TexasCHLforum.com

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Sat Jun 22, 2019 7:04 pm Wow! That does make a difference.

Exactly! With the hearing loss I've suffered over the years from decades of playing amplified guitars on stage, and decades of shooting guns, I'm very protective of my hearing now. Suppressors make a HUGE difference in the enjoyment of the sport....and not just for me, but for the people on either side of me at the range.

I keep 3 firearms in a ready state for home defense. One is a shotgun, for "crowd" work. One is a SBR AR15 for "perimeter defense". But my primary home defense weapon is a Glock 17, loaded with 147 grain subsonics, and sporting a suppressor. That pistol/ammo/suppressor combination is about as close to hearing safe as you can get, and if I have to discharge a firearm inside the house, that's the setup I want. The SBR is suppressed too, by the way. It would still be too loud for comfort inside the house, loaded with standard supersonic ammo; but outdoors it's no more uncomfortably loud than that SCAR 17S in the video I posted, as long as you're standing behind the gun.

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Sat Jun 22, 2019 6:10 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Sat Jun 22, 2019 4:17 pm My point was as Andy stated. It’s true that, without a gun, a suppressor is useless; but I’m not counting on an anti to make that connection because they "know darn well" that European gov’ts thought guns were dangerous and seriously restricted them, and they’d do the same if they thought suppressors were dangerous. They obviously don’t think they’re dangerous, and they understand good manners.

After yours and Andy's post I decided to do some googling. I was amazed that in Europe a suppressor is actually considered polite. For those that do have firearms for hunting and such, a suppressor is a recommended accessory.

I understand your point better now.

i would definitely recommend one for hunting. Outside the confines of a shooting range, even an outdoor shooting range, for a shooter who is behind the rifle, you can get away without ear pro for a limited number of shots. In this video, I'm shooting my SCAR 17S (which is a notoriously LOUD rifle) with a form 1 can on it, and I'm not wearing any ear pro. Now, IRL, it was louder than in this video, but not by much:

My point was as Andy stated. It’s true that, without a gun, a suppressor is useless; but I’m not counting on an anti to make that connection because they "know darn well" that European gov’ts thought guns were dangerous and seriously restricted them, and they’d do the same if they thought suppressors were dangerous. They obviously don’t think they’re dangerous, and they understand good manners.

Other than voting intelligently, the only thing you can do to fight this is to challenge the antis with facts. I’ve shut people up on twitter by discussing decibel levels with hard data, demonstrating why the gun community calls them "suppressors" rather than "silencers". It’s also helpful to point out that, in many of the European countries which the antis like to hold up as having ideal gun laws, suppressors are sold over the counter with minimal regulation for a tenth of the cost we pay here, and they are regarded as just plain good manners.