Wear your eye and ear protection!!!

[Tallbald]

I'm not a nanny-type person except with my wife and children folks, but occasionally I see photos and videos of us shooters enjoying our hobby without ear and eye protection. In my career in ER health care I've seen my share of fragments in eyes, and am personally suffering hearing loss as a direct result of no ear protection back in my youth. I myself have been hit by cap fragments in the face since taking up cap and ball too. I just worry about the safety and comfort of my web friends. Whining over. Take care all. Don

 

[Legionnaire]

Good advice, this. Eye and ear protection always. I wear glasses anyway, so make sure they have good coverage; no skinny little grandpa glasses for me. I wear Peltor Tac7s at the range, often times over a pair of foam plugs. I also wear them while hunting with a handgun, although not while hunting with long guns. While deer hunting, I have a pair of foam plugs on a string that I hang around my neck. If I see a distant deer coming my way, I'll insert plugs before taking the shot.

 

[RevDerb]

Thanks, Don. Safety is always worth repeating.

 

[Noz]

My ears are a lost cause (8" Howitzers took care of that) but I still wear plugs. Eyes are always protected while shooting, reloading, chain saw, lawnmower etc. I have one eye with some vision damage so I'm extra careful.

 

[Vermonter]

I have permanent crickets from not being careful enough when younger. Loud exhausts, metal concerts, and power tools. I'm very careful now! I have a pair of ear plugs with a headband that I can take in and out of my ears one-handed. I know Surefire has some plugs that you can just leave in your ear and they'll block loud noises but still allow you to hear. I want to try some, they're only around $20.

 

[Busyhands94]

i too want some of those earplugs that allow you to hear but block loud noises. that would be great! i think I'll buy some when i get the time and money to stop slingin' lead for a second and buy me a pair. i am going today, and have found that with my shorter barreled C&B .22 pistols i need hearing protection for the sake of my hearing. i have spent plenty of time at rock concerts, i like to be standing right next to the speakers right in the front row while the Doobie Brothers, Lynerd Skynerd, or The Whiskey thieves are playing good and loud. while it's good and loud i hear a ringing from October through Christmas if i don't stick some earplugs in. and shooting, that's obviously needing earplugs. i like to reuse the foam kind until they get a little old looking, then i replace them. the shotgun range out at the end of town gives earplugs away for free and will lend eye protection and even a shotgun if you don't have the tools necessary to enjoy this sport. i have a buddy who always gives my a few sets of earplugs when i go there. it's good because i can take the whole family shooting and nobody will go deaf!

 

[Jaymo]

I always wear my eyes and ears. I have a buddy who refuses to wear any, even if I offer them.
Then he complains about his ears.
You can lead a horse to water.

 

[clem]

I don't remember the story about this guy, except that his firearm kaboomed, but he was wearing eye protection.

 

[Jaymo]

Dam that looks painful. At least his eyes were uninjured.
That makes me want to wear a full face shield when shooting.
And THAT'S why I always wear eyes and ears when shooting.
That, and I'm used to wearing them at work.

 

[Armored farmer]

I caught a fencing staple in my left eye 5/9/83. One wk in hosp and 14 tiny stitches. In my 47yrs.....by far the most painful injury ever.

Safety glasses/shooting glasses......always

 

[Zeke/PA]

Eye AND ear protection at the Range is a POSITIVE that should NOT be even debated.
EYES, EARS, PERIOD!!!

 

[ZX10Aviator]

my left ear is permanently ringing from hunting, it sucks. Im looking into some in the ear electronic protection from now on...

 

[camar]

I am a range safety officer and I leave it up to the individual. I am not a baby sitter. Same for safety belts and other safety devices. These are all individual reponsibilities. PERIOD. :banghead:

 

[Alec]

camar, I'm surprised your employer has not urged you to babysit a bit-- if only to prevent lawsuits. That seems like a liability to me.

 

[camar]

Not employed. I donate my time several days a week.

 

[Whacked]

Just over this last holiday weekend I went target/skeet shooting with bro-in-law and friends.
Never fired a .44 mag before, and somewhere between my truck and the shooting area a plug fell out of my left ear and I didnt notice it. OUCH! dang that pistol is LOUD!
My ear was ringing for a couple hours afterwards.

the pain alone is enough to want to wear hearing protection

 

[Dimis]

All the ranges here its mandatory or you go home

 

[mykeal]

camar - I suggest you have the range you volunteer at take a close look at their insurance policy.

I have both NRA and NMLRA RSO training and certification; both include ensuring ear and eye protection on the part of anyone on the line. None of the ranges I'm aware of allow anyone on the firing line without ear and eye protection.

Yes, you're not a babysitter. But as an RSO you are responsible for the safe operation of a firing line. How can you allow the people who's safety you are responsible for to engage in unsafe activity? Taking chances with eyesight, and absolutely damaging hearing, is the very definition of unsafe - how do you reconcile that with your responsibility as an RSO? Where did you get your certification?

 

[camar]

Private range. Safety glasses and hearing protection is an individual responsibility. Range safety is my responsibility and this is taken very seriously.

 

[BleysAhrens]

Wow....

 

[4v50 Gary]

Concur. Eye and ear always.

 

[arcticap]

I guess that it's like whether a state mandates motorcyclists to wear helmets or not which some states chose not to do.
And I can understand why a range officer wouldn't want to enforce range rules that don't exist or to exceed his authority.
In that event the best that I could suggest would be to strongly recommend to wear eyes and ears to anyone who enters the range.
Many ranges will supply eye and ears if the shooter doesn't have any.
I'm not sure how a range, club or a range officer could be held responsible for someone's hearing loss or how they could even prove where or when it happened.
I know that indoor ranges don't want to see eye injuries due to ricochets coming off the backstop or spinner/bullet catch.
Sometimes the concern about needing to defend oneself from a nuisance law suit is reason enough to enact a mandatory policy. But that's still up to the membership or management of the range to decide.
If it's noticed that people are exposing themselves to injury then the range officer could be proactive enough to at least bring the issue to the attention of management. That is unless the issue has already been hashed over.
But it's hard to understand how a child could be allowed on the range without eyes and ears on.
A minute amount of lead exposure is one thing, but if an adult totally disregards the safety needs of a child then maybe there are adults that literally do need baby sitters, at least for their child's own safety if not for their own.

 

[mykeal]

arcticap, and camar - we'll have to disagree on this.

If an RSO observes unsafe behavior it is his responsibility to stop it immediately, not to take notes and go to a meeting to discuss it with range management. Do you know of any managed range that tells their RSO's not to take action, but instead to bring it to them for adjudication?

How can any RSO say he takes safety very seriously while INTENTIONALLY ignoring unsafe practices? "I'm only going to enforce the written rules applied by the management of this facility and ignore any other unsafe practices." Where did that RSO get his training - what RSO certification course would pass anyone who had such an attitude?

Perhaps it's that the RSO doesn't believe that not using ear and eye protection is unsafe. Is that the case here?

Is there ANY question that shooting without ear protection damages hearing? Not just risks damage, actually CAUSES damage. And if not, is there ANY question that an activity that results in damage to the body is unsafe by definition?

Is there ANY question that shooting without eye protection risks loss of sight? Can anyone reasonably say that's SAFE activity?

To some degree I'm putting words in your mouth with the above, but that's what I understand you to be saying. I may be way off base here in my understanding of your position; if so, tell me.

 

[Sky]

Gosh how did we old guys ever get old with out the nanny state and clutching momma's apron strings.

I totally agree eye and hearing protection is a wise investment for you and yours.

I also believe in natural selection without the intervention of some plaintiff and lawyer trying to milk someone for their hard earned money because of the plaintiff's stupidity or just bad luck. But heck what do I know. Many years ago few of us wore hearing or eye protection an even the military training I was involved in did not furnish eye or ear protection on some firing lines if I remember correctly. The guys I know who were arty officers are wearing hearing aids today.

Good news "back to evolution" as we age, or as we as a species observe, we can learn from the mistakes of others. Even shooting a Archery bow or getting out of bed and cooking with a hot grease splatter in the eye ball can mess up your day. Life is hazardous and was meant to be lived so there is a middle ground between the nanny state and the young bold and almost invisible mentality where many of us choose live. To early, need coffee.

 

[arcticap]

There were some older guys in my black powder club that didn't wear ear protection. Some wore prescription eye glasses because they needed them, but I couldn't understand why they didn't wear hearing protection and no one stopped them from shooting.
Under some circumstances a minor child should definitely be protected or kept off the range.
In the absence of range rules then a "duly appointed and authorized" range officer may be able to be the dictator. That's why shooting clubs have head safety and range officers and stated range rules that can lead to members being disciplined if the written rules are broken.
But in this day and age there are still some libertarians than would advocate that people have certain rights to engage in risky behavior.
How can a range officer become a rogue authority in spite of the written rules?
I don't think that folks should go without wearing eyes ears at the range, but like our freedom of religion which gives adults the right to refuse necessary medical treatment, I don't see how people's rights can be invaded if the property owner/owners chose not to.
Having a range officer certification doesn't necesarily give them the legal right to supercede the right of the private property owner of the range.
A state law might and there's always the risk of injury laws regarding minor children that may apply.
That's why I mention that the welfare of children might be an exception, or maybe the range officer could make a report to the legal authorities.
Try looking at the situation as if one were a police officer that was called to the scene based on a complaint.
If an adult gun club member were refused the right to enjoy the property because of a rogue range officer, then maybe a trespassing, disorderly conduct or a breech of peace charge could be filed against one party or the other based on who is in the right or wrong.
Theoretically if a range officer exceeded his authority, based on his actions he could potentially end up being charged for attempting to interfere with a member's legal use of range property.
The same would apply to the member if he disregarded a written range rule which the range officer was empowered by the owner to enforce. That's why written range rules are often posted.
If there's a dispute and the police are called, who is legally in the right or wrong?
I don't know, but I think that personal and property rights need to be respected above all, and the courts act as the legal balance between them.
What's the legal obligation of the range officer vs. their legal right to take unilateral action?
Again, I don't know.
All I know is that some of the old guys at my muzzle loading club chose not to wear any ear protection and they were well respected by all of the members.
What could or should a range officer do about it?
Even a child shooting a .22LR rifle outdoors without eyes and ears probably isn't very risky at all.
So when assessing the degree of risk involved every situation is different.