Any time I see the New York Times is running a big story on firearms, I always steel myself for a healthy dose of anti-gun activism disguised as journalism. And at first glance, the paper’s latest piece, entitled “Target Shooting Could Be Causing Brain Injuries,” looks to be just another attack on gun ownership designed for its liberal readers, but its message is one that many gun owners may actually find benefical.
The gist of the Times report is that target shooting, particularly indoors, generates concussive blast waves that can hurt the brain.
The data showed that some large-caliber civilian rifles delivered a blast wave that exceeds what the military says is safe for the brain, and firing smaller-caliber guns repeatedly could quickly add up to potentially harmful exposure. The data also showed that indoor shooting ranges designed to make shooting safe inadvertently make blast exposure worse — doubling and sometimes tripling the amplitude of the blast.
Now, as it turns out, the “some large-caliber civilian rifles” mentioned by the Times in its lede turns out to be one large caliber rifle… and one that you won’t find at most indoor ranges.
The smaller-caliber weapons that The Times tested at an indoor range created blasts that measured 1.3 P.S.I. on average — far below the military’s 4 p.s.i safety threshold.
But one gun far exceeded what the military says is safe. A .50-caliber rifle — one of the more powerful guns on the market, which shoots a thumb-sized high-velocity projectile originally designed to pierce vehicle armor — measured 7.6 P.S.I. on average when fired from a prone position.
The guns tested by the Times that had the highest P.S.I. were the aforementioned .50-caliber rifle and a .50-caliber Desert Eagle handgun, with a P.S.I. of 3.6. A .500 Mag revolver had an average P.S.I. of 2.9, but most of the other firearms came in comfortably under 2 P.S.I.
Still, as the Times says, over time those concussive blasts can add up. It’s probably not an issue for those gun owners who don’t regularly spend time on the firing line, but for competitive shooters and those who visit their local range as often as possible it’s something to keep in mind.
I expected the paper’s report to conclude with a quote or two from an anti-gun neurologist or academic from Johns Hopkins warning gun owners to stay away from the range, but I was pleasantly surprised to isntead see support for the use of an accessory long demonized by gun control activists.
Fortunately, there are simple ways to limit exposure. The Times found that shooting in an open outdoor setting, rather than in an enclosed booth, can cut blast levels by more than half. When shooting indoors, ensuring that the gun barrel extends beyond the booth can reduce exposure. Choosing smaller caliber weapons and less powerful ammunition can also help.
Attaching a suppressor or blast regulator to the muzzle to direct the blast forward and away from the shooter can also make a big difference. In The Times testing, the blast from firing an AR-15 rifle indoors measured as high as 1.7 P.S.I. When a blast regulator was added, the measurement fell to less than 0.5 P.S.I.
We talk a lot about the beneficial aspects of suppressors when it comes to our hearing, but if this is true then there’s another important reason why suppressors should be deregulated and treated the same as any other accessory. Suppressors not only make for good neighbors when shooting outdoors. It appears they’re hugely helpful in reducing the concussive effects of gunshots at indoor ranges too.
With the $200 tax on suppressors disappearing on January 1 as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, these items will likely become even more commonplace than they already are. Still, so long as they’re restricted under the National Firearms Act, purchasing these devices will continue to be more complicated than it should be. It would be ironic if an anti-gun outlet like the New York Times actually helped to remove suppressors from the NFA entirely, but this report provides even more ammunition for those hoping to to de-regulate the devices and normalize suppressor ownership.
Editor’s Note: The Schumer Shutdown is here. Rather than put the American people first, Chuck Schumer and the radical Democrats forced a government shutdown for healthcare for illegals. They own this.
Help us continue to report the truth about the Schumer Shutdown. Use promo code POTUS47 to get 74% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here
