Papers on differentiating gunshot from firecrackers

>>33060258
protip:
this image will scare away actual replies

>>33060258
I'll wait for an English translation before trying to answer the question

>>33060258
I honestly don't think there's any sort of academically valid, citeable source on this in existence. Gunshots are simply sharper and louder in general, more like fireworks than firecrackers, but that's it. The best way to do it would be to hear them yourself, but I suppose that's hardly valid as a source.

>>33060258
anyone who has heard a gunshot irl can tell the difference between a car backfiring or a firecracker and a gunshot

tell him to look into those systems american cities set up to detect and localize gunshots, those things don't pick up car backfires or firecrackers. the things that they mount on HMMWVs that can detect snipers also avoid activating when they hear things that aren't gunshots but do sound like explosions

heres some links i pulled out of my ass

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunfire_locator
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_source_localization
http://www.shotspotter.com/
http://www.shotspotter.com/contact
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artillery_sound_ranging
www.shooterdetectionsystems.com

>>33060258
They don't sound the same at the same distance but a firecracker going off at 30 ft can sound a lot like a gun going off at 100 ft. It's still not the same though but I doubt you'll get that in writing with some kind of expert credentials backing it.

However the idea of security waving off a potential gunshot as a firecracker is retarded (unless there is some specific precedent of firecrackers going off in that area).

>>33060356
Fair enough
>>33060469
Hurr durr. Is there any citable, valid source on the topic on telling gunshots and firecrackers etc apart? Better?

>>33060507
We both know how a gunshot sounds different from other things, but he's writing some 5k symbol paper on the topic and he needs sources. So writing it off with "It sounds different, you mongs" isn't gonna do it.

>>33060529
Very helpful. Cheers, mate, those are some good leads.

>>33060632
Indeed, being a quarter mile from a range can sound a lot like some kids firing off firecrackers next street, but hey, as i said to >>33060507
And I am just going to say that A) people are retarded pretty often B) that's what his proffesors say, which leads you back to point A.

Thanks, people.

>>33060258
Not to answer your question but nailing a tin roof sounds like a .22 at a distance. Only thing that I know of that comes close to a gun shot.

>>33060258
maybe tell your idiot friend to use the resources offered by his University and access a database. Jstor or the like.

>>33061039
>buy firecracker
>record at distance
>shoot gun (you DO have a gun, don't you?)
>record at distance

>rip the audio, bring it into Audacity. Print screen the very obvious decibel difference.

Now you have a primary resource AND a graph.

>>33061066
Hah! Yeah, I did that one time too. My thoughts exactly. Altough working on a sunny summer day on a rooftop is a sure way to heatstroke. Hell of a thing.

File: kill a muslim.png (264KB, 502x337px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 502x337px

>>33061109
>rip the audio, bring it into Audacity. Print screen the very obvious decibel difference.
I would honestly say it's less of a decibel difference and more about how the "explosion" itself sounds. Firecrackers might not sound like guns, but fireworks are loud enough to fool an inexperienced ear.

>>33061171
>inexperienced ear

Well I guess you got your work cut out for you then. You need to make the inexperience ear an experienced ear. At some random point during your presentation draw your CCW and fire it at the projector screen (make sure the barrel is always pointed in a safe direction though)

That way they'll know what it sounds like

>>33060258
a gunshot is like 10x louder than a fucking firecracker