09-16-2017, 05:40 PM
I agree with you Stan, but comparing the left"s lack of logic to the poor explanation of suppressor use is not even in the same universe. It should have been explained better that hearing damage is decreased ten fold when using a suppressed firearm compared to non suppressed. A good comparison would be to running heavy equipment. Heavy equipment has mufflers but hearing protection is recommended for long term exposure. Running heavy equipment with just a straight pipe will damage hearing immediately not to mention any person near that piece of equipment. What the laws tell shooters today is they must run their firearms with a straight stack. Many suppressors are not hearing safe but are much better for long term exposure compared to non suppressed. Most hunters today never use suppressors because of laws and or exorbitant cost of licensing. Many do not use ear protection, "including myself" as they need to use their sense of hearing to acquire their game. Using a suppressed weapon for hunting will save hearing plain and simple as it will in all shooting. Having the option of going suppressed is a viable health issue, not a crime issue.