Would one really lose hearing firing 357 indoors in home defense scenario?

[WR Moore]

Originally posted by MCVenner:
Certainly the .357 Magnum was the standard service cartridge of most U.S. police departments from the 1920s through the 1980s. That translates to a lot of cops, firing a lot of rounds, indoors, without ear protection. They didn't all suffer permanent hearing effects.

Since the .357 Magnum wasn't developed until the mid 1930's there's a problem with your comment.

Before the widespread use of hearing protection, ALL firearms users experienced hearing loss. There just wasn't any significant standardized hearing testing going on. Also, since they generally fired a whole lot less rounds, it didn't set in until much later in life-generally after they retired. The hearing loss would then be blamed on old age.

 

[Wyatt Earp]

The more I think about this, the more I am convinced that the tactical benefit of electronic noise cancelling hearing protection muffs outweigh any perceived disadvantages.

You can hear BETTER before you shoot AND PROTECT your hearing from gunfire when you do shoot.

Win-win if you ask me. I'm getting a pair ASAP.

 

[Ron H.]

Would one really lose hearing firing 357 indoors in home defense scenario?

Sir, in a word, no. But it's still not a good idea.

20-ish years ago, I had an ND with a 4-inch .357 and full-power factory loads (Remington 158-grain JHPS, IIRC) about a foot away from my unprotected right ear. I was indoors at the time. I was not deafened, not even temporarily, but my ears rang for a couple days afterward. The ringing in my right ear took longer to go away than my left.

I'm sure that stupid event contributed considerably to the hearing loss I have now.

Anyway, all that being so, I prefer quieter rounds for indoor use, such as .45 ACP.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

 

[flop-shank]

Originally posted by tanksoldier:

Would one really lose hearing firing 357 indoors in home defense scenario?

Possible.

However, you'd have to survive the encounter to worry about hearing loss.

Anyone who chooses a HD weapon based on this criteria has their priorities misplaced.

That depends as long as that choice doesn't make the homeowner choose an inferior cartridge. Lower pressure could be a tie breaker that might make someone choose .45 ACP over .40 S&W or 9MM, or .44 spl. over .357magnum. I can't fault that reasoning, although that's not what I based my decision on. The .45 and .44 spl. are both very capable cartridges.

 

[buckeyeshooter]

It would be a lot less noise than an ar-15 in 223 going off inside

 

[SmithSwede]

When I was a stupid teenager, I deliberately fired a few rounds of full charge 158 grain .357 Mag indoors without ear protection out of a 4" Security Six. I wanted to know "how loud it would sound."

As I recall, there was some ringing in my ears, but it went away in a few minutes. I was certainly not made immediately deaf, nor was I rendered dazed and disoriented. And yes, it was LOUD.

It is true that nowadays I have some high frequency hearing loss, and that stupid stunt could have contributed to it. But it's also true that I shot lots of .22LR without hearing protectors, listened to loud music, rode loud motorcycles, and generally did bad things to my ears for decades, until I wised up.

In my humble opinion, this is just not something to worry about in a self-defense situation.

If you are really justified in shooting, that's because you are in reasonable fear for your life, not just fear for your hearing. I'm not going to be upset about the outcome if I survive the gunfight but have a bit more hearing loss afterwards.

I certainly would not want to be confronting a 350 pound, drunken bad guy and remembering that I selected my ammunition not for its effectiveness or its controllability, but because I wanted to make sure that my hearing would not be harmed in my last few minutes on earth.

On the other hand, I believe good .38 special +P is plenty effective, so you aren't losing much if you chose that over the louder magnum stuff. But if you belive that the Magnum stuff is much more effective, and the Specials are wimpy, then I don't see why you would reject the Magnums on the basis trying to protect your hearing.

Having said all that, for any kind of shooting that is not an absolute life-or-death emergency, I wear both ear plug and ear muffs--religiously. And if I had to go outside to shoot a feral dog or coyote, I probably would pause to put on hearing protectors or swap the Magnums for some hot Specials.

 

[Capt Steve]

Many years ago I went from normal hearing to severe tinnitus. All it took was one round from a 357 fired 12" from my unprotected ears. I was at the firing line plinking with my 22 rifle, thus no ear protection. Thinking it would be funny, this joker popped off the 357 next to my left ear. It was probably made worse due to my being forward of the muzzle. In any case after a couple of weeks and the ringing never stopped the joke was on me. My hearing has continued to deteriorate over the years and now without my hearing aides I am nearly stone deaf.

The ultimate irony is knowing that for years my mother lied to me. She always told me I'd go blind. (o;

 

[biggs357]

I load my snubnose and 4 inch 686 both with 110gr jhp Federal .38 rounds,far less recoil and noise.At 5 to 7 feet they are as effective as anything else i have.

 

[LoboGunLeather]

First priority in the scenario given is to survive, thus protecting one's hearing is a little further down the list.

Second point: the best .357 magnum performance from a 2.5" barrel is closely comparable (velocity and energy) to performance of the same bullet weights in a 6-inch .38 Special. No getting around it, you just aren't going to achieve maximum performance of any cartridge out of a snubby tube.

Next point to consider is the use of .357 magnum ammunition in a residential area. I was involved in an on-duty shooting situation years ago. Armed robbery suspect was shot with .357 mag. 125-gr. JHP Remington from a 4-inch Model 19 at about 12 yards distance. Bullet passed through the bad guy's shoulder, breaking two bones, exited at a downward angle, ricocheted off a concrete curb, went through a 2X4 porch railing, penetrated the exterior wall of a frame house, went through an interior wall of the house, lodged in a third wall. Total bullet travel was about 35 yards.

The third wall was in a bedroom, about 3 feet from an infant sleeping in a crib. I was so scared that I actually puked, then fell over in it.

I stopped using magnum ammunition anywhere near any human development. My duty loads from that point onward were .38 Special +P 158 gr. SWC-HP (the so-called FBI load), for as long as I was required to carry a revolver.

Even the best, most highly developed defensive ammunition cannot be relied upon to perform perfectly 100% of the time.

My primary home defense weapon? Remington 870 12-gauge pump shotgun, I/C choke, loaded with 2-3/4", 1-1/4 oz. BB shot. I don't believe that the target would be able to tell the difference between that and buckshot at the ranges involved, and I am certain that one interior wall would reduce pellet velocity and energy to very low levels. And the sound of racking the slide might just be enough to avoid a confrontation.

My primary defensive handgun? .45 ACP, 230-grain Black Talons (purchased before I retired, not available to the general public).

My back-up? S&W M-37 Airweight Chief Special, 148-grain hollow-base wadcutter (loaded backward, hollow-base forward) over 3 grains of Bullseye (for about 700 FPS). Hits like a sledgehammer, try one on a gallon milk jug filled with water; you can't make it penetrate all the way through, but the slug will be at least double caliber-diameter when recovered.

The first point made in law enforcement firearms training is that the shooter is completely responsible for the bullet from the time it leaves the muzzle until it comes to rest. Everything that happens in between is on your shoulders forever.

 

[OHIOUP]

My ears have been ringing constantly for over 20 years. I care about what's left of my hearing. To that end, both my wife and I keep amplified/noise cancelling ear protection at our bedside. The advantages have already been identified, namely: one's hearing is enhanced and protected. The question is whether we would have time or feel we have time to reach for hearing protection first and firearm second if we heard the bump in the night. That said, I'm beginning to think the 148gr. 38 wadcutter idea makes a great deal of sense both from the noise reduction and defensive effectiveness standpoint.

 

[WR Moore]

I'm rather amazed at the number of folks who've said that shooting indoors without hearing protection won't damage your hearing and then go on to list the hearing damage they've experienced.

Guys, hearing damage is cummulative, progressive and permanent. The only good thing about my current ability to hear is that I have a doctors certification to prove to my wife that I'm NOT ignoring her, I didn't hear her.

I'm not saying not to defend yourself, just plan ahead. I don't go looking for bumps in the night without amplified ears, haven't for decades.

 

[Andy Taylor]

Originally posted by LoboGunLeather:

The first point made in law enforcement firearms training is that the shooter is completely responsible for the bullet from the time it leaves the muzzle until it comes to rest. Everything that happens in between is on your shoulders forever.

Truer words have never been spoken. May I borrow that phrase to post on the bulliten board for my officers?

 

[Ron H.]

Originally posted by WR Moore:
I'm rather amazed at the number of folks who've said that shooting indoors without hearing protection won't damage your hearing and then go on to list the hearing damage they've experienced.

Guys, hearing damage is cummulative, progressive and permanent.

Sir, perhaps I misread the original post, but the OP seems to be asking whether firing one cylinder-full of .357s indoors without ear protection will deafen you or take you straight from good hearing to tinnitus in one fell swoop.

Based on my limited experience, the answer to both those questions is "no."

Will it damage your hearing? Yes indeedy, as noted previously.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

 

[flop-shank]

Originally posted by LoboGunLeather:
Next point to consider is the use of .357 magnum ammunition in a residential area. I was involved in an on-duty shooting situation years ago. Armed robbery suspect was shot with .357 mag. 125-gr. JHP Remington from a 4-inch Model 19 at about 12 yards distance. Bullet passed through the bad guy's shoulder, breaking two bones, exited at a downward angle, ricocheted off a concrete curb, went through a 2X4 porch railing, penetrated the exterior wall of a frame house, went through an interior wall of the house, lodged in a third wall. Total bullet travel was about 35 yards.

The third wall was in a bedroom, about 3 feet from an infant sleeping in a crib. I was so scared that I actually puked, then fell over in it.

I stopped using magnum ammunition anywhere near any human development. My duty loads from that point onward were .38 Special +P 158 gr. SWC-HP (the so-called FBI load), for as long as I was required to carry a revolver.

My primary defensive handgun? .45 ACP, 230-grain Black Talons (purchased before I retired, not available to the general public).

I have never tested them, but my understanding is that that Black Talon load is a very deep penetrator and likely to overpenetrate. You may want to research that if you haven't already.

If that is Remington's .357 125 gr. SJHP (R357M1) to which you are referring, it is no more likely to overpenetrate than any other defensive round. The .357 is no more prone to overpenetration than any other cartridge with well designed ammo. When did this happen?

 

[feldspar13]

I have fired a 9mm indoors couldn't hear much
of any thing for 30 mins or so and have sustained permanent damage to my hearing in my left ear

 

[Wyatt Earp]

Since I have to remember to put on my glasses (which are on top of my night table every night) to function if the SHTF, I can also remember to put on a set of ear muffs just as fast, then grab the pistol.

 

[Outrider]

When I first bought a .357 back in 1983 -- and had only fired a .38 previously -- I took it to an old stone quarry to test it out.

I was completely ignorant about the differences in a .357 and .38 -- and didn't realize the quarry's stone walls would amplify the sound many times over.

I got educated really, really, really quickly -- and part of me still can't believe I was so naive at that point.

I took precaustions against ricochets, but couldn't have ever conceived of how loud the sound would be.

I fired 6 times as rapidly as possible -- and was immediately struck almost stone deaf.

In fact, I was deaf for nearly three weeks -- and terrified that my hearing would never recover.

Finally, after about a month and a half, it inched up bit by bit -- until two really large globs of wax worked out of both ears.

My hearing now is actually a little bit better than average for my age -- with only a tiny bit of high end loss.

However, my ear doctor said I was extremely lucky -- and apparently only the fact that I had a lot of compacted ear wax I didn't know about saved me.

Still, both of my ear drums are perforated -- and it's probably only a matter of time before they tear further.

I understand that ear doctors now have a bonding agent -- almost like super glue -- they can put on the perforation. That's one of my objectives soon -- to find out more about this repair.

I also understand the opening your mouth slightly when you shoot without hearing protection equalizes the pressure somewhat -- and may lessen the damage. Army range instructors used to teach this -- and it might just be an Old Sergeant's Tale.

Also, pretty strong research indicates having adequate magnesium levels in your body -- of all things -- seems to have some protective benefit to hearing against gunfire and other loud, sudden noises. Some 60 percent of us don't have even close to the right amount of magnesium.

I take Shaklee products -- and believe me, I make certain I get plenty of magnesium (which also seems to help prevent heart attacks.)

Nevertheless, even when hunting -- if I possibly can -- I have some form of hearing protection.

I'd never fire a .357 indoors -- ever -- after what I went through -- or a 10mm either.

Ironically, up to the point of my "enlightenment,"

I'd been highly protective of my hearing -- because my father lost most of his as an anti-aircraft gunner.

 

[Capt Steve]

"Sir, perhaps I misread the original post, but the OP seems to be asking whether firing one cylinder-full of .357s indoors without ear protection will deafen you or take you straight from good hearing to tinnitus in one fell swoop.

Based on my limited experience, the answer to both those questions is "no.""

Ron, I guess you didn't read my previous post. The answer is a resounding YES! (sorry to yell but I am seriously deaf). It happened to me outside, inside would only be worse. The loss of ones hearing is a handicap I would not wish on my worst enemy. Until you lose it you have no idea how precious normal hearing is. Helen Keller said that the loss of hearing was far worse than the loss of sight. Something to think about. In an emergency, certainly the preservation of life is paramount but preservation of your hearing is a close second.

 

[BugBeard]

The many responses and viewpoints, as usual on this forum, are great!

It sounds like the prudent thing to cover all the angles would be to get the amplified protection, assuming one wants to incur the various dimensions of cost inherent in such a scheme.

I may very well do that as I just might be anal retentive enough to actually stash them in various caches about my dwelling.

(Or just put a pair by the bedside

.)

I've already incurred minor hearing loss and mild tinnitus (it has to be fairly quiet) from listening to music at work for countless hours straight without a break so I am actively being careful about this now.

Thanks again for the input, it is very enlightening.

I will still fire 357 from my 5 shot carry revolver though. I think I will swap out the short barrel ammo and go for a full house 125gr load though. Having only 5 shots makes one really want to make sure that each hit achieves devastating impact.

 

[Ron H.]

Originally posted by Capt Steve:
"Sir, perhaps I misread the original post, but the OP seems to be asking whether firing one cylinder-full of .357s indoors without ear protection will deafen you or take you straight from good hearing to tinnitus in one fell swoop.

Based on my limited experience, the answer to both those questions is "no.""

Ron, I guess you didn't read my previous post. The answer is a resounding YES! (sorry to yell but I am seriously deaf). It happened to me outside, inside would only be worse. The loss of ones hearing is a handicap I would not wish on my worst enemy. Until you lose it you have no idea how precious normal hearing is. Helen Keller said that the loss of hearing was far worse than the loss of sight. Something to think about. In an emergency, certainly the preservation of life is paramount but preservation of your hearing is a close second.

Sir, I read your post, and my experience (see my original post on page 2 of this thread) differs from yours.

[shrug]

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.