Suppressors - for the children - updated

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Oleg Volk

Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
9,155
Location
Nashville, TN
teaching0315.sized.jpg
 
It baffles me (pun intended) why those professing concern over making guns "safer" aren't stepping up and working to remove restrictions on these safety devices. Oh wait, it's not baffling. It's the result of too many nitwits seeing too many James Bond movies, and treating them like a documentaries. :rolleyes:
 
The poster doesn't make sense - OSHA regulates employers to protect their employees from occupational hazards; it is not charged with protecting consumers, or the public.
 
OSHA regulates employers to protect their employees from occupational hazards
Click to expand...

So why arnt cops and soldiers forced to use them at all times?

The biggest problem is marking a difference in the publics mind between a silencer and a supressor.
Most people see that device on the end and think (james bond style) it makes a weapon into a silent killing machine more quiet than a knife... all its doing is making a noisy bang less noisy.

I do like the image used.
It does not hurt to make shooting come across to viewers as a family sport.
 
Please don't forget eye protection also...... The little girl is wearing safety glasses, the teacher is not? Hearing and eye protection is paramount, they go hand in hand.

I appreciate your efforts and photography Oleg. Keep up the outstanding work!

Ваша работа - аппрекейтд один и белорусская жена.

Wags
 
Sigh. You're way off target with this one, buy I think there's a fundamental lack of understanding about what OSHA does or doesn’t do for most folks. OSHA deals with what hazards your employer may expose the employee to not anything (or anyone) else. Besides the fact that your statement isn't true. Plugs and muffs when properly applied protect kids well.

OSHA doesn't get involved if you climb up a ladder that you built with bailing twine and scavenged PVC sprinkler pipe as long as you're not doing it as part of your job. OSHA does care if you're employer has you climbing up a ladder built of bailing twine and scavenged PVC sprinkler pipe. OSHA doesn't regulate YOUR use of suppressors any more than it does your use of seat belts in your personnal vehicle.

OSHA doesn't often tell employers how to do, or not do, anything, but it tells them they may or may not do a thing (expose employees to too much noise). If a company has people shooting small arms, OSHA says they may not be exposed above a certain level of noise for a certain amount of time each day. The employer may use sound absorbing wall and ceiling materials to keep the exposure of the employees below that level. The employer may require the employees to use plugs and muffs to keep the exposure of the employees below that level. The employer may use small arms sound suppressors to keep the exposure below that level. OSHA doesn't care how you do it as long as you do. Considering what employers spend on ear plugs each year some of them would be happy to use firearms sound suppressors. The only problem is that BATFE regulates firearms sound suppressors so that employers using firearms are stuck (just like you and me) using ear plugs and muffs instead of applying the desired engineering control that are small arms suppressors.

Find another way to say this.

Perhaps, "If OSHA were in charge instead of BATFE you'de be REQUIRED to have sound suppressor on guns instead of risking damage to your hearing. So if it's good enough for work why isn't it good enough for home?" or "Socialist Finnland protects it's kids hearing while hunting with sound suppressors. Why can't America?"
 
El Tejon said:
Or, maybe cite the CFR about noise levels in the workplace if you wanted to keep it OSHA related???
Click to expand...

That's not going to help much. The niggling detail of what that number is isn't the issue.

I think the best approach is to play on the fact that OSHA tells your employer that they have to prevent you from becoming overexposed to noise. OSHA also says that the first thing the employer has to try is to implement engineering controls. Mufflers are a classic engineering control for noise. A small arms suppressor is just a 'gun muffler' to reduce the amount of noise coming out. If OSHA had responsibility for this issue they'd require the employer to FIRST use a suppressor and then take care of the rest of the noise with other methods.

In addition there are noise ordinances that limit the amount of noise you may expose the public to. Yet, BATFE deprives the average citizen the most effective means to reduce noise levels from small arms fire.

The other problem is that Oleg's statement just isn't the truth. You can do a fine job protecting your child's hearing with the use of plugs and muffs and limiting the amount of time you shoot each day. Sure the suppressor would help, but "if you loved your kids you'd use an air gun to teach them to shoot instead of risking their hearing". My daughter wears seat belts in the car for the same reason she wears hearing protection when she shoots.

My 7 year old in plugs and muffs.
attachment.php
 
Last edited:
El Tejon said:
Yeah, besides the CFR is a guaranteed cure for insomnia.:D

I have "iron forehead" from my forehead hitting a table in the library from reading CFRs.:D
Click to expand...

You should try 10 CFE 835!
 
Was in a hurry to get to work, missed the mangled text -- will fix once I get home. Good point on the content also, will change to make the comparison with Finland.
 
If OSHA got involved:
-We would have to dance the NFA Shuffle with every gun we purchased.
-If we were ever tested and found to have any degree of hearing loss, OSHA would inspect our guns and fine us for any silencers that aren't up to snuff.
-You would have one more bloated bureaucracy regulating gun ownership.

Other than that, I understand the message and completely agree.
 
I always thought it was a good arguement that they will ticket me if my Harley (or car) is too loud. Yet, if I try to reduce the sound my weapon makes they could send me to jail.

Maybe and idea for a future poster.

It never made sense to me. It would be better for everyone if we were allowed easier access to suppressors.
 
cracked butt said:
If OSHA got involved:
-We would have to dance the NFA Shuffle with every gun we purchased.
Click to expand...

Not only illogical, but untrue. If OSHA was involved you'd be required to have documentation that you tried suppressors, but they were more expensive than plugs for all employees and you could do just as good a job for less money with plugs.

cracked butt said:
-If we were ever tested and found to have any degree of hearing loss, OSHA would inspect our guns and fine us for any silencers that aren't up to snuff.
Click to expand...

Almost. If you were found to have folks you were in control of and they did have that hearing loss they would cite and fine you and require you to come up with a correctve action plan that had testing and inspection as part of it to make sure that you knew just how much noise the gun made with the suppressor and that if you needed to add plugs to protect those folks you provided them.

cracked butt said:
-You would have one more bloated bureaucracy regulating gun ownership.
Click to expand...

Yes, but you'd have one that pushed you to use suppressors instead of getting in your way of using them.
 
Standing Wolf said:
We already have more than enough federal meddling with our civil rights. We need to repeal the N.F.A. of 1934, not involve O.S.H.A. in shooting.
Click to expand...

Don't worry. You can't involve OSHA with shooting unless it's an employer/employee relationship. That's the alpha and omega of their charter.
 
HSO- you are probably right on the money, but I think you are splitting hairs here. There isn't any real upside in getting OSHA involved with gun ownership.
 
There isn't any real upside in getting OSHA involved with gun ownership.
Click to expand...

I think oleg is more pointing at the ignorance of weapon functions represented in our most basic gun control laws.

Like in the other thread on supressors, a doctor cooked up a piece Ill summise with "loud noises cause hearing loss", then says its the guns fault and how guns are dangerous because they can damage your body.

Well supressors and heaing protection solve that. You can have your cake and eat it too.
If they loosen the stranglehold nfa has put on supressors, guns get quieter and more neighbor friendly. Gun ranges, at the expense of a gun owner thatsonly too happy to oblige, can become less of a bother to the towns their located in.

All thats needed is a change to an old law that never made sense.
 
earl_simmons said:
The poster doesn't make sense - OSHA regulates employers to protect their employees from occupational hazards; it is not charged with protecting consumers, or the public.
Click to expand...
+1
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top