And personally I'd support any of my fellow shooters to get something they want even if I'd never use it myself.

If we all had a united front we would achieve a lot more.

I'll say it again, if the uk can get them, why can't we? Their laws are much stricter.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 03-12-2014, 03:07 PM
Hjortejeger Hjortejeger is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Norway
Posts: 29
Default

I have three suppressors and I will buy one more this summer. I use it all the time.

A suggestion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t_pcWPdSDs
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 03-12-2014, 03:26 PM
bhguy bhguy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rugatika View Post
Maybe we should pass a law that bowhunters have to yell BANG!!! in a bull horn when they shoot an arrow. To stop bowhunters from poaching ya know.
why do we as hunters have to put down one area of our lifestyle to prove ours is right? there is a new gun law we want changed, but if it doesn't bow hunters should yell bang? wtf?

why bring bows up at all?
__________________
No wonder some of the ABA crowd find it so hard to become proficient with a spear, they are throwing them backwards.

The lack of feathers must confuse some of them
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 03-12-2014, 04:02 PM
Roughneck Country's Avatar
Roughneck Country Roughneck Country is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bhguy View Post
why do we as hunters have to put down one area of our lifestyle to prove ours is right? there is a new gun law we want changed, but if it doesn't bow hunters should yell bang? wtf?

why bring bows up at all?
His point was bows quiet so poachers could use them just like a silenced gun, if you read the whole thread his comment makes sense
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 03-12-2014, 04:25 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck Country View Post
His point was bows quiet so poachers could use them just like a silenced gun, if you read the whole thread his comment makes sense
I don't see how it makes sense.

Bows and Rifles are completely different tools and require completely different techniques to use.

I don't think you would find a poacher driving around with a loaded bow, taking shots out the window at targets three or four hundred yards away.

As it is now, when a bow would work, poachers absolutely do use bows. And when they do I'm pretty sure it's because bows are quiet.

I have zero experience with silencers but logic suggests that if they didn't make a substantial difference in the loudness of the gun shot, they wouldn't remain on the market very long.

Logic also suggests that any significant reduction in the rifle report would be of advantage to a poacher.

For me, the conundrum is, I don't believe we should have to give up a valuable tool just to keep it out of the hands of the law breakers.

And besides, such efforts are seldom effective.

Upon thinking about it, I suspect that if silencers were of significant benefit to a poacher, we would be hearing about a lot more silencers being found in the possession of the poachers that are caught.

Personally I have never heard of anyone being found in the possession of such a device, in this Provence, although I'm sure it must have happened at least once or twice. For certain any good machinist could produce a somewhat workable unit.

I am seriously beginning to think that those here who say that silencers would not be of much advantage to a poacher, are probably right.

On the other hand, I'm beginning to think they wouldn't be of much benefit to law abiding hunters either.


Like so many of these sort of issues, I have no interest in them but I have no objection to others wanting to use them.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 03-12-2014, 04:34 PM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
I don't see how it makes sense.

Bows and Rifles are completely different tools and require completely different techniques to use.

I don't think you would find a poacher driving around with a loaded bow, taking shots out the window at targets three or four hundred yards away.

As it is now, when a bow would work, poachers absolutely do use bows. And when they do I'm pretty sure it's because bows are quiet.

I have zero experience with silencers but logic suggests that if they didn't make a substantial difference in the loudness of the gun shot, they wouldn't remain on the market very long.

Logic also suggests that any significant reduction in the rifle report would be of advantage to a poacher.

For me, the conundrum is, I don't believe we should have to give up a valuable tool just to keep it out of the hands of the law breakers.

And besides, such efforts are seldom effective.

Upon thinking about it, I suspect that if silencers were of significant benefit to a poacher, we would be hearing about a lot more silencers being found in the possession of the poachers that are caught.

Personally I have never heard of anyone being found in the possession of such a device, in this Provence, although I'm sure it must have happened at least once or twice. For certain any good machinist could produce a somewhat workable unit.

I am seriously beginning to think that those here who say that silencers would not be of much advantage to a poacher, are probably right.

On the other hand, I'm beginning to think they wouldn't be of much benefit to law abiding hunters either.


Like so many of these sort of issues, I have no interest in them but I have no objection to others wanting to use them.

The bit you're missing is the volume of gunshots, or indeed the volume of anything is on an exponential scale.
suppressors can lower the volume massively in terms of the danger range to our hearing, and what is left is still a loud sound that won't allow poachers to operate like a movie assassin. But the health benefit is still huge.

A rifle firing at 160+db is doing huge damage to your ears. Bringing it down to 120 is great for your ears, but still loud enough to be heard if someone is doing something they shouldn't be. The difference between 160 and 120 is many many times a reduction in the impulse power. A 10db loss at the top end of the scale is many times more than a 10db loss at the lower end.

If they didn't work for hunters no one in Europe would use them, but every shooting friend there does.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 03-12-2014, 04:52 PM
bhguy bhguy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 490
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck Country View Post
His point was bows quiet so poachers could use them just like a silenced gun, if you read the whole thread his comment makes sense
I did read it and don't see the the point as a correlation. You could say handguns should be banned cause poachers could hide them better...same logic, it would be valid if a suppressor silenced a gun, but it really doesn't make a super drastic change
__________________
No wonder some of the ABA crowd find it so hard to become proficient with a spear, they are throwing them backwards.

The lack of feathers must confuse some of them
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 03-13-2014, 02:56 PM
243 wild cat 243 wild cat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 776
Cool That my friend is a right!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
In Europe, where they don't have the silly tax, they are not expensive. You can get effective rimfire ones for less than about $50 which last 10s of thousands of rounds.
Larger calibre ones obviously cost a bit more, but will last equally as long. Probably longer than the barrel of your rifle.

It saddens me that people won't support their fellow shooter, and even admit defeat before we've even started. For anyone here to immediately dismiss them is folly. If you shoot on a range, or varmint shoot, or shoot anywhere near other people I guarantee you would see a benefit if you actually tried one.

It's like the green vegatables when you're a kid, you don't know you'll like it until you try it.

And personally I'd support any of my fellow shooters to get something they want even if I'd never use it myself.

If we all had a united front we would achieve a lot more.

I'll say it again, if the uk can get them, why can't we? Their laws are much stricter.
I totally agree if you don't think you need one don't buy one but if it came to regards to bringing them in we should all join together and vote yes just to support a fellow shooter in haveing a choice. It would help us all for the best reasons to fight for anything to do with firearms. We just have to much conflict with in ourselves that we CAN'T!!!! SUPPORT each other in what would be a choice to have as a shooter or a hunter. It only pertains to your choice but DAM IT!! you still have a choice and thats what its all about haveing a choice at all. Because as i see it now we are limited to the gun rights and the laws we have now which is not much at all. So not supporting each other now won't help for the next thing that we would like to have or see come in to are sport!.

Last edited by 243 wild cat; 03-13-2014 at 03:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 03-13-2014, 05:18 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
The bit you're missing is the volume of gunshots,
Oh I get that all right. And I know there are other alternatives so far as my hearing goes.

Like I said, I wouldn't want one but I have no objection to someone else wanting one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
to no one in particular.

Would I sign a petition to legalize them. I'm thinking, yes. But I really should do some more research first. Fact is I don't know a lot about them.

Yeah I know, some would say I shouldn't have an opinion if I'm not an expert.

Well guess what, I may be asked to vote, on this and other issues I know little about. Another fact is, I can't be an expert on everything. No one can.

We all vote, and or make decisions based on what little we do know.

So to those who think I shouldn't have an opinion if I'm not an expert. Would you rather I say nothing and go ahead and vote without getting involved with discussions like this? Or should I just not vote on anything I'm not an expert in?

I can see the end of the trail from here. For me it doesn't really matter, I won't be around long enough for it to make a big difference in my life.

If I vote, I vote for your sake, not mine. So who do you want on your side? An uneducated fellow hunter or a clueless yuppy that knows nothing about hunting? Cause that's about all that will be left if guys like me don't vote. And you can bet your paycheck that they will vote no matter what you say, and you won't like the way they vote.

Come on people, quit fighting each other. We have enough enemies as it is.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 03-13-2014, 06:29 PM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
Oh I get that all right. And I know there are other alternatives so far as my hearing goes.

Like I said, I wouldn't want one but I have no objection to someone else wanting one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the issue, there are no alternatives. The best ear defenders going, even double plugged do not bring a full bore rifle shot to safe levels. The absolute best you can do is about 40db. Assuming you're bald and not wearing safety glasses for a perfect seal. So a 170db rifle shot is now 130 (in reality you'll never do this well) and 130 is still damaging your ears.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 03-13-2014, 08:00 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
That's the issue, there are no alternatives. The best ear defenders going, even double plugged do not bring a full bore rifle shot to safe levels. The absolute best you can do is about 40db. Assuming you're bald and not wearing safety glasses for a perfect seal. So a 170db rifle shot is now 130 (in reality you'll never do this well) and 130 is still damaging your ears.
I have never worn hearing protection and I've owned and used guns since I was 12 years old. Not to mention all the other loud noises I've experienced. Like an 8V92 with straight pipes. When the Jake cut in birds would drop out of the sky.

Plus I've shot everything from a .22 short on up to a .338 magnum. I've had more then one rifle triggered while the mussel was adjacent to my ear and although it hurt like crazy my hearing is still not too bad.

Just how much of an issue is an unsilenced gun?


Hey, if you want to use one, go for it. But I don't see the need for me to have one.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 03-13-2014, 08:23 PM
crunchiespg crunchiespg is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
I have never worn hearing protection and I've owned and used guns since I was 12 years old. Not to mention all the other loud noises I've experienced. Like an 8V92 with straight pipes. When the Jake cut in birds would drop out of the sky.

Plus I've shot everything from a .22 short on up to a .338 magnum. I've had more then one rifle triggered while the mussel was adjacent to my ear and although it hurt like crazy my hearing is still not too bad.

Just how much of an issue is an unsilenced gun?


Hey, if you want to use one, go for it. But I don't see the need for me to have one.
Well on my yearly hearing tests when I was on the team shooting 100,000s of rounds a year even protected they could see a loss in hearing.

I totally support your choice not to. But I'd say when they are legal you might be surprised how much you like them. If you still don't want one then that's fine, but I do. I'd have them on every rifle I own.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 03-13-2014, 08:33 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchiespg View Post
Well on my yearly hearing tests when I was on the team shooting 100,000s of rounds a year even protected they could see a loss in hearing.

I totally support your choice not to. But I'd say when they are legal you might be surprised how much you like them. If you still don't want one then that's fine, but I do. I'd have them on every rifle I own.

Fair enough. And I support your desire to have them, for you.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.