View Single Post
Old November 21, 2012, 06:49 PM   #39
Unclenick
Staff
 
Join Date: March 4, 2005
Location: Ohio
Posts: 10,221
More than that, Finnish law actually requires use of suppressors in many areas to prevent sound pollution. So they work on subsonic loads a lot.


Salmoneye,

I didn't say it was court level controlled condition documented proof of SEE. I merely wanted to give the source for completeness. It carries at least as much weight as any other anecdotal report of SEE. That is, it's an alert, neither to be blindly believed nor entirely dismissed from a safety standpoint. It's a valid indication the matter needs further study.

The two extreme examples that come to mind are how many people have seen UFO's, which seem unlikely will ever turn out to be actual alien spacecraft. That's more a matter of how the witnesses interpret what they see or experience. The other is all the years physicists universally dismissed the possibility of the existence of ball lightning as merely spots in front of the eyes of their beholders on similar grounds. No theoretical basis and no lab evidence. It wasn't until a reputable physicist personally witnessed a lightning ball form up on the high voltage supply in a particle accelerator in one of the National Labs in about 1970 that minds began to change. He reported it left the supply, danced around his shoulders, then moved off to an electrical box where it exploded and did some physical damage. They went looking for a way to make them after that, of course. Someone discovered that Nikola Tesla had described a lightning ball generator in the late 1800's and that Mark Twain claimed to have seen Tesla demonstrating it (they were friends). I don't know if they ever got a version of Tesla's apparatus working, but they do make small fireballs now by rapidly opening large surface area high current electric train engine circuit breakers.

Anyway, you get the point. Some things witnessed by the masses are figments of the imagination, but some things reported in quantity turn out to be true. Again, from a safety standpoint, there's no penalty for treating the possibility as if it were true, where there may be one for ignoring it. Prudence suggests doing the former until it is proved or disproved and the mechanism understood.
__________________
Gunsite Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Rifle Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member

Last edited by Unclenick; November 21, 2012 at 10:12 PM.
Unclenick is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04261 seconds with 7 queries