• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Massacre blunts momentum of gun silencer bill [W:148]

I’ll just go ahead and ask the deer to stop while I put my earplugs in. What a damn joke of an argument, of course from people who have never hunted and most likely never fired a gun, let alone a suppressed one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

firing once or twice at a deer isn't going to make you go deaf, it's the repeated firing over and over again at a range or target shooting that causes the damage, it's long time exposure to loud noises, not one offs.
 
they really aren't an issue. this isn't the movies. this is the problem with dealing with uneducated people when it comes to fire arms.
they have no clue what they are talking about at any given time.

you can still hear a rifle shot from a suppressor quite well. instead of 15-160 db's it is 130 bd well enough to hear the retort go off.


Suppressor technology hasn't advanced as fas as other technologies because of them being illegal and out of the market, so there's not a lot a of competition to make better and better suppressors.
 
no you don't.

it is perfectly legal to have a 50 cal on a tank it is perfectly legal to have a main cannon operational.
they all have to be registered independent of each other.

the cost is very expensive and requires a massive background check.

however there are people that have them and they own large amounts of property and allow people to come out and
drive and shoot a tank.

https://www.drivetanks.com/packages/

So, that background check, think it might work with other guns as well? you know, so we can make sure that actual good guys are getting the guns, instead of the joke of a background test they have now
 
Right bro. keep huntin dem dead hogs. Here are a bunch of other "limp" and "ignorant" people that know more than you. You are simply making **** up. Are you right and all these people wrong?

Sigh, this is why folks who never have, should not post simple data and make odd claims.

First I have never hunted a dead hog, have made a few dozen that way so I do know a bit about hunting them... have you ever hunted feral hogs?

Next the example used in the OP is probably the worst combo to use- a short barreled AR with a pistol length suppressor- the direct impinge system vents unsuppressed gases back into the action- this is like a dodge charger coupled to a Yugo muffler with a big hole in the exhaust pipe- not very effective.

How a suppressor works- first they change the volume of the area the hot gas flows into- bigger is better. Next they have a baffle system that chops the acoustic wave up reducing the supersonic signature to a sharp hiss. Number and design of baffles counts. Have you ever used one?

Moving on to hunting hogs- all 'real' Americans know the story of Sgt. York but for the few who don't... among his other accomplishments he took out a German patrol, one man at a time with a unsuppressed bolt rifle. Asked how he did it he said the same way he shot turkeys, he shot the tail end Charlie first and worked his way forward.

So back to my statement that backround noise can obscure the sound of a suppressed weapon. The sharp supersonic crack of a rifle does carry fairly well, the suppressed hiss of the suppressed weapon doesn't- again have you fired one???

Now all experts on shooting sounds knows there is a difference between in front of a weapon and behind one. What I said is BEHIND the suppressed weapon we could be unmuffed and hold conversations.

Not much you can do about the bullet's supersonic crack, however once separated from the muzzle blast it isn't all that impressive, what matters most is the distance from your head the bullet passes. Within 3 feet and the crack does get your undivided attention, out at oh, 6 to 12 feet depending on some exterior ballistic factors the sharp crack is diminished and there is a Doppler effect as it continues on passed, further off the line of flight and the crack is very muted with more angry bee buzz than anything as it leaves the AO.

Lets combine the experiences- you hunt ferals hogs from a distance of 2 to 300 meters, you shoot from front to back and on the edges. You'll get 3 or so hogs before the passel figures out they are being shot and haul butt. They can do over 20mph but if you can use Mil-dot you stand a reasonable chance of knocking down another hog.

Now onto this chart- I doubt anyone would have thought a Daisy BB gun almost breaks 100 db... :shock:

But I'm sure everyone who shoots often knows their earmuff NNR score- mine is 27. Now like the sticker MPG rating on a car no one gets the rating. So according to the chart you present my relatively mild 308 combined with my earmuffs still has me above the painful threshold.... :roll:

Interesting a set of muffs are so effective with a 20 something db rating but a suppressor apparently isn't... :doh

I can assure you it doesn't hurt to shoot over 100 rounds a day or spot for a dozen guys who shoot 100 rounds a day- eye strain on the spotting scope is another matter.

I've never 'decibeled' my rifle, never knew a BB gun was 97db and am pretty sure my experience means a tad more than a chart claiming a BB gun is that loud.

Perhaps gaining some experience in this matter would help you put this chart in it's proper place.. :peace
 
Republicans in Congress don't know how to govern. The shooting in Las Vegas has nothing to do with this issue. The swamp must be drained.

Yes we can!
 
Danarhea:

Silencers lessen gun reports which makes auditory location of a distant or concealed shooters much harder. Gun users can use external ear protection to preserve their hearing with little discomfort or annoyance. So the danger of police being unable to quickly and accurately locate a distant or concealed shooter outweighs the lawful shooter's desire to more easily protect their ears.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

The obfuscation of the position of the shooter makes silencers ideal for citizens protecting their rights against a government nibbling or grabbing for or crushing them. 'Sounds like just yhe kind of weapon one needs in Catalonia or would have in Syria.
 
The obfuscation of the position of the shooter makes silencers ideal for citizens protecting their rights against a government nibbling or grabbing for or crushing them. 'Sounds like just yhe kind of weapon one needs in Catalonia or would have in Syria.

People are allowed to own guns in Russia and the Yemen. How are their freedoms doing?

Catalonia, lol. Are you encouraging people to use guns against the police upholding the law?
 
Nah, it just suggests that you are too serious, my friend, and missed the giggle. Stop swinging at windmills, this debate thing is supposed to be fun, you know where I stand on this. ;)

As long as these items can be demonstrated to be used responsibly, I don't particularly care, nor do I feel like having laws against them will stop anyone determined to do someone else dirt. The silencer thing for hunting seems a little silly, but that's just me, and not a reason why they should be illegal. If it's at the range, ok, fine, but you're still going to need ear protection unless the range has a rule that everyone must have silencers...and even then, it's still going to be loud, so you're better off popping a couple earplugs in. And if it's in a home defense situation, if you have the time to affix a silencer to a properly stored firearm, more power to you...

That all said, I'm sure even a staunch gun supporter like yourself can understand how less educated folks are a little sensitive around stuff like this, given recent events. Perhaps within the first couple days after America's worst mass shooting isn't the time to get too sticky about a pro gun agenda. Give it a week, everyone will have found something else to be pissed off about...and yes, I get how sad and cynical that statement is.

Ditto!
 
Couldn't watch the video where I am at the moment...and this is definitely not a "gotcha", legitimately curious over here... If a suppressor only brings the rifle down to 130-140db, what's the point?

Sorry if this has been discussed already, if it has a post reference number will suffice. Again, not a gotcha... I've never used one before, despite having spent a fair amount of time at the range, nor have I seen one in use in person.

Thanks!

I have fired a few rounds with a friends Glock 17 9 MM fitted with a "Evolution series suppressor". He was all giddy about the great deal he got on it, but I didn't see the value in it after hearing it with and without.
 
Double hearing protection is a hell of a lot cheaper than buying a suppressor......and more effective.
 
People are allowed to own guns in Russia and the Yemen. How are their freedoms doing?

Catalonia, lol. Are you encouraging people to use guns against the police upholding the law?

Is it that you miss the existential constitutional question involved in what might be considered the ultimate check on rulers' powers? You flip answer indicates that you aren't really interested in how power is controlled by sociopolitical groups, how legitimacy decays or under which circumstances which degree of violence is required from the citizen. I am surprised in a way, you being on a political forum and our having seen numerous examples recently.
 
Sigh, this is why folks who never have, should not post simple data and make odd claims.

First I have never hunted a dead hog, have made a few dozen that way so I do know a bit about hunting them... have you ever hunted feral hogs?

Next the example used in the OP is probably the worst combo to use- a short barreled AR with a pistol length suppressor- the direct impinge system vents unsuppressed gases back into the action- this is like a dodge charger coupled to a Yugo muffler with a big hole in the exhaust pipe- not very effective.

How a suppressor works- first they change the volume of the area the hot gas flows into- bigger is better. Next they have a baffle system that chops the acoustic wave up reducing the supersonic signature to a sharp hiss. Number and design of baffles counts. Have you ever used one?

Moving on to hunting hogs- all 'real' Americans know the story of Sgt. York but for the few who don't... among his other accomplishments he took out a German patrol, one man at a time with a unsuppressed bolt rifle. Asked how he did it he said the same way he shot turkeys, he shot the tail end Charlie first and worked his way forward.

So back to my statement that backround noise can obscure the sound of a suppressed weapon. The sharp supersonic crack of a rifle does carry fairly well, the suppressed hiss of the suppressed weapon doesn't- again have you fired one???

Now all experts on shooting sounds knows there is a difference between in front of a weapon and behind one. What I said is BEHIND the suppressed weapon we could be unmuffed and hold conversations.

Not much you can do about the bullet's supersonic crack, however once separated from the muzzle blast it isn't all that impressive, what matters most is the distance from your head the bullet passes. Within 3 feet and the crack does get your undivided attention, out at oh, 6 to 12 feet depending on some exterior ballistic factors the sharp crack is diminished and there is a Doppler effect as it continues on passed, further off the line of flight and the crack is very muted with more angry bee buzz than anything as it leaves the AO.

Lets combine the experiences- you hunt ferals hogs from a distance of 2 to 300 meters, you shoot from front to back and on the edges. You'll get 3 or so hogs before the passel figures out they are being shot and haul butt. They can do over 20mph but if you can use Mil-dot you stand a reasonable chance of knocking down another hog.

Now onto this chart- I doubt anyone would have thought a Daisy BB gun almost breaks 100 db... :shock:

But I'm sure everyone who shoots often knows their earmuff NNR score- mine is 27. Now like the sticker MPG rating on a car no one gets the rating. So according to the chart you present my relatively mild 308 combined with my earmuffs still has me above the painful threshold.... :roll:

Interesting a set of muffs are so effective with a 20 something db rating but a suppressor apparently isn't... :doh

I can assure you it doesn't hurt to shoot over 100 rounds a day or spot for a dozen guys who shoot 100 rounds a day- eye strain on the spotting scope is another matter.

I've never 'decibeled' my rifle, never knew a BB gun was 97db and am pretty sure my experience means a tad more than a chart claiming a BB gun is that loud.

Perhaps gaining some experience in this matter would help you put this chart in it's proper place.. :peace




blah blah blah blah, you could have said "you know what, you are correct". would have saved you all that time writing up this nonsense that no ones going to read.


I've shown you the facts, and pointed out how wrong you were. I've shown you actual specs, what nonsense you babbling about is rather irrellevant.
 
Is it that you miss the existential constitutional question involved in what might be considered the ultimate check on rulers' powers? You flip answer indicates that you aren't really interested in how power is controlled by sociopolitical groups, how legitimacy decays or under which circumstances which degree of violence is required from the citizen. I am surprised in a way, you being on a political forum and our having seen numerous examples recently.

What am I missing then? Yemenis are allowed to own guns yet is a dictatorship, which kind of puts a big hole in the pro-gunners argument that they are essential for liberty and preventing tyranny.
It's not guns that keeps america a democracy, it's the rule of law and the checks and balances.
 
What am I missing then? Yemenis are allowed to own guns yet is a dictatorship, which kind of puts a big hole in the pro-gunners argument that they are essential for liberty and preventing tyranny.
It's not guns that keeps america a democracy, it's the rule of law and the checks and balances.

You are ignoring the status quo and history of the structure of the political systems. By implying they could simply be compared in order to make a point that isn't there, when the differences are considered, you make a false equivalence either knowingly or not.
 
So, that background check, think it might work with other guns as well? you know, so we can make sure that actual good guys are getting the guns, instead of the joke of a background test they have now

see folks this is exactly what i am talking about the uneducated masses when it comes to guns and gun laws.
the background check are already in place.

the vegas shooter passed all of them.
 
blah blah blah blah, you could have said "you know what, you are correct". would have saved you all that time writing up this nonsense that no ones going to read. I've shown you the facts, and pointed out how wrong you were. I've shown you actual specs, what nonsense you babbling about is rather irrellevant.

You can blah blah all you want, you have nothing but a suspect chart and ZERO experience to back anything up...

You once again have shown you only believe what you want to believe. That a BB gun is rated at 97db is amazing to say the least. That ear muffs reduce the acoustic signature 20 some db and are considered effective but a suppressor doing in excess of 30 isn't... :doh

You have a single not well documented chart vs actual experience both on the firing line and downrange. No experience hunting feral hogs, none with suppressors, anyplace where bullets fly past your head- but a chart, well by golly a chart is all you need to opine on a subject!

Spare us, this is so like your 'expert' knowledge of the VA and wounded vets. So expert that you can't believe someone can have a 60% VA rating and still shoot and scoot with the best of them! :roll:

The facts are simple. A sniper isn't deadly because he is a superior shot- plenty of pogueys are that. No a sniper is deadly because he uses everything to the best tactical advantage he can, understands the limitations and works to minimize them.

Putting a shorty suppressor on a leaky AR gas system so a newbie can 'marvel' at the noise level on a sterile range ain't it... :peace
 
You can blah blah all you want, you have nothing but a suspect chart and ZERO experience to back anything up...

You once again have shown you only believe what you want to believe. That a BB gun is rated at 97db is amazing to say the least. That ear muffs reduce the acoustic signature 20 some db and are considered effective but a suppressor doing in excess of 30 isn't... :doh

You have a single not well documented chart vs actual experience both on the firing line and downrange. No experience hunting feral hogs, none with suppressors, anyplace where bullets fly past your head- but a chart, well by golly a chart is all you need to opine on a subject!

Spare us, this is so like your 'expert' knowledge of the VA and wounded vets. So expert that you can't believe someone can have a 60% VA rating and still shoot and scoot with the best of them! :roll:

The facts are simple. A sniper isn't deadly because he is a superior shot- plenty of pogueys are that. No a sniper is deadly because he uses everything to the best tactical advantage he can, understands the limitations and works to minimize them.

Putting a shorty suppressor on a leaky AR gas system so a newbie can 'marvel' at the noise level on a sterile range ain't it... :peace



U mad, bro?

Still butthurt I see. So you are more of an expert than a manufacturer, and all those people on ar15.com?


I've provided links and evidence, you've flapped your gums, I've given not only decibel ratings but calculated how much quieter the report would be using inverse square law. you flapped your gums.




The chart, https://www.dakotasilencer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Silencer_Sound_Comparsion_chart.pdf

Is from dakota silencer, you know more than them?



Modern Rifleman database with SPL levels of hundreds of suppressors:

https://modernrifleman.net/suppressors/


You couldn't be more arrogantly wrong, guy.
 
U mad, bro? Still butthurt I see. So you are more of an expert than a manufacturer, and all those people on ar15.com? I've provided links and evidence, you've flapped your gums, I've given not only decibel ratings but calculated how much quieter the report would be using inverse square law. you flapped your gums. Is from dakota silencer, you know more than them? Modern Rifleman database with SPL levels of hundreds of suppressors: You couldn't be more arrogantly wrong, guy.

I'm not butt hurt, you're the one so wrong about another area you claimed massive expertize- the VA and wounded vets... :roll:

So a repeat of a PR chart listing a BB gun at an amazing 97 db. The other lacks data on 'at the ear' noise levels of longer barreled rifles (and no reference what type of operating system the test rifle used)

Again you want to use sterile range charts vs my examples out in a far more realistic scenario. Urban back round noise does mask other sounds. I said BEHIND the firing line I could talk easily without muffs on.

You cling to your charts but the NNR rating of earmuffs is LESS THAN the suppressor but you ignore that... :doh

BUT BUT BUT I have a chart!!!!! :(

You want an artificial test to replace real world use... I'd opine the arrogant person you see is in the mirror... and he lacks even basic experience in anything we are talking about to include how to best hunt feral hogs..

They ain't dead until after I hunt them brah... :peace
 
I'm not butt hurt, you're the one so wrong about another area you claimed massive expertize- the VA and wounded vets... :roll:

Your comprehension issues are not my concern.


So a repeat of a PR chart listing a BB gun at an amazing 97 db. The other lacks data on 'at the ear' noise levels of longer barreled rifles (and no reference what type of operating system the test rifle used)

Again you want to use sterile range charts vs my examples out in a far more realistic scenario. Urban back round noise does mask other sounds. I said BEHIND the firing line I could talk easily without muffs on.


So you literally are claiming that multiple sources manufacturers and tests, and experts are all wrong, and you are right. yet you have no evidence to back up your claim. your argument literally is "The sky is purple cause I say so!!!!"


You cling to your charts but the NNR rating of earmuffs is LESS THAN the suppressor but you ignore that... :doh

Red herring, who's talking about earmuffs here?


BUT BUT BUT I have a chart!!!!! :(

You want an artificial test to replace real world use... I'd opine the arrogant person you see is in the mirror... and he lacks even basic experience in anything we are talking about to include how to best hunt feral hogs..

They ain't dead until after I hunt them brah... :peace


Right your such a manly hunter and an expert on suppressors, I mean really there is no one better than you, manufacturers and modern rifle should consult with you before posting data tests showing the effective DB reduction of hundreds of silencers.


What's sad is I'm beginning to think you are all pretend. You seem to think suppressors are like you would see in a james bond movie.

That's not real life, bro. :lol:
 
firing once or twice at a deer isn't going to make you go deaf, it's the repeated firing over and over again at a range or target shooting that causes the damage, it's long time exposure to loud noises, not one offs.

So it won’t make you deaf your first year hunting. But 20 years later it will.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
What am I missing then? Yemenis are allowed to own guns yet is a dictatorship, which kind of puts a big hole in the pro-gunners argument that they are essential for liberty and preventing tyranny.
It's not guns that keeps america a democracy, it's the rule of law and the checks and balances.

Gun Nuts Demand you stand for Flag and Country...The same Gun Nuts want No Gun Laws so they can someday overthrow the same Flag and country...Go figure
 
Back
Top Bottom