The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 13, 2012, 05:55 PM   #51
K4THRYN
Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2012
Posts: 31
The ones which are of a hollow canister shape, and emulate the look of silencers, deaden muzzle sound 'some'.

Actually, I was googling to better describe what I was talking about, and it appears that fairly recently the ATF made them change the design of canister-look flash suppressors and fake silencers, so that they have a sleeve down the bore on the inside, and do not open up to a large diameter inside. This change apparently because the ATF felt that the open-hollow sort deadened muzzle sound too much for their tastes.

As far as I know, that doesn't reflect legally on older models. just a 'from now on, put sleeves in those' ruling.

At any rate, the type i was referring to are apparently no longer legal to manufacture new. Explicitly because they deaden sound a bit too much for ATF preference.
K4THRYN is offline  
Old November 13, 2012, 07:34 PM   #52
Mello2u
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,424
Healthy undamaged cilia in the cochlea of the ear.
http://imageshack.us/a/img14/439/coc...aundamaged.jpg

Some damage.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images...omedamage.jpg/

Great damage.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images...iadamaged.jpg/

This physical damage is permanent and irreversible. So protect what you have if you want to keep it.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it.
" Frederic Bastiat
Mello2u is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 10:31 AM   #53
drail
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2008
Posts: 3,150
There are no calibers which will not cause hearing damage if fired without protection. I spent many years working on flight lines around jet engines and watched a LOT of guys lose their hearing. Every one used to tell me that the noise didn't really bother them before they did the damage. It has nothing to do with your perception of how loud it is. It is too loud. Our hearing was tested monthly and plotted on a graph. You could look at the graph and see the loss over time. I always wore protection and it kept my hearing intact. Once the damage is done it is permanent. Ironically I now have tinnitus so severe that some nights I can not go to sleep because of the constant shreiking in my head. Some people have been driven to suicide from the constant roar. My tinnitus was not caused by exposure to high noise levels but from a neurological disorder and injuries from a car wreck. I considered suicide at times. The doctors said they could completely sever my auditory nerves and it would not make any difference. Do everything you possibly can to protect your ears. I would give anything to be able to experience total silence once again. Anything.

Last edited by drail; November 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM.
drail is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 03:49 PM   #54
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,844
Since we have already established that all common handgun cartridges are loud enough to cause permanent hearing damage if used without a suppressor or hearing protection, do we have any way to quantify how much hearing damage varying decibel levels will cause? The reason I ask is because I see several people recommending cartridges like .38 Special, .44 Special, and .45 ACP because they produce lower decibel levels and would thus presumably cause less hearing damage, but I've never seen anyone say how much less damage. It seems to me that decibel levels, and thus potential hearing damage, should be weighed against cartridge effectiveness when selecting a defensive cartridge, but we cannot do that if we don't know the risk and/or magnitude of hearing damage caused by various decibel levels.
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 04:39 PM   #55
CCCLVII
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2012
Location: Idaho
Posts: 295
I had to shoot a snub nose 357 magnum while indoors twice. The stress blocked out the noise. After I settled down my head hurt but I I can not tell any difference in my hearing and I have no tinnitus.

That said If I could do it over again I would get a suppressed 9mm
__________________
Always looking for a good hunt!
CCCLVII is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 05:24 PM   #56
chrisintexas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2012
Posts: 182
I am the poster of this topic.

After reading replies, I am baffled that why are suppressors/silencers do hard to get when they can protect irreparable damage done to ears by guns?
chrisintexas is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 09:29 PM   #57
JC57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 2, 2010
Posts: 247
Quote:
I am the poster of this topic.

After reading replies, I am baffled that why are suppressors/silencers do hard to get when they can protect irreparable damage done to ears by guns?
The National Firearms Act of 1934 established high taxes and laws regarding transfer of certain weapons and accessories, including silencers. It was an attempt to reduce the availability of things like machine guns and silencers to organized crime, back during the original gangster era in the 20s and 30s.

Don't look for it to get repealed any time soon.
JC57 is offline  
Old November 14, 2012, 09:39 PM   #58
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisintexas View Post
I am the poster of this topic.

After reading replies, I am baffled that why are suppressors/silencers do hard to get when they can protect irreparable damage done to ears by guns?
Short version:

The National Firearms Act in 1934 originally included a ban on handguns. They knew it couldn't pass. They dropped handguns and added silencers instead. Pure political maneuvering.

Now, Americans are convinced that silencers are evil devices only used by mafia hit men. In much of the rest of the world, silencers are REQUIRED on some guns. They're seen as the useful tools that they are rather than Hollywood assassins tools.

They can be had in most of the US too, after appropriate paperwork and waiting. The issue of using them in a defensive scenario (remember the Hollywood assassin myth) is another matter altogether.
Brian Pfleuger is online now  
Old November 14, 2012, 10:51 PM   #59
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,844
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisintexas View Post
I am the poster of this topic.

After reading replies, I am baffled that why are suppressors/silencers do hard to get when they can protect irreparable damage done to ears by guns?
Short version:

The National Firearms Act in 1934 originally included a ban on handguns. They knew it couldn't pass. They dropped handguns and added silencers instead. Pure political maneuvering.

Now, Americans are convinced that silencers are evil devices only used by mafia hit men. In much of the rest of the world, silencers are REQUIRED on some guns. They're seen as the useful tools that they are rather than Hollywood assassins tools.
While that is a very astute analysis, I would also add that in 1934, the effects of gunfire on hearing were likely not widely known, if known at all, and thus the health benefits of silencers/suppressors were not considered when the law was written.
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 02:36 AM   #60
carprivershooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2008
Location: Michigan, Upper Pennsula
Posts: 393
the chance of hearing damage from different guns is pretty good. The damage is accumulative each time you are exposed to the noise you with do some damage. over time there will be a change in your hearing. The surrounding and distance from the shot will impact the amount of damage. If you are in a gun fight and not wearing ear protection there will be some hearing loss. I keep a set of auto canceling ear muffs on the night stand just in case.
__________________
CarpriverShOOter
Finch, I don't like guns. Reese, Me either but if someone has to have guns I'd rather it be me. (Person of Interest).
No trees were destroyed in the posting of the this message
carprivershooter is offline  
Old November 15, 2012, 10:33 AM   #61
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,527
I started that and put some cheap passive ones downstairs. My wife scolded me for not putting away my toys. I told her the purpose. Guess what - she bought it!
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old November 20, 2012, 12:27 AM   #62
rayway
Member
 
Join Date: November 8, 2012
Posts: 35
For a nighttime home invasion I would not use earplugs I really need to know where the sound of the crook is coming from so they don't assault and or kill me cause I have my ears obstructed and they are right around a corner. Sorry but it beats being maimed or killed. In the daytime I would try to get my wits about me and find some protection but there is daylight to help me see what is going on. So not as much as the necessity of hearing whats going on and using a flashlight no way im going to obstruct my ears at night.
rayway is offline  
Old November 20, 2012, 01:09 AM   #63
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
rayway, we aren't talking about earplugs.

We are talking about electronic muffs. They can actually be set to AMPLIFY normal sound, but the amplification cuts off when dB exceed a certain point, at which time the muffs act like normal muffs, until the noise abates, and they go back to amplification mode.

You will see a lot of instructors use these when conducting live fire courses. They allow people to converse in normal tones, without removing hearing protection between courses of fire.
MLeake is offline  
Old November 20, 2012, 02:56 AM   #64
warningshot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 7, 2009
Posts: 995
Quote:
what caliber size will minimize the chances of damage to hearing
The below suggestions should work without too much concearn of hearing damage to home owner(s);
LowieVille slugger#19, wood, German shepard 70 lbs or bigger, Tazer, Chemical agents including but not limited to: (wasp Spary works well & no licenses needed) saps, knives, brass knuckels, hatchet, ax, wood or plastic handle, baton; for Florida residents a 9 iron should not be overlooked.
warningshot is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 12:16 PM   #65
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,527
Interestingly, Clint Smith in American Handguns mentioned he had significant ear damage from just one shot of a handgun too near his unprotected head.

Kind of negates some of the naysayers that we've dealt with here.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old November 25, 2012, 10:37 PM   #66
amygdala
Member
 
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Posts: 16
Shooting-produced hearing loss/prevention

Most of us would like to avoid shooting-related hearing losses. Blogs on this topic usually recommend electronic devices. Can we start a blog on what to buy, or what features to seek, in an electronic hearing-protection system? Input should assist in answering the question: which electronic device should I purchase based on data?
amygdala is offline  
Old November 26, 2012, 01:51 AM   #67
curmudgeon1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 21, 2007
Location: n.e. ohio
Posts: 538
Considering the cylinder gap on my .357 magnum revolver, would a suppressor on the muzzle still be effective ?
curmudgeon1 is offline  
Old November 26, 2012, 01:58 AM   #68
youngunz4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2010
Location: United States of America
Posts: 1,877
just my opinion/two cents only

don't shoot without earmuffs and plugs of whatever type jointly, but don't worry about your ears for the typical home defense scenario or whatnot. Just don't shoot in a non-selfdefense scenario without the protection.

How many times in your life have you shot without protection? I know I have done it...the first of the very few times was one of the first times I shot, and I did it on purpose which I guess was unnecessary at best.

Save the life threatening, emergency situation(which hopefully never happens) for the time when you have the greenlight. I respect your thoughts and it is a good thread + question, but I wouldn't get rid of my 357s to do what you are considering.

just my advice and you can take it or leave it
__________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" -Admiral Farragut @ Battle of Mobile Bay 05AUG1864
youngunz4life is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 07:27 PM   #69
Stevie-Ray
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: The shores of Lake Huron
Posts: 4,494
You don't have to spend a lot on electronic muffs to get good ones, either. This is what I have and they're fine. I can attest to highly directional sound, as that is one of the fears of buying "cheap" ones.E-muffs I am also a big fan of .45 ACP-lucky me, since it is low-pressure and generally places rather low on the big boomer's list. All good for somebody that suffers with tinnitus as a constant companion. Oh, I've been a good boy for over 30 years-not so much before that. Too late, but I'd kind of like to keep what I've got left.
__________________
Stevie-Ray
Join the NRA/ILA
I am the weapon; my gun is a tool. It's regrettable that with some people those descriptors are reversed.
Stevie-Ray is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 07:55 PM   #70
ltc444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Location: Vernon AZ
Posts: 1,195
In the general forum in the last year or so there was a very detailed discussion of this question.

one of the posters provided data showing the recorded noise (dba) of a variety of different caliber pistols.

I provided a discussion of the limitations on shooting to prevent hearing damage.

If someone who is more adapt using the search feature could call this up I think most of the issues in this discussion could be answered.

If you wish to protect your hearing, you should find out the noise in dba generated by your piece. Then you subtract the NRR your hearing protection provides. in effect if your gun generates a 128 dba when fired and your hearing protection has an NRR of 33. You find your effective exposure by subtracting 33 form 128 to find that your effective exposure is 95 dba. Per OSHA you can be exposed to continuous firing for 4 hours without experiencing permanent hearing lose.

This is a simplistic method designed for layman use. Most Safety or Industrial Hygiene people out there will/can find fault with it. It is intended as a field expedient to allow ordinary shooters to not have the hearing lose which so many of us have experienced.

Last edited by ltc444; November 28, 2012 at 08:08 PM. Reason: add comments
ltc444 is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 08:51 PM   #71
chrisintexas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2012
Posts: 182
ltc444

so you mean highest NRR would protect ears most?
what is the highest NRR ear muffs come in?
which ones do you recommend?
thanks
chrisintexas is offline  
Old November 29, 2012, 12:02 AM   #72
Mello2u
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 21, 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,424
Quote:
chrisintexas

so you mean highest NRR would protect ears most?
what is the highest NRR ear muffs come in?
The highest NRR rated ear muffs I could find on the internet was Pro-Ears Ultra 33 Earmuffs (NRR 33 dB). These do not have electronics.
The highest rated electronic ear muffs I could find on the internet was the Pro-Ears Pro Mag Gold NRR 33 Electronic Ear Muffs (NRR 33 dB) over $300 retail.
__________________
NRA Life Member - Orange Gunsite Member - NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society,
they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it.
" Frederic Bastiat
Mello2u is offline  
Old November 30, 2012, 06:02 PM   #73
ltc444
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 3, 2011
Location: Vernon AZ
Posts: 1,195
Chris in texas. NRR 33 are about the highest rated plugs available. According to the Australian OSHA Plugs are more effective than muffs. I trust their data more than US data. A combination of plugs and muffs give increased protection but the increase is not linear.

Single use foam plugs are the most effective if they are properly installed. As you move they maintain full contact.

Muffs, on the other hand, do not maintain full contact and their protection is degraded. For example: If you wear shooting glasses and the bows go under the muffs then you loose protection. Some studies indicate the lose is as much as 25%. In effect if the Muff's advertised NRR is 33 the effective NRR is 24.75.

There is a graduate level paper in this discussion. I hope this is helpful. If you would like a more complete discussion PM me.
ltc444 is offline  
Old November 30, 2012, 06:29 PM   #74
spacecoast
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 14, 2009
Location: Sunshine and Keystone States
Posts: 4,049
Quote:
We are talking about electronic muffs. They can actually be set to AMPLIFY normal sound, but the amplification cuts off when dB exceed a certain point, at which time the muffs act like normal muffs, until the noise abates, and they go back to amplification mode.
True, but you still lose some direction-determining capability.
spacecoast is offline  
Old November 30, 2012, 06:41 PM   #75
Dead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2000
Location: AoW Land, USA
Posts: 1,933
I fired a single low velocity 38sp target load OUTSIDE without hearinv protection when I was young. I will never do that again!!! My ears rang for a few minutes but wow!
__________________
Dead [Black Ops]
www.therallypoint.org
Dead is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

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 -5. The time now is 02:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14738 seconds with 9 queries