CNN: Silencer sales booming

[HCM]

I live in a state that just legalized them for civilians, so were it not for the fact that I simply can't justify the cost right now, I'd be braving the paperwork hassle myself. What's the least you can pay for a good quality suppressor for 9mm/.380 usage, anyway? (I assume that since they use the same bullet diameter, the same suppressors would work for both calibers?)

Yes a 9 millimeter suppressor would work for both calibers.

[TGS]

Sorry that you took the ossicle thing literally.

There's no need for the snark simply because someone countered your bad gouge.

It's no secret that a suppressor is preferable, and it absolutely gives you advantages....but I still think you were overstating the immediate impact of firing an unsuppressed weapon without earpro. In addition, the statement that any ready-gun needs to be suppressed is an unqualified statement without factual support.

While it'd be preferable if it were suppressed, history has shown us that you can effectively function in shootings sans earpro with unsuppressed weapons. Even to this day, the vast majority of non-training firearm use by LE and military are sans earpro, unsuppressed, and these men and women continue to deliver.

[Drang]

That blows.

And I now someone's wondering: In Real Life she was fairly attractive; in Korea, in Second Infantry Division, she was about a 15.

She's certainly the exception, though. There's always going to be an exception no matter what topic.

Sure, firing without ear pro is risking damage...and doing so repeatedly or for time is guaranteeing hearing loss to varying degrees....but lots of troops and LEOs have fired highpower, smokeless powder firearms without ear pro for the last hundred+ years and were still able to function during and after the shooting. Lots of wars have been faught, and lots of OIS's been won, by shooters without ear pro whose ossicles did not fall on the ground.

So far as I can tell, my father (25 years Detroit PD, starting about a year before my birth; before that 2 years US Army, before that grew upon a farm in Michigan, during much of which period ear pro was probably optional, if not considered a sign of weakness) has better hearing than me (20 years US Army, always using ear pro.)

Anyway, I consider SGT R*** to be a cautionary tale about why one should wear ear pro if at all possible.

[Sensei]

There's no need for the snark simply because someone countered your bad gouge.

It's no secret that a suppressor is preferable, and it absolutely gives you advantages....but I still think you were overstating the immediate impact of firing an unsuppressed weapon without earpro. In addition, the statement that any ready-gun needs to be suppressed is an unqualified statement without factual support.

While it'd be preferable if it were suppressed, history has shown us that you can effectively function in shootings sans earpro with unsuppressed weapons. Even to this day, the vast majority of non-training firearm use by LE and military are sans earpro, unsuppressed, and these men and women continue to deliver.

I wasn't being snarky. I actually thought that you didn't get the hyperbole since you quoted it in your own post. As for proving my point, it's impossible to do since nobody would allow you to study the comparison. I suppose that we just disagree about the effectiveness of fighting indoors and in a vehicle without a suppressor.

[TGS]

And I now someone's wondering: In Real Life she was fairly attractive; in Korea, in Second Infantry Division, she was about a 15.

Example 1

and...

Example 2