Re: Ear Protection
Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:11 am
Only after a few bottlesCorjack wrote:Anyone else here the voices?
For the enthusiast of Blaser and other firearms related to the Blaser family, such as Mauser, Sauer, Rigby, and other fine European sporting arms.
http://www.blaserbuds.com/forum/
Only after a few bottlesCorjack wrote:Anyone else here the voices?
Nar mate ear muff he is talking about. Silencers are illegal here. It's a Federal offence to have and use one. Only way you can have one is if you are a professional pest controller and get a permit for one with conditions or member of the special operation group Vicpol or the FOSTU Federal operations tactical unit raids wing. or the other states Tac units. If you get done with one it's soap on the rope for 10skeetshot wrote:If we talk of ear protection, we must talk about silencers or sound supressors.
Unfortunately in many countries this is viewed as some sort of assasin's device and is frowned upon by many law enforcement agencies.
That is rather unfortunate as the Silencer can save the hearing of many thousands of sportsmen as well as make their shooting more pleasant. The two ways of controlling flinch is to reduce the noise of discharge of a firearm and reduce its recoil, and the Silencer does both.
The draw back of present Silencers is this ungainly mass you have hanging on the end of the barrel disturbing the harmonics, balance and visual appeal of the weapon, but if there is enough demand, this is merely an engineering challenge that could perhaps be met.
Agree, unfortunately between the dumbshits that make up the management of most law enforcement agencies and the retarded governments we have to deal with common sense goes completely out the window. It really is scary when you look at the thinking process that most of those in police management have when it comes to the public. Too many believe that the public is THE ENEMY and that THEY should be the only ones allowed to carry guns, etc. Many of these retards in the big cities even believe their officers shouldn't be allowed to take their duty weapon home or carry a gun when off duty.skeetshot wrote:If we talk of ear protection, we must talk about silencers or sound supressors.
Unfortunately in many countries this is viewed as some sort of assasin's device and is frowned upon by many law enforcement agencies.
That is rather unfortunate as the Silencer can save the hearing of many thousands of sportsmen as well as make their shooting more pleasant. The two ways of controlling flinch is to reduce the noise of discharge of a firearm and reduce its recoil, and the Silencer does both.
The draw back of present Silencers is this ungainly mass you have hanging on the end of the barrel disturbing the harmonics, balance and visual appeal of the weapon, but if there is enough demand, this is merely an engineering challenge that could perhaps be met.