The Internet Has a Rat Poison Problem

The way gun suppressors work in movies and TV is complete fiction, in real life suppressors can attenuate gun shots by maybe 15-35 dB SPL at best. 140 dB SPL is the threshold at which sound causes pain, 120 dB SPL is the threshold that risks instantaneous noise-induced hearing loss, and most rifles and handguns using standard ammunition are in the 140-170 dB SPL range. Even with a suppressor the volume a typical gun produces is enough to be painful and to cause permanent hearing loss if no additional hearing protection is used. In the typical best case scenario using an extremely underpowered subsonic .22LR round with a suppressor a gun shot will still be in the 120 dB SPL range, and for reference, hunting even small muntjac deer with a .22LR would be considered inhumane and in many parts of the world (including many American states) it is illegal to do so. It is a round intended to shoot rodents and birds.

I realise this comment is a nitpick but it's something that needs to be brought up any time suppressors are brought up. The only relevance suppressors have on the gun control argument is that their use and sale means that gun operators have less risk of suffering from hearing loss (especially when shooting indoors in a range) and people living near shooting ranges are less likely to complain about noise, i.e., there's no public safety argument here, it's purely ideological, and that's fine if it's what you're going for but it's not a compelling argument or one that holds up to scrutiny. As a point of comparison, there's very little controversy over suppressors in Europe and typically no additional regulations are placed on their ownership beyond the regulations necessary to own the guns that they're used with.

It also has a gray market problem.

I ordered a webcam on Amazon, some time ago. Amazon had it listed as “official,” and had a link to the manufacturer’s store page at the top. It was a “Fulfilled by Amazon” product, which should have told me that it wasn’t actually coming from the manufacturer, as the listing led me to believe.

However, when I received the device, it was the Chinese version (gray market), with a fairly crude sticker on the box, claiming that it was the US version (it wasn’t), even though all the packaging was Chinese. After I returned it for a refund, I attempted to write a review on the page, warning of the scam, complete with a photo of the sticker, and the review was rejected by Amazon. They completely ignored my reports. As far as I know, the item is still listed, with hundreds of positive reviews (I just checked -it is).

It’s fairly obvious that Amazon is directly and knowingly working with sketchy vendors, and actively suppressing attempts to expose these practices. I’m wondering if there’s a bottom to this. I think it would take a fairly aggressive effort, by multiple governments, to stop it, and I suspect the will is not there. There’s probably a lot of money being made, and many people would be perfectly happy with the gray market device (until they try to upgrade it, or get it fixed).

I did let the manufacturer know (when I ordered the real device, directly from them). I saw many complaints on the manufacturer’s support site about the same exact issue (which is why gray markets are such a brand-damaging problem). I would not be surprised if the manufacturer was afraid to do anything about it, as Amazon is an 800lb gorilla.

Brodifacoum? I don’t buy that on Amazon, I buy it at my local supermarket. Not the US, Australia. I’ve never heard any controversy about availability of brodifacoum in Australia (maybe some environmental or animal welfare group has complained, but if so I haven’t heard about it)

Glue traps, now that’s controversial. In the state of Victoria, illegal to use in residential settings (on animal welfare grounds), but still legal to use in some agricultural and industrial settings. I’m in New South Wales where residential use is legal, but you won’t find them on sale except in rural supply stores

No, you can get literal Hollywood quiet with suppressors. If you’ve never gotten to experience that, sorry I guess haha.

A Kel-Tec CP33 or Ruger MKIV with various forms of attached suppressors or integrated suppressors shooting CCI subsonic .22 is Hollywood quiet. Less noise than a BB gun.

There are various other calibers that can get pretty damn close to as quiet as those as well.

For your traditional military calibers across the globe - yes, they’re still pretty damn loud suppressed. I think .50 bmg or Lapua suppressed is still as loud as 7.62x39 unsuppressed.

But to say you can’t get Hollywood quiet is simply incorrect, and there’s still a factor of louder calibers pitch being changed to something that a person not in the immediate vicinity could confuse as construction instead of gunfire.

As much as I personally enjoy suppressors… I do have issue with the fact anybody can get their hands on one next day. Just work for a gun range in any mid sized town for two weeks and your honest thoughts about just about literally anybody being able to obtain a firearm will likely change. People are fucking dumb man.

If you have a big enough garden, you could put an owl nest box in a calm place when the owlets constant screeching noise will not suppose a problem. Owls can be territorial and attack to protect the nest also, so leave them far from the house and alone. Unlike traps, they will catch ten mice by night each night and will dispose of the corpses so you don't need to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P-KWBSbis4