gun blast in small room question

confused

gun blast in small room question
What would you guys recommend for a hd gun that would'nt blind and completely deafen you/your spouse if called upon to use?
Click to expand...

You raise two issues:
1) sound (muzzle blast)
2) light (muzzle flash)

Any of the defensive center fire handgun cartridges that you fire indoors will reduce your hearing a significant amount temporarily and damage it permanently. I can think of only one way to hear what is going on and protect your hearing in your home in a defensive situation. That is to wear electronic hearing protection. It is not what most people think about in reacting to a possible home invasion. If you have both your flashlight, ear protection, and your handgun in your bedside table it only takes an extra 2 seconds to put on the hearing protection. If you feel you have the time (where it won't put you at risk) to put on hearing protection, why not do it? With my damaged hearing the electronic hearing protectors act like hearing aids.

Muzzle flash is not much of an issue indoors in dim light. I recently did some shooting after dark with several other NRA Instructors. We noted that the muzzle flash of 9mm, 10mm, and 45acp all were about 6" to 10" long and fairly dim. I was shooting the 10mm. I asked them to note how the muzzle flash was as I could not see it at all while shooting. I was shooting 180gr bullet @ 1250fps using AA#7 powder from a Colt Delta Elite.
 
I disagree with the .22 advice. The few times I've fired mine without hearing protection was a big mistake. Sounded every bit as loud as my 9mm or .38spl.
 
Maybe a Tazer would suit what you are looking for?

In all seriousness, in a HD / SD situation, I wouldn't look for a low recoil / small gun blast round in the hopes of saving my hearing. I'd look for a gun that I could use to save my life.

Perhaps a .38 revolver would be a good choice? Not as loud as either a 9mm or a .357 and has proven to be a good SD / HD round.
 
Lost Sheep wrote:

Electronic muffs are good and useful, but you get what you pay for. The $30 electronic muffs my friend and I have are monaural. One microphone (but a speaker inside each side of the muffs) means there is no directional information. His have broken twice.
Click to expand...

My original statement, with underlining added, was:

Sportsman's Guide and some other have inexpensive ones that will do for HD use -- and are much better than nothing!! -- for around $30.
Click to expand...

That's not suggesting you should use them for the range, or that they're made of granite or something unbreakable -- only that they'll protect your ears in the house. If the electronics die, they'll still offer hearing protection. I've bought two sets, and they've been pretty reliable. (I generally use Peltor electronic muffs, myself, but carry the cheap extra pair in my gun bag -- and gave a set to my son for his infrequent range trips.)

Think of them as one-time-usage muffs -- only slightly more expensive than some non-electronic ones, and likely to get you through a potential crisis.
 
It sounds like you are fairly young. 20's to 30's. Hit 50 and the answer is MUCH different. While you may not register the sound cognitively due to the massive release of adrenaline, your ears ARE still damaged.
Click to expand...

Cougar's is one of the most intelligent posts I've yet to read on this subject.

I'd say that most of those who say "worry about neutralizing the threat, not your hearing" would probably regret that statement after the fact. Yes, you should be grateful to be alive but if at all possible, I'd love to live out the rest of my years with as much of my hearing as I can. Which has not been 100% for quite some time......because of shooting without protection. This is exactly why I completely disregard the .357Mag as a sporting or self defense cartridge. The relatively high pressure, small bore of the .357 produces an ear-splitting report and immense muzzle blast. So if I can get the same efficiency on target with less noise and blast, I will certainly do so. Which is why I prefer a moderately loaded big bore whether it's a .44Spl, .44Mag, .45ACP or .45Colt. Others would also suffice.
 
I agree with Walt and with Lost sheep. I understand that things like this can and WILL be fluid, and that one cannot always choose their situation. In which case it is likely and possible that I will break one or more of my own personal rules, but they are what I strive to adhere to.

About the shotgun and one shot... If there are 2 perps, there's gonna be 2 shots... But I REALLLY REALLLLLY do NOT want to have to shoot a person as long as I live. I'm out of the military, and find myself obligated to not shoot someone...

I genuinely hope the OP find's his perfect piece for the job.

But in my experience and training with weapons, there are no pistols or shotguns that will blind or partially blind you when firing them. Your eyesight may be dimmed, but it's a very long shot to even come close to diminishing your vision enough that you could not tell the perp from a family member.
 
Fact #1: If I was going to shoot a perp with a shotgun, I would need no more than ONE shot, and he would be dead or down.
Click to expand...
Ridiculous. Even the best shooters in the world miss sometimes. But even if you NEVER miss, are you saying that you know that you will never encounter multiple "perps"? If you can control things that well why not use that power to exclude "perps" from your home altogether?
If I were top use a Pistol, I would have a light on and there would be NO reason for flash to effect my sight.
Click to expand...
If you are able to dictate the circumstances of a shooting encounter to your satisfaction why not just declare that you won't have one? Ok, back to reality--the fact is that we don't get to choose how these situations unfold.
(hearing be dammed, it's your life that means something, not your hearing during a one time event)
Click to expand...
Life definitely ranks above hearing, but IF there is obviously time to don good quality electronic hearing protection it's worth the effort.
Fact #2: If I was to shoot at a perp in MY home, I would have a LIGHT ON, or I would NOT shoot.
Click to expand...
Glad to know that your house is a gun free zone if the power goes off... :D Seriously, there is absolutely no way to be so dogmatic about these situations. If a person were really have that much control over their universe it would be far wiser for them to simply dictate that no criminals are allowed to enter their home at all.
Fact #3: If I was EVER to pull the trigger in a SD situation in my own or another person's home, I would ONLY do so in Full recognition that the person I was squeezing off at was NOT Friend or Family!
Click to expand...
And that makes you different from every other member of TFL how? Do you really believe that there are TFL members who plan to shoot at people that they believe could be friends or family? :rolleyes:
Fact #4: If YOU or anyone else pulls the trigger in the dark or at something they cannot 100% identify to be a bad guy, they are the King of FOOLS. Simple & factual!

Fact #5: I will NEVER fire at an unidentified target, whether it be human, animal or Paper. If I cannot fully identify it I cannot shoot it. This should apply to EVERYONE that touches a firearm...
Click to expand...
Yes, we call that the first rule of gun safety. ;)
To take time to put on a set of ear muffs during a Home Invasion, or suspected home invasion, when you need to be 100% aware of everything, is a foolish thing to do in my opinion.
Click to expand...
It may have escaped your attention that the hearing protection being discussed here is electronic hearing protection. Good quality electronic hearing protection not only allows you to be 100% aware of everything, it can actually ENHANCE your awareness by providing better than normal hearing.
Accidents kill more loved ones than any other thing known to man.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Disease holds that distinction.
If you do NOT know what's going on after a shot, either yours or a perps, then you are in serious trouble...
Click to expand...
Yeah, ain't that the truth. That's why I advocate (when expedient) the use of equipment that will allow you to maintain full awareness--to include your sense of hearing.

I know what you're implying, but it's ridiculous. No one has the ability to predict how a self-defense situation will play out no matter how skilled or confident they are.
But in my experience and training with weapons, there are no pistols or shotguns that will blind or partially blind you when firing them.
Click to expand...
Actually it has more to do with the characteristics of the ammunition than the firearm itself. But I'm curious, how much low-light shooting have you done? I will readily admit that I've not been blessed with the opportunity to do a lot of it but even so I've found that some ammunition can definitely present enough flash to disrupt vision temporarily in low-light situations.
 
Thanks for all the replies.Ordinarily I would'nt even care but with a newborn in the house maybe I am thinking too much.
I have several calibers to choose from.Normally I keep a .45 beside the bed.My .357 sig(carry piece)is close by as well.I have an older .38 I could use as well.
I think I will keep the .45 as it is'nt much louder than the .38 but will make a bigger hole.
 
There was a group of abandoned building being demolished in the Twp that I work in. A few of us secured permission to go inside after the workers had left for the day and shoot various weapons inside. The gist of this was penetration tests with various guns and calibers. Two things that I want to share pertaining to "gun blast in small room(s)".

1. We had hearing protection on and the shots were loud but very tolerable.
What was amazing was the percussion that the bigger calibers emitted! The 7.62 fired inside a hallway is simply awe inspiring!

2. Before we left, I wanted to go into a small room, close the door and fire off a .40S&W round with no hearing protection on. It was loud and my ears rang for about a half hour but it was not so disorienting as you may imagine.
I personally would never "practice" that again, but it's really not the end of the world.

When I was about 12-13, my Uncle visited us from Ohio and my brothers and I went shooting with him. One of the guns he had was a .9mm P-08 Luger.
We were standing in a loose line and at that time I didn't have or wear hearing protection. Well, I either inched up some or he backed up some but whatever the case, when he fired a series of rounds, my right ear was almost even with the muzzle but about 4 feet away. I didn't want to appear as a "sissy" so when he shot, instead of covering my ears, I just stood my ground for 4-5 shots. My right ear rang for days and I'm convinced to this day that that is why my hearing is so bad in my right ear.

Unless you're trying an "experiment" of some sort, always wear some quality hearing protection. There's nothing to be gained by trying to be macho at 12 and partially deaf at 50! :)
 
It sounds like you are fairly young. 20's to 30's. Hit 50 and the answer is MUCH different. While you may not register the sound cognitively due to the massive release of adrenaline, your ears ARE still damaged.
Click to expand...

No cougar, I'm into my 60's. I have been shooting most of my life (both recreationally and occupationally) and, as an aircraft mechanic, I worked around jet engines most of my life (plus my secondary as gunsmith, replete with range testing). I do have some hearing loss, probably around 8-10%, mostly in mid-range, and mostly due to my year in Southeast Asia when hearing protection was not always available, or the times when I got caught with my pants down working the flightline for the airlines. (Ironically, I can still hear high frequency noises better than most with "normal" hearing.)

My point that everyone is missing is that in a HD scenario, firing one or two shots in close quarters isn't going to amount to a hill of beans insofar as hearing loss is concerned, and that is the LAST thing you need to be worried about.

Just a guess, but I daresay you have already lost more of your hearing from listening to loud music or driving your car with the windows down than you ever would from firing one or two shots in close quarters.

IMHO, some of the other suggestions, such as buying a silencer, or worrying about putting on earmuffs when someone is invading your home are the most asinine things I have ever heard. I mean, come on, we're talking here about something that, in all probability, will never happen anyway. (And I'm not saying that it couldn't happen, just that the odds are heavily in your favor that it won't.)
 
Confused, . . . just two comments.

You will not need to worry about the muzzle flash, . . . if there is enough light for you to ID your target as being worth shooting, . . . you will have enough light that the flash will not be a problem to you.

CraigC nailed the other comment, . . . that being about the .357 magnum. It is an awesome HD or SD round, . . . but the muzzle blast is just that, . . . a full fledged blast. I like the .45 ACP or even .45 LC in cowboy action loads as good HD or SD rounds as either has a much more mellow report, which should do less permanent damage.

May God bless,
Dwight
 
My point that everyone is missing is that in a HD scenario, firing one or two shots in close quarters isn't going to amount to a hill of beans insofar as hearing loss is concerned, and that is the LAST thing you need to be worried about.
Click to expand...
It's true that different people have different tolerances for noise before damage occurs, but I can tell you for certain that some people can lose significant hearing from one or two shots in close quarters.

My single shot indoors without hearing protection has left me with noticeable hearing loss and a friend of mine (former police officer) who was exposed to 3 close range handgun shots indoors also experienced noticeable hearing loss as a result.
IMHO, some of the other suggestions, such as buying a silencer, or worrying about putting on earmuffs when someone is invading your home are the most asinine things I have ever heard.
Click to expand...
I think if you can step back and be objective about this you will see that no one is suggesting putting on earmuffs when someone is invading their home. The difference between investigating a typical bump-in-the-night scenario and responding to a home invasion is tremendous.
 
Confused,

Good choice, a reliable 0.45 is a very good SD / HD firearm, and I am willing to bet that you are quite profficient with it.

I hope you never need it.

Brgds,

Danny
 
I disagree with the .22 advice. The few times I've fired mine without hearing protection was a big mistake. Sounded every bit as loud as my 9mm or .38spl.
Click to expand...
+1
I have been caught out at the range by all sorts of calibers firing when I wasn't expecting it and without my ear defenders on. In an enclosed space, the .22 report hurts.
 
This is what I know about the subject....

My son and I were talking about clearing rooms. I was speaking from the side of law enforcement. Of course, since this was my son, I was the smartbutt. Knew everything.

My son had just come back from Fallujah, while attached to 1st Bn 3rd Marines. He was an Artilleryman (C 1/12 Marines).

I was saying how the blast of a M4 type carbine would be deafening in a small room.

He shrugged, and said, "Nah. All you hear are pops."

Of course, I asked him what he meant.

My son looked at me. I remembered vividly walking with him where his hand was so small he could only hold on to two fingers. I remembered his pride in 6th grade, bringing home a report card with straight A's. I remembered his happiness and his running off with his best friend after graduation from high school.

Now, my son looked at me and told me that he and another Marine were clearing rooms in Fallujah. He told me that he walked into a room and he and his fellow Marine were met by two men, armed with AK's.

Then, he got quiet and looked away.

I asked him gently, "What happened?"

He looked at me and said simply, "Well, we came out."

Falls under the heading of "things that make Dads cringe".

I remember that I thought, "a lion in the desert roared at my son in that room. An American Eagle roared back. Eagle eats lion meat for dinner."

So, train with what you will use--whatever it is. Train long and hard. Train well. And here's hoping you never have to even aim your weapon at anything other than paper.
 
Quote:
I disagree with the .22 advice. The few times I've fired mine without hearing protection was a big mistake. Sounded every bit as loud as my 9mm or .38spl.
Click to expand...
+1
I have been caught out at the range by all sorts of calibers firing when I wasn't expecting it and without my ear defenders on. In an enclosed space, the .22 report hurts.
Click to expand...

I agree about .22 pistols. Rifles are quieter. Forgive or ignore the tangent if this interests no one.

I imagine that being hit by dozens of .22 bullets might be something like being hit with a shotgun loaded with moderately sized shot. Am I way off?

If not, a fully automatic 10/22 with one of those 50 or hundred round magazines seems like a viable alternative for home defense by someone who is noise or recoil sensitive. Such a rifle seems more easily handled by a 110 pound housewife than a shotgun would be.
 
Gyvel wrote:

My point that everyone is missing is that in a HD scenario, firing one or two shots in close quarters isn't going to amount to a hill of beans insofar as hearing loss is concerned, and that is the LAST thing you need to be worried about.
Click to expand...

Nobody's advocating that you NOT fire a weapon to protect your hearing rather than your life. Your life is more important than your hearing.

But you seem to be advocating a false choice: it's not hearing protection OR your life. You can protect both, and do it fairly inexpensively. And, arguably improve your survival ability, too. (The electronic muffs can AMPLIFY sounds in the area, not just block the sound of gunfire.)

This isn't a MACHO thing. It only takes a fraction of a minute longer to put the muffs on as you grab your weapon.

Your nonchalance about hearing loss makes you seem like someone who has lost several fingers playing with fire works who says, "so what, I've still got all these fingers on my other hand... Got a match?!"

If you've bene exposed to all those things that can harm you're hearing, and you're only down 8%-10% at your age, you need to seriously consider playing the lottery! You're going to hit it big, one of these days!!

I'm 65, have led a sedentary life, always used hearing protection while shooting, and am down more than that -- and really notice it when in places like a restaurant or with small groups. Voices sort of disappear in some contexts.
 
zukiphile,

Please forgive me, but I disagree with you.

I have no doubts that being shot multiple times with a 0.22 will be similar, or maybe even worst than being shot once with a shotgun.

The problem is that in a SD/HD situation you need to incapacitate your oponent (s?) before they can inflict enough damage to you to put you out of commission. Therefore, I think that trying to hit an oponent with a 0.22 enough times to disable him to the point that he no longer poses a risk may take too long, particularly if you are facing more than one.


Also, going back to the OP, I think that if one checked, we would find that the effect of firing multiple 0.22 rounds in a room on your ears will be worst than firing one or 2 rounds of 9mm, 0.45, 0.38 etc. so this would not be of any advantage.

Indeed a shotgun maybe too much gun for a small person, but that does not leave the 0.22 as the only option left.
Consider my wife for example; she weighs 46 KG (about 110 pounds or less), her carry gun is a glock in 0.357 Sig, and she is very proficient with all the guns that I own. This coming weekend we are both participating in the national championsip for pin-shooting, where we are representing our province in the men and ladies teams. She will be competing with my Colt 1911 (0.45), S&W586 (0.357 Mag) and Browning HP (9mm).
Indeed a shotgun maybe too much gun for a small person, but that does not leave the 0.22 as the only option left.

Back to the OP, when choosing an SD/HD gun, one should consider using a gun he/she can shoot well, in a caliber that is highly likely to incapacitate an oponent with one or two shots to COM, or that if it hits a limb, that limb becomes incapacitated (not " blown off" A LA Mall Ninja speak, just not useful)

Brgds,

Danny
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top