Quite possibly they do do more damage. I've no idea. But I feel this isn't about that. There's huge debates that could come from this about stuff like who does more harm to planet. I'm not a mad environmentalist so I hope it doesn't come across like that. I simply don't see why the bangs are necessary when they causes so much harm. I think from your thread you agree, drones and light shows would be an ideal solution!
I'm not really a massive MN commenter but someone posted something early on that I felt needed a response and it's spiralled (and I don't believe that person responded to my points so they've either ignored it, or hopefully they've either took stock of what they said)
I understand there's a huge bigger picture that people have brought up.... ie "lots of you can't care about animals if you eat meat", the politics of using the red panda to promote an argument about fireworks, whether the animals injured do more harm than fireworks. It's too complex. The bare bones for me really is, yes lots of people like the fireworks but ultimately the bangs causes a lot of harm to animals and people so why not have best of both worlds and have just silent organised displays?
The noise of a firework indisputably causes considerable distress to an animal. Whether someone likes animals or not, I think you have to question who is comfortable causes such intense distress to another living creature for what is ultimately less than 30 minutes of enjoyment watching lights and bangs when there's an easy solution that suits everyone. We watch the displays for 30 mins , enjoy the lights, prob enjoy a pie and pint and then trot off home and off to bed all forgotten about. For the sake of our 30 mins of fun, some poor animals is utterly distressed. Some dog owner is heartbroken watching their large dog trying to squeeze themself into a tiny spot to cower from noise etc. it's not really justifiable to me.