Changing the Suppressor law

[dt]

imported post

#399...

As for the current pissback going on in this thread... sheesh.

I do a lot of lurking and not much posting, but my observation is this:

Bear, you obviously have a wealth of experience and knowledge to share. But gee whiz, do you have to be so dang negative about everything? People have different opinions, and obviously different ideas about what is important. That's life.

Sometimes it's better to sit back and think of a constructive way to reply to something. Or even just let it go. Youhave made comments or brought up ideas in the past thatI think are'different', but I didn't feel the need to point that out. What would it add to thediscussion? I'm sure you would thinkthe same of some of my opinions,butso what? So you personally could care less about silencers... good for you -nobody is really concerned with whether you do or not.If you thinkthis petition isa waste of time, why not post an idea for abetter way to bring this issueup toour lawmakers?

Itsa freecountry and this is the internet. You can say whatever the heck you please IMO. But it suredoesn't foster a positive experience on this board.I know for myself, I wouldn't ask you a questionto tap your knowledge because I don't care to deal with the condescending attitute and insultingthat comeswith it. If that ishow you want to be seen, then... <shrugs>. You'll reap what you sow.

 

[bluer1]

imported post

Almost 400 guys/gals! That's alot of signatures! Remember to tell your friends and family, and post elsewhere!

 

[shakul]

imported post

#400!!!!!!!! :O

 

[Bear 45/70]

imported post

FE427TP wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

Well, I don't really care about shooting withsuppressors, so why would I? I have used muzzle breaks that reduce recoil by 50% but the way a suppressor reduces recoil is by slowing the bullet, there by destroying your normal ballistics, I'll pass thank you. You don't need to instruct me in noise and what it can do to your hearing. Between jet engines and gunfire, the VA pays me every month for hearing problems. A suppressor while help a new shooter only if you are starting them out with to much gun, a bad way to instruct. I have found for first time shooter, the 22 LR solves all the noise and recoil problems so again suppressors are unnecessary. You really don't need them for anything except their novelty and I don't find them very novel. I'd rather have a black powder cannon. I generally don't need more shots for varmits and suppressing my 22-250 effecitively would require a several foot long suppressor, again I'll pass.

you need to learn more about suppressors then, you might be able to correct some misinformed opinions you have

As with all things some suppressors do better than 30% some don't. The Finnish research I referenced earlier stated 43% recoil reduction for a 308 (silencer history and performance, page 56) the muzzle break increased the sound by 8 decibels while a suppressor will drop it by at least 20 for a net gain of 28 decibel reduction with subsonic ammo having a 41 decibel reduction, that's less than 1% of the muzzlebreaks sound pressure. Hearing damage doesn't stop just because it doesn't hurt anymore. Just think, if you had started shooting with a suppressor you may not need the VA check every month!

Suppressors do NOT slow a bullet down unless it's a older integral style where they ported the barrel, these area almost exclusively for bringing supersonic handgun cartridges velocities down to a subsonic level with the 9mm and 22lr being the most common. The delisle did it as well but it seems to be more for adding more expansion chamber as the cartridge is already subsonic.

There is an effect nicknamed "freebore boost" where some cans will actually add have a small increase in projectile velocity vs. no suppressor installed.

Even a .22LR has a obnoxious amount of noise, why make earplugs mandatory (albeit it's good practice) for a new shooter when you can shoot something that is as quiet as a pellet gun and have a normal conversation while instructing them instead? making clear communication more effective with less chance of miscommunication. and again with the 22LR most 22 cans need rebuilt after about 10,000 shots usually for a minimal fee (the MFG fee no more transfer fees for repairing a silencer) because the 22 has so much vaporized airborne lead that the suppressor cools and collects it starts to fill the baffle space. Do you want the lead in the can or in you or your students lungs?

A hearing safe suppressor for a 50BMG is about 2 inches in diameter and 20 inches long. One for your 22-250 would be about 1.5 inches by 8 or 9 long and if it's a reflex design would add about 4-6 inches to the overall length of your gun.

First off a muzzle break can not increase the sound, ever. Physics says it can't happen. The break does however redirect the sound backwards and to the side, but increase the noise the total noise, not gonna happen. I would think that a suppressor that increase bullet velocity would not work very well as the increased velocity by itself would make the bullet noisier. But still you don't really get it. I don't care because I don't want one anyway. The is no magic there for me. I like my gun noise, it's the power thing. If it is loud it is powerful. Suppressors are for snipers and ambushers. Not my thing.

 

[911Boss]

imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:

First off a muzzle break can not increase the sound, ever. Physics says it can't happen. The break does however redirect the sound backwards and to the side, but increase the noise the total noise, not gonna happen. I would think that a suppressor that increase bullet velocity would not work very well as the increased velocity by itself would make the bullet noisier. But still you don't really get it. I don't care because I don't want one anyway. The is no magic there for me. I like my gun noise, it's the power thing. If it is loud it is powerful. Suppressors are for snipers and ambushers. Not my thing.

Wow, you sound like Mr. Science himself. I think everyone besides you realized the comment meant that brakes can increase the sound level at the shooters position. That happens exactly because it directs more of the sounds waves towards the shooter. Did you used to be a rocket scientist before becoming a waste of tax dollars?

Another case of you have no need or want for something so you try and tear it down or those who may have a want or need for it.

"If it is loud it is powerful"... I think we just got to the root of your stupidity and manner. You equate noise with power, certainly explains most of your posts...

 

[FE427TP]

imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:

First off a muzzle break can not increase the sound, ever. Physics says it can't happen. The break does however redirect the sound backwards and to the side, but increase the noise the total noise, not gonna happen. I would think that a suppressor that increase bullet velocity would not work very well as the increased velocity by itself would make the bullet noisier. But still you don't really get it. I don't care because I don't want one anyway. The is no magic there for me. I like my gun noise, it's the power thing. If it is loud it is powerful. Suppressors are for snipers and ambushers. Not my thing.

You're right, i guess i should have clarified it better, the sound level referred to was at a point one meter to the left of the muzzle and 1.67 meters above the ground per MIL-STD-1474C increased with a muzzle break, this translates into higher sound pressure at the ear of the shooter and other shooters nearby causing greater damage. You say you think that a suppressor increasing the bullet velocity would not work well. Well my rebuttal is, aside from your viewpoint about suppressors and you which is correct for you, you have been wrong on every other argument you've tried to throw out, so hey why not let the accept it and help the rest of us with our cause. If you are talking the noise and power thing you need to try a Krinkov pistol or a AR Pistol, I built one just for that little blast you can feel in your sinus', it's great fun, but sometimes I like it quiet. Also Handguns are only for gangbangers and murderers like silencers are only for snipers and ambushers, if you look on the whole worlds scene instead of having your perception viewed only by american culture you'll see that in a lot of countries it's considered good ettiquite to shoot suppressed, South Africa for example they are totally unregulated, no permits, no serial number, no records, no rise in crime or use only by snipers or ambushers, even in britain you can still get them.



Blue, weren't you started the petition didn't you say you were going to take it to a state rep when you got 500?

 

[bluer1]

imported post

FE427TP wrote:

Blue, weren't you started the petition didn't you say you were going to take it to a state rep when you got 500?

I'm going to talk to the guy that wrote the petition to see where we're at. It would be my preference that we wait until after the elections for obvious reasons. I'm very happy to see everyone supporting this (-1). If the author doesn't want to push it, I'll take the reins and start talking to my reps/making calls/letters/etc. Thank you everyone who has supported this, your rights will be fought for.

 

[Bear 45/70]

imported post

911Boss wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

First off a muzzle break can not increase the sound, ever. Physics says it can't happen. The break does however redirect the sound backwards and to the side, but increase the noise the total noise, not gonna happen. I would think that a suppressor that increase bullet velocity would not work very well as the increased velocity by itself would make the bullet noisier. But still you don't really get it. I don't care because I don't want one anyway. The is no magic there for me. I like my gun noise, it's the power thing. If it is loud it is powerful. Suppressors are for snipers and ambushers. Not my thing.

Wow, you sound like Mr. Science himself. I think everyone besides you realized the comment meant that brakes can increase the sound level at the shooters position. That happens exactly because it directs more of the sounds waves towards the shooter. Did you used to be a rocket scientist before becoming a waste of tax dollars?

Another case of you have no need or want for something so you try and tear it down or those who may have a want or need for it.

"If it is loud it is powerful"... I think we just got to the root of your stupidity and manner. You equate noise with power, certainly explains most of your posts...

What are you trying to do get every thread in the Washington Forum locked. You accomplished it all by yourself with your maniac ranting, A first for a proclaimed good guy. Go away unless you really do know something about the subject. The "If it is loud it is powerful"... is my opinion, I guess in your world I'm not allowed one. However I think new shooters need to understand that bigger and/or faster means louder. You following wherever I post and attacking me makes you look bad, not me. But then you truly are one of the bad guys. As to science, I can read and I do a lot, I've lived a long time and did a lot of things, so guess what? I know a lot of thing, which you obviously don't. As to the sound comments, FE427TP didn't say it sounded louder to the shooter, he just said it increased the noise. But he and I are not attacking each other but having a discussion. You are attcking because you are a petty little boy that can't stand some criticism of the all wonderful Glock. As to explainations for post, there is no logical one for yours other than being a spoiled brat.

 

[shakul]

imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:

What are you trying to do get every thread in the Washington Forum locked. You accomplished it all by yourself with your maniac ranting, A first for a proclaimed good guy. Go away unless you really do know something about the subject. The "If it is loud it is powerful"... is my opinion, I guess in your world I'm not allowed one. However I think new shooters need to understand that bigger and/or faster means louder. You following wherever I post and attacking me makes you look bad, not me. But then you truly are one of the bad guys. As to science, I can read and I do a lot, I've lived a long time and did a lot of things, so guess what? I know a lot of thing, which you obviously don't. As to the sound comments, FE427TP didn't say it sounded louder to the shooter, he just said it increased the noise. But he and I are not attacking each other but having a discussion. You are attcking because you are a petty little boy that can't stand some criticism of the all wonderful Glock. As to explainations for post, there is no logical one for yours other than being a spoiled brat.

Allow me to break this down for you Bear. Now I don't consider my self a firearms expert in any way shape or form. But I do however consider myself both fairly knowledgeable in the areas of physics and the mechanics of motion.

Ok so first off FASTER does NOT equal Louder... if that were the case then the .223 Rem would be louder then the .308 Win. and would be one of the loudest cartridges out there
PROOF: The following Charts were acquired from http://www.gunsandammomag.com (their ballistics chart section) For the purpose of this we are taking the LOWEST weight and a "standard" load for these rounds (aka the cheapest rounds available)

.22 LR 40Gr Solid Lead has a muzzle velocity of 1150 FPS and an energy of 115 k

.223 Remington 55Gr FMJ has a muzzle velocity of 3240 fps and an energy of 1282k

.30-06 123Gr FMJ has a muzzle velocity of 2936 and an energy of 2364k

.308 Winchester 147Gr FMJ has a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps and an energy of 2560k

.338 Lapua Mag. 300Gr BTHP has a muzzle velocity of 2800 FPS and an energy of 5224k

.50 BMG 661Gr M33 ball has a muzzle velocity of 2750 FPS and an energy of 11098k

Now according to your logic "Faster = louder" then the order of loudness would be

.223 Remington
.30-06
.308 Winchester .338 Lapua Mag.
.50 BMG
.22 LR

Now if you've been around any of these you would know that you can hear a .50 BMG from very very very very very far away.... The .30-6 .308Winchester and .338 Lapua Mag. are also very loud rounds compared to the .223 Remington.

If you've notice I also noted the energy these rounds have at the moment they leave the barrel, this energy is determined by A. Weight of the Bullet B. Size of the cartridge (amount of propellant) C. Size of the Bullet D. Shape of the Bullet
SOUND is a form of ENERGY so the sound a firearm makes is infact not coming from the firearm (which we aren't discussing) but from the ammunition you are using... Depending on the weight of the bullet wether it be HP, FMJ, Frang; whether or not it has a boattail. All these things come into account determining how load a round is. Supressors take one of these components (usually the thermal energy; which we know to be the gases escaping the barrel) and it spreads them thorughout it's interrior SLOWING them down before releasing them.

 

[Bear 45/70]

imported post

shakul wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

What are you trying to do get every thread in the Washington Forum locked. You accomplished it all by yourself with your maniac ranting, A first for a proclaimed good guy. Go away unless you really do know something about the subject. The "If it is loud it is powerful"... is my opinion, I guess in your world I'm not allowed one. However I think new shooters need to understand that bigger and/or faster means louder. You following wherever I post and attacking me makes you look bad, not me. But then you truly are one of the bad guys. As to science, I can read and I do a lot, I've lived a long time and did a lot of things, so guess what? I know a lot of thing, which you obviously don't. As to the sound comments, FE427TP didn't say it sounded louder to the shooter, he just said it increased the noise. But he and I are not attacking each other but having a discussion. You are attcking because you are a petty little boy that can't stand some criticism of the all wonderful Glock. As to explainations for post, there is no logical one for yours other than being a spoiled brat.

Allow me to break this down for you Bear. Now I don't consider my self a firearms expert in any way shape or form. But I do however consider myself both fairly knowledgeable in the areas of physics and the mechanics of motion.

Ok so first off FASTER does NOT equal Louder... if that were the case then the .223 Rem would be louder then the .308 Win. and would be one of the loudest cartridges out there
PROOF: The following Charts were acquired from http://www.gunsandammomag.com (their ballistics chart section) For the purpose of this we are taking the LOWEST weight and a "standard" load for these rounds (aka the cheapest rounds available)

.22 LR 40Gr Solid Lead has a muzzle velocity of 1150 FPS and an energy of 115 k

.223 Remington 55Gr FMJ has a muzzle velocity of 3240 fps and an energy of 1282k

.30-06 123Gr FMJ has a muzzle velocity of 2936 and an energy of 2364k

.308 Winchester 147Gr FMJ has a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps and an energy of 2560k

.338 Lapua Mag. 300Gr BTHP has a muzzle velocity of 2800 FPS and an energy of 5224k

.50 BMG 661Gr M33 ball has a muzzle velocity of 2750 FPS and an energy of 11098k

Now according to your logic "Faster = louder" then the order of loudness would be

.223 Remington
.30-06
.308 Winchester .338 Lapua Mag.
.50 BMG
.22 LR

Now if you've been around any of these you would know that you can hear a .50 BMG from very very very very very far away.... The .30-6 .308Winchester and .338 Lapua Mag. are also very loud rounds compared to the .223 Remington.

If you've notice I also noted the energy these rounds have at the moment they leave the barrel, this energy is determined by A. Weight of the Bullet B. Size of the cartridge (amount of propellant) C. Size of the Bullet D. Shape of the Bullet
SOUND is a form of ENERGY so the sound a firearm makes is infact not coming from the firearm (which we aren't discussing) but from the ammunition you are using... Depending on the weight of the bullet wether it be HP, FMJ, Frang; whether or not it has a boattail. All these things come into account determining how load a round is. Supressors take one of these components (usually the thermal energy; which we know to be the gases escaping the barrel) and it spreads them thorughout it's interrior SLOWING them down before releasing them.

Well you are half right. Compare a 22 Hornet to a 223? The 223 is louder because the bullet is faster. So why are you nitpicking? Oh and I still stand by the louder means either faster or bigger and in some cases both.

 

[shakul]

imported post

That is not how sound works... Just because something is faster does not mean it is louder... it has to do w. the energy exerted by an object... In this case the gases created by the thermal energy... If there was no ENERGY then there would be no noise.... The acceleration of a round is determined by the ENERGY exerted on that object... Again it is not because the bullet is faster that it is louder, but because there is more energy involved.

 

[Helter]

imported post

The bottom line here is that even though you personally may not ever care to own a suppressor (for whatever reason, and don't knock it 'til you've tried it), it's still well worth defending the right of others to do so.

I look at the situation as being similar to the one where a lot of hunters are okay with gun control just so long as nobody comes after their rifles and shotguns. That's the sort of attitude that lands us with crap like the '94 AWB.

And Bear, I suggest you do a little research on modern suppressor design. The days of baffle wipes and the added inaccuracy that came with them are long over.

 

[911Boss]

imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:

What are you trying to do get every thread in the Washington Forum locked. You accomplished it all by yourself with your maniac ranting, A first for a proclaimed good guy. Go away unless you really do know something about the subject. The "If it is loud it is powerful"... is my opinion, I guess in your world I'm not allowed one. However I think new shooters need to understand that bigger and/or faster means louder. You following wherever I post and attacking me makes you look bad, not me. But then you truly are one of the bad guys. As to science, I can read and I do a lot, I've lived a long time and did a lot of things, so guess what? I know a lot of thing, which you obviously don't. As to the sound comments, FE427TP didn't say it sounded louder to the shooter, he just said it increased the noise. But he and I are not attacking each other but having a discussion. You are attcking because you are a petty little boy that can't stand some criticism of the all wonderful Glock. As to explainations for post, there is no logical one for yours other than being a spoiled brat.

No, just trying to shut you and you asinine behavior down. I will not "go away", every time you turn around and spew forth forth the fertilizer you type I will be there to shine the spotlight on your dumbassery.

You are certainly allowed your opinion, as is everyone else. My quest is only to get you to accept the opinions of others in the same manner you expect them to accept yours.

You may read a lot, but I bet someone has to help you with the big words. I would venture to guess you know no where near as much as you think you know.

You want to hen peck him for saying it "increased noise" instead of "increased perceived noise". As I said, the rest of knew what he was saying, evidently you aren't as smart as you think you are.

I am a-t-t-a-c-k-i-n-g because once again you have spouted off in a degrading manner. As for the issues surrounding the Glocks, if you don't like them fine. News flash though, you are not the arbiter of what is and is not excellence in firearm design.

See you in the next thread!

 

[Bear 45/70]

imported post

911Boss wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

What are you trying to do get every thread in the Washington Forum locked. You accomplished it all by yourself with your maniac ranting, A first for a proclaimed good guy. Go away unless you really do know something about the subject. The "If it is loud it is powerful"... is my opinion, I guess in your world I'm not allowed one. However I think new shooters need to understand that bigger and/or faster means louder. You following wherever I post and attacking me makes you look bad, not me. But then you truly are one of the bad guys. As to science, I can read and I do a lot, I've lived a long time and did a lot of things, so guess what? I know a lot of thing, which you obviously don't. As to the sound comments, FE427TP didn't say it sounded louder to the shooter, he just said it increased the noise. But he and I are not attacking each other but having a discussion. You are attcking because you are a petty little boy that can't stand some criticism of the all wonderful Glock. As to explainations for post, there is no logical one for yours other than being a spoiled brat.

No, just trying to shut you and you asinine behavior down. I will not "go away", every time you turn around and spew forth forth the fertilizer you type I will be there to shine the spotlight on your dumbassery.

You are certainly allowed your opinion, as is everyone else. My quest is only to get you to accept the opinions of others in the same manner you expect them to accept yours.

You may read a lot, but I bet someone has to help you with the big words. I would venture to guess you know no where near as much as you think you know.

You want to hen peck him for saying it "increased noise" instead of "increased perceived noise". As I said, the rest of knew what he was saying, evidently you aren't as smart as you think you are.

I am a-t-t-a-c-k-i-n-g because once again you have spouted off in a degrading manner. As for the issues surrounding the Glocks, if you don't like them fine. News flash though, you are not the arbiter of what is and is not excellence in firearm design.

See you in the next thread!

Why don't you shut up. Your childish asinine behavior already got one thread lock and I hadn't posted there in days. It was all your rant about nothing. You seem to think you get to have your opinion but I can't have one because no matter what I say it will disagree with you. If I were a vindictive guy like you are, you would already be gone. You make me look good with your personal attacks out of nowhere, not even a difference of opinion, just personal attacks as you admit too. You are a bratty little boy and I will out last you easily.

 

[911Boss]

imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:

Why don't you shut up. Your childish asinine behavior already got one thread lock and I hadn't posted there in days. It was all your rant about nothing. You seem to think you get to have your opinion but I can't have one because no matter what I say it will disagree with you. If I were a vindictive guy like you are, you would already be gone. You make me look good with your personal attacks out of nowhere, not even a difference of opinion, just personal attacks as you admit too. You are a bratty little boy and I will out last you easily.

Sorry old man, you won't shout me down. As I have said repeatedly, everyone is entitled to their opinion. When you want to present yours in a civil manner then I will have no complaint. You want to call names and insult folks though and I will call you on it every time.

You've posted on other threads and I haven't said a peep. You keep attacking folks and I am going to be there.

PM vote is now 15 out of 16, most recent quote:

"...Our tax money is paying for Bear's internet access, I think we need to write our congressmen..."

 

[holepoker]

imported post

Bear 45/70 wrote:

Go away unless you really do know something about the subject.

I think you said it best. You have nothing to add to this thread, so find a different thread to share your "opinion". Just my opinion.

 

[Bear 45/70]

imported post

holepoker wrote:

Bear 45/70 wrote:

Go away unless you really do know something about the subject.

I think you said it best. You have nothing to add to this thread, so find a different thread to share your "opinion". Just my opinion.

So what is your qualifications to be making that statement. Other than being arrogant.

 

[FE427TP]

imported post

911Boss wrote:

Sorry old man, you won't shout me down. As I have said repeatedly, everyone is entitled to their opinion. When you want to present yours in a civil manner then I will have no complaint. You want to call names and insult folks though and I will call you on it every time.

You've posted on other threads and I haven't said a peep. You keep attacking folks and I am going to be there.

PM vote is now 15 out of 16, most recent quote:

"...Our tax money is paying for Bear's internet access, I think we need to write our congressmen..."

911 Boss, you know how people will tell a kid not to talk to someone because it's only encouraging them to be obnoxious, just let it go man, yeah Bear is abrasive, but seriously dude, let it slide. winning a argument over the internet is like winning the Special Olympics, yeah you won, but it's still retarded. If YOU want to support our cause let him be so this thread can get back on track before it gets locked over a fight you two should be having via private messages. The bickering going on between you two publicly doesn't help our cause look like one of rational ADULTS does it?

I'll try to send you a PM if i can figure it out

 

[bluer1]

imported post

Look guys, I'm just trying to get some signatures here... Just ignore Bear

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

imported post

Thisthreadsargument is like running in the special olympics, even if you win you're still retarded.