Lead exposure with certain ammo and certain guns is also an underappreciated problem. People shooting cheap, non-jacketed ammo from semi automatic rifles in particular, are basically stabding in lead dust clouds while they shoot. It gets on their hands, clothes and equipment, and that gets carried into their car and home where a steady concentration of background lead will build up over years. I seriously believe that if studied seriously, we’d see a direct inverse correlation between the most active hobby shooters and IQ.
It’s slowly becoming more known. The indoor ranges in my area have started installing ventilation systems, banning pregnant women from entry, providing lead-removing soap in the bathrooms, encouraging people to use it, and posting signs about it in the bathrooms.
But still, many people either don’t know or, even worse, know and don’t care because “I ain’t no sissy” or whatever.
Most effects of lead exposure are reversible with time though.
I think an even bigger problem that even more people don’t think about is the fact that leaded gasoline is still used in airplane fuel (avgas). If you fly for a hobby or live under a flight path, you very likely have more lead in your blood than the most avid of shooters.
Wut??? Where are you from that indoor ranges aren’t required to have proper filtration and ventilation? That shits the law here in the states. You can’t open a indoor range without passing a ton of safety shit, and the fire Marshal will check it regularly.
is that a federal regulation? sounds like sissy states rights that aren’t patriotic enough confound it tarnation etc
Lead is in primers too. Not just in the non jacketed bullet.
So they say that the Army uses 4 PSI as a placeholder safety threshold while they gather data on this specific issue, but do say that threshold is based on prior not directly related research.
The .50 BMG is obv in a class of its own (completely smashing that threshold), but the only one that tickles at that threshold is the Desert Eagle (also a .50 caliber round).
Most of the firearms they tested rated in in the 1-2 PSI range…and as I was double checking that noticed their note: “Measurements shown are the average of the three highest readings for weapons fired from inside a range booth.”
I don’t mean to say there’s nothing here, but this does feel alarmist. Nonetheless does seem like double hearing protection wouldn’t be a bad idea.
It is interesting that a Model 1911 clocked in with a lower pressure wave than a “9mm pistol” (wonder which model(s) they tested). John Browning continues to flex from the grave.
The 1911 uses .45 and .45 is a subsonic ammunition, which means its muzzle velocity is below the speed to break the sound barrier, and doesn’t produce a supersonic crack. The delisle carbine was a bolt action integrally suppressed rifle made from the Lee Enfield, re-chambered for .45 from .303 due to its subsonic nature and is known to be one of the quietest firearms to exist, and the round doesn’t produce a loud crack.
Where 9mm isn’t subsonic, it has a higher muzzle velocity and therefore would generate more atmospheric pressure, and a supersonic crack. This is why the world famous MP5SD, known for its total silence, was revolutionary. people say the only thing you hear is the bolt cycling. It has a perforated barrel that leaks enough of the gases out of the barrel into the suppressor. Infact, it leaks enough to actually prevent the 9mm from achieving supersonic speeds. They designed it this way so it doesn’t have to use ammunition that is specifically filled to be subsonic, or to use a round that is inherently subsonic like .45.
So that is two examples of gun design history around trying to be quiet with ammunition, one designed around the ammo, and one around the gun.
I agree that it does feel alarmist, but to be fair, the article mentioned multiple times that the research isn’t established just yet. In the end it sort of reminds me of the radiation doses from x-rays and CT scans. You have to weigh the potential risks with the potential benefits when deciding to practice with a firearm.
A 50ae from a desert eagle doesn’t get anywhere close to that of a 50bmg. It’s about 15% of the energy, if even, which is about the same as typical infantry rifles.
Caliber is probably is among the worst metrics for determining energy honestly
Came here to say this.
.50 AE and .50 BMG are worlds apart. Hell, even the difference between .45 ACP and .45-70 is pretty big.
In the range I’ve always worn double, though that only provides incremental increase in protection.
With double, I barely notice any typical round - it really is just background noise, though you can feel the pressure in your chest.
But something like a DE? Holy hell that was something else. WOOMP! I think you really feel even that more than you hear it.
This article seems like a tempest in a teapot.
4 psi is based on the army report for popping ear drums, more specifically for impact events like gun shots. Note, your ears can handle 4 psi if it’s a slow ramp up so they can acclimate like diving in water.
Even if it’s not causing brain injuries, it is causing hearing loss. Even if you double up and wear both earplugs and electronic ear muffs, a rifle at an indoor range is LOUD.
BTW, having silencers on everything would go a very long way to eliminating these risks. Silencers slow down the expansion of gasses, which also slows down the pressure wave.
Hearing loss is neurodegeneration. It can progress retrograde to the brain.
This makes so much sense. Think of the demographics who partake in this and what the average IQ between them is.
People like me?
And all the other lgbt+ and poc I shoot with?
I mean, sure a couple aren’t the brightest crayons in the box, but that’s a pretty wide blanket statement
It’s not really a wide blanket. While there might be an uptick they are not the dominant demographic.
On top of that, we’re talking about long term gun range exposure. It’s straight white men and has been for the last since whenever gun ranges became a thing.
deleted by creator
You’ve got issues
If the cops in your part of the world are like the ones in mine, its a sure bet they clock way, way more shooting range time than you and your friends do.
Its funny I live in pro gun area and the cops I know are pretty lax about their range time. Just a few gun jockies that just really enjoy it.
The majority of the range is hunters
Not sure where you’re from, but in the USA, most cops are only required to qualify once per year. The qualifying course uses maybe 15-30 rounds, depending on the department. Also, most cops in the USA will tell you, qualifying is the only time they fire their gun.
So, if you’re in the USA and you go to the range and shoot a whole 50-round box of ammo every six months, you’ll have about twice the practice and range time as about half the cops.
I don’t think that’s entirely true I think cities and large metropolitan areas are actually quarterly.
That’s why I said “most cops”. Training requirements vary wildly from state-to-state, county-to-county, sometimes even department-to-department.
The three biggest cities in the US are Chicago, New York, and LA. Chicago is once a year, New York is twice, LA is four times a year, but only one has to be with duty ammo, the rest are with practice ammo.
I’ve heard of quarterly qualifying for SWAT officers or those on task forces that apprehend high-risk fugitives. But, for the most part, your standard beat cop or highway trooper is gonna be once a year.
It may shock you learn this, but, despite what the media portrays, cops in big cities spend 99% of their time doing rather mundane things like traffic enforcement, domestic disputes, and event security.
Dunno why the slight condescending tone or the need to try to assert I’m wrong or ill informed but sure.
I would be willing to bet that the average police officer fires very little outside of annual or semi-annual qualifications, though my evidence is purely anecdotal.
Based on my experience, which includes asking many, many cops from many, many different departments and jurisdictions all over the US, you’re correct. Every single one has told me that maybe 10 percent of cops practice at the range outside of qualifying, and only about 1 percent practice on a monthly basis or better, and those guys are usually on a SWAT team or high-risk fugitive apprehension task force, were prior military continuing their habitual training, or also moonlight as an armored car driver or some other high-risk private gig.
I bought a 9mm recently because I’m uncomfortable with the amount of Nazis and the state of this country. Is that the demographic you meant?
I dunno why everyone thinks their one off experience changes this.
Yes you buying a gun has changed the demographic that has been standard since gun ranges existed.
I have a 50 yard home range and easily 90% of the time I shoot it’s suppressed with subsonic ammo. The only time I’m shooting without suppressor is to practice with my edc or shotgun.
The only time I’m exposed to supersonic waves is the rare occasion I go to the gun club to train long range and that’s always other people’s firearms.
The article specifically mentioned indoor ranges so you’re probably good
Also a 50 yard home range sounds so nice
How many acres do you need to have a range like that? I’m shopping for cheap land
I have about 1.25 acres riverfront property, small but diverse and highly productive. I have water rights to the river, the irrigation behind my land and wells. I have a small old growth forest grove, some lawn, some pasture with gardens and orchards.
I have .6 acre, and I couldn’t do my own range because I’d be hitting my neighbors house. I have friends with similar or less property that shoot all the time because they abut large swaths of woodland! All depends where you are at. If you want to make your own range, be super mindful of what’s around your property and please make a big back stop for ur range!!!
Well, shit.
I don’t know if a bunch of guys in white lab coats are actually worried about shooters? Possibly they are just pointing out the danger?
I think that they might be actually worried about the climate making the world uninhabitable.
Id rather have potential head injuries than have my freedom threatened and the only thing you can do is cry about it
It’s being threatened. What are you going to do about it then?
Whats being threatened?
If you’re in the US, you are. Your democracy has been attacked, is being attacked. Freedom of speech is under attack, the government is implimenting mass surveillance programs and where they aren’t they’re purchasing data from commercial mass surveillance programs. Trump just cleared out the commissioners of election watchdog so there are none. The list goes on and on and on.
At this thing, we agree.
If you arent in the US, you already lost everything
Classic US centric thinking
Well hoothoot talks like a 2nd amendment nut from the US.
It’s still pretty nice here in EU. Our right wingers and other regressives are hurting our region much slower. Our left is strong and fighting back.
It’s slow at first.
I’d say it’s too late for you, champion
You appear to be very stupid.
Enlighten me
You’re not worth any effort whatsoever
Don’t breed
Spent too much time at the range, I see
Think those injuries have already set in…
Why aren’t you doing anything to stop the further degradation of our constitution then?
