I feel bad for the residents who can no longer fully enjoy their property because they’ve become obsessed with the Cranston Police Department’s shooting range.

But, I’m sorry to say, as a neighbor, I can’t relate.

I’ve spent most of my life living less than a mile from the range, my entire primary and secondary education was spent within earshot of the range, and my home office -- where I love to have the windows open -- faces it.

Compared to the other the background sounds of living in a populated area -- the car driving by with the radio blaring, the revved-up engine belonging to a teen getting out of class, the neighbor who insists on blasting opera and that guy across the street who randomly (and I mean randomly) sets off a single cherry bomb on his sidewalk -- the occasional crackle of the firing range is almost soothing.

I was struck by a few things in the Brown University Community Noise Lab report.

At the distance from where I live, shooting at the range increased the peak noise level by less than 3 decibels. Compared with the background level before the shooting started, which was 67 dBA, that’s not a big increase. (When you’re flying in a plane, the drone is 80 dBA, according to the report.) In fact, among the five locations measured, the largest increase was less than 4 dBA.

Also, I was disturbed by the report’s open call for stories from residents bothered by the shooting range. Apparently stories such as mine are not welcome, suggesting that the work of the Brown University Community Noise Lab is neither impartial nor objective. Real research is supposed to be both.

Finally, to hear people predict that students, teachers and administrators wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between the shots coming from a firing range located two or three ballfields away, and an active shooter at the other end of the corridor at Cranston West is ridiculous.

Gene Emery

Meshanticut