No Viable Reason For Quieting The Sound Of Guns
BY Herschel Smith9 years ago
I agree that gunfire is a loud noise. What is curious is what is the actual benefit of making that noise less audible?
Is it to avoid hurting the shooter’s ears? Is it to not scare off nearby wildlife? Is it so people don’t know a gun is being fired in their immediate area?
Understandably, when James Bond wants to do away with an evil villain, it’s to his benefit to do so with a bit of stealth.
The state of Maine just passed a law that allows people with possibly no conceivable training in firearms to carry one among unknowing people. Before this law, people who wanted a concealed weapons permit had to be totally vetted by a number of state agencies, including the state police and/or their local police chief. Now it’s go to a gun shop, pick up a 9mm and a shiny concealed holster, and off they go.
The insanity continues with lessening the sounds of a firearm being used nearby. That means game wardens would have less opportunity to arrest night hunters, neighbors wouldn’t be sure how far away they are from guns being fired, and careless hunters would have more opportunity to fire closer to neighborhoods than legally allowed.
As a past hunter and active skeet shooter, I wear ear protection, practice safety to the highest degree and am well-versed in the safe handling of firearms. I wish I could say the same for the masses that tramp through the woods and walk into public places with a seriously dangerous machine that they may not know how operate, thus causing potential danger to themselves and an unknowing public.
A quiet gun. No one seems to have a viable answer for why we need one, except that it might mean more sales for gun sellers.
Well thank you Mr. Fudd. With friends like you, who needs enemies? Actually, I jest. I consider you the enemy. In fact, come to think of it, I think you’re lying. I don’t think you’re really a past hunter and active skeet shooter. You sound just like a collectivist, statist windbag who’s making things up for the sake of drama.
But if you are, you got yours, didn’t you? And you don’t trust anyone with guns except you, your Fudd buddies, and the cops, even if we all lose our hearing, outside or inside at the shooting range. Do you? And don’t give me that crap about wearing hearing protection. We both know better.
We both know that even with ear plugs and muffs, it’s better for us all to have suppressed weapons. It’s better for our quality of life as we grow old, and it’s better for long term health costs for our progeny who must watch over us. But that doesn’t matter to you, does it? You’d rather sacrifice our hearing, preferring that Mr. Fudd pal around with other Mr. Fudds in the woods once a season, and go shoot clays a couple of times a year. Are you a member of an an exclusive country club too, Mr. Fudd?
Does the encroachment of technology scare you, Mr. Fudd? Does freedom offend you? Good. I hope you’re appalled at the likes of me. As I said, I consider you the enemy, just like the collectivist windbags. So don’t bring up anything else about being a hunter and clay shooter. I’m not interested.
On November 9, 2015 at 6:51 am, TexTopCat said:
I like the response. It is past time that we are shy about saying “no way no how”.
On November 9, 2015 at 11:10 am, Blake said:
“Understandably, when James Bond wants to do away with an evil villain, it’s to his benefit to do so with a bit of stealth.”
That sentence tells me the writer is lying about his experience with firearms. Silencers, or, more properly, suppressors, do not reduce the sound to the point of being barely audible.
Anyone who writes what is supposed to be a serious article about firearms and invokes James Bond as an example is a fool.
On November 9, 2015 at 1:00 pm, Joe said:
Bravo, Herschel! Great post! Interesting to remember that “silencers” are essentially unrestricted in various European countries (despite heavy gun control) because there is general recognition of their benefits to both shooters and non-shooters that may be nearby.
On November 9, 2015 at 3:31 pm, timbroweraz said:
what’s left of my hearing would like a suppressor.
On November 9, 2015 at 9:26 pm, hightecrebel . said:
As a Maineiac, I’d like to apologize for the psychos, fudds, and supposed fudds that have come out of the woodwork lately
On November 12, 2015 at 12:21 pm, HerrMorgenholz said:
I always wear ear protection when shooting, but not when hunting, and at only 45 I’ve got some hearing loss, so suppressors would be really nice.
My father said his hearing loss was from recoilless rifles in the Army. Not sure how you suppress those things, if they even exist anymore.
On November 13, 2015 at 4:29 pm, jc collins said:
Ban the Marshall Amp! And all of those other assault amps. No one really *needs* more than 30 watts anyway. And the portable, concealable, high power 1 x 12 combo amps are used only by trained professionals! (I used to play in a band with a couple of cops)