How is a metal tube with some washers in it so hard to obtain? And, why does the government make us pay them $200 as a “tax stamp”? What even is a tax stamp…?
In this post I will cover the origin of suppressors, their intended purpose, why they became so hard to get, what the data says about gun violence with suppressors, and why suppressors as a NFA item is bogus and unconstitutional. Off safe.
Table of Contents
The Birth of the Silencer
Hiram Percy Maxim, a distinguished inventor of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, made significant contributions across various fields, including electricity, automobiles, aviation, radio, and sound suppression. Graduating from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology at 17, Maxim’s most notable invention was the Maxim Silencer, the first truly successful firearm suppressor. Being a genius investor must be genetic since his father, Sir Hiram Maxim, is known for creating the Maxim machine gun.
Hiram Percy Maxim inherited his father’s engineering skills, initially working in the electric industry before venturing into the rapidly growing automobile sector.
By 1892, he was developing internal combustion engines. leading to innovations in automobile muffler systems to reduce noise and exhaust after he found engines of the day were too loud and unenjoyable. This work inspired his creation of the Maxim Silencer in 1909, which employed a series of curved vanes to redirect and cool muzzle gases, thereby reducing firearm noise. This design laid the foundation for modern suppressors.
Silencer or Suppressor?
Besides being a great inventor, Hiram Maxim was also excellent at marketing. Calling his new invention a “silencer” brought a certain allure in making the claim that his new invention would eliminate all noise when fired.
The change to “suppressor” came around as manufacturers tried to change the negative connotation around silencers. Additionally, the term suppressor is a more realistic description since most suppressed firearms measure at ~140 decibels. A car horn is around 107 decibels as a comparison.
Today, most people refer to these devices as suppressors while the ATF still calls them silencers.
The Suppressor Gets Banned
The 1920s and 1930s were a crazy time in America. Society went from The Great Gatsby’s Roaring Twenties to the Grapes of Wrath’s Great Depression in only 10 years.
With the passing of the 18th Amendment (Prohibition) in 1920, the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol became illegal. This, spurred with the Great Depression in 1929, opened the door to organized crime. Famous gangsters like Al Capone took advantage of America’s desire for alcohol by running bootleg alcohol networks.
Gangsters like Capone would use weapons like the Thompson submachine gun and sawed off shotguns to defend themselves from police. This rise in organized crime brought the weapons used by gangsters into lawmaker’s crosshairs (pun intended).
The 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA)
The NFA applied a $200 tax stamp on the weapons used by organized crime and applied harsher penalties if this tax stamp was not paid. Purchasing one of these firearms required additional registration.
Q: Did gangsters use suppressors?
A: Not really, the most notable suppressor usage was on .22 cal hushpuppy pistols.
Q: So why did lawmakers throw suppressors into the NFA?
A: The inclusion of suppressors in the National Firearms Act of 1934 seems to have been influenced more by public perception and fears about their potential for criminal use, rather than widespread actual use by gangsters.
The dramatic portrayal of suppressors in the media and their association with both assassins and gangsters played a role in shaping public opinion and legislation.
The Role of Fear and Media in Public Perception
News outlets, even in the 1920’s, love to stretch the truth.
The New York Times published a column on December 17, 1920 titled: “SLAYERS ESCAPE POLICE NET” with subtitle “Score of Detectives on Avenue as Daylight Robbers Flee – SILENCER USED ON GUN”.
The only mention of “silencer” in the column is in this one paragraph:
“Mr. Andrews had returned from lunch, following a long-established custom of the partners Mr. Winsten had gone out. When the bandits entered the office Mr. Andrews was alone. There was evidence that he had offered resistance, but neighboring tenants had heard no unusual noise. This gave rise to the theory that the bandits used silencers on their weapons”.
Here is another New York Times column which mentioned silencer from 1924 titled “MERCHANT SHOT DEAD ON VISIT TO FIANCEE”, with subtitle “Slayer, With Silencer on Rifle, Pumps Bullets Into Victim’s Back in Brooklyn”.
The mention of “silencer” appears here:
“The slayer fired five shots from a rifle through a kitchen window overlooking the yard while Panno was drinking a cup of tea with his prospective sister-in-law. The murderer was believed to have used a silencer on the rifle, as neither Miss Valente nor any other person in the vicinity heard the shots”
Both of these examples don’t provide hard evidence a silencer was used, but it does make people want to buy the paper.
Sites like The Trace love to use these old articles to substantiate the reason suppressors must be kept under strict control by the government. Once you dive 1 inch past the surface, you can quickly see things don’t add up.
How Many Crimes Are Committed with Suppressors?
You would think suppressors would account for at least ¼ of murders in America based on the rhetoric the media uses. However, when you look at the data, that couldn’t be further from the truth.
The Facts (source):
- Federal Prosecutions (1995-2005): Out of 153 federal cases involving silencers, only two were associated with murder. The majority of these cases pertained to possession offenses rather than active use in violent crimes.
- State-Level Data (California, 2000-2005): In California, there were over 1,000 reported armed robbery cases involving firearms during this period. However, instances where silencers were used were extremely rare, constituting fewer than 0.1% of these cases.
- Criminal Records of Offenders: Individuals prosecuted for silencer-related offenses were less likely to have prior criminal records compared to those convicted of crimes involving unsilenced firearms.
- According to ATF data, as of February 2017, there were 1,297,670 suppressors registered in the United States. The ATF reported that they recommended prosecutions for only 44 silencer-related crimes per year over the past decade. This means that approximately 0.003% of registered suppressors are used in crimes each year. This number has likely decreased as more citizens have purchased suppressors.
From the data, I hope you can see suppressors are almost nonexistent in gun related crimes today.
It appears the only reason we continue with the idea that suppressors are extremely dangerous is due to the media and the potential for increased crime as outlined in this memorandum by the Law Enforcement Coalition for Common Sense.
I support the police 100% but the claims that gun violence will increase if suppressors become unregulated is unsubstantiated. Suppressors have been under the NFA for almost 100 years. There were 2,664,774 suppressors in this country in 2021 with only a handful of incidents involving a suppressor to date. Is this really our rationale for making law-abiding citizens wait months for a suppressor after they pay a $200 tax stamp crated in 1934?
Here is a video of the newest suppressor technology. I wouldn’t consider this whisper quiet like Hollywood likes to portray.
Removing Suppressors from the NFA
So far we know there is no basis for suppressors to continue to be regulated under the NFA. In this section, I will make the case for why suppressor regulation is unconstitutional and the benefits suppressors bring to society.
Hearing Protection and Health Benefits
Suppressors reduce the sound level of gunshots and the felt pressure in your eardrum. This is handy when shooting indoors (or exterminating feral hogs and you don’t want to wake up your neighbors).
Constitutional Considerations and 2nd Amendment Rights
Texas House Bill 957 makes a strong case for why the NFA is unconstitutional. The Texas government views federal suppressor laws as a violation of Second Amendment rights, noting that these regulations and associated taxes constitute federal overreach. Texas argues that citizens’ rights to bear arms should not incur federal taxes, similar to how no other constitutional rights are taxed. The Texas Attorney General has publicly defended this stance, equating it with the need to protect state sovereignty against federal encroachment.
The government should not be allowed to tax my ability to defend myself.
International Perspectives on Suppressors
Turns out Europe is more logical about suppressor laws than the free-est country on Earth.
Countries with Minimal Restrictions
- Norway: Suppressors are essentially unregulated, treated the same as everyday consumer products. Would be nice to self checkout a suppressor on your way back from the grocery store..
- Poland: Civilians can freely purchase suppressors without a permit, even without a gun license. They can be bought in shops or online like any other product. However, attaching the suppressor is a different issue and is considered illegal like putting your SBR upper on a non-SBR lower..
- France: Suppressors for rimfire pistols can be purchased without a permit. A permit is required for centerfire firearms.
Countries Allowing Suppressors with Permits
- Germany: Suppressors are allowed with proper permits.
- United Kingdom: Suppressors are legal with appropriate permits.
- Sweden: Suppressors can be obtained with proper licensing.
- Finland: Suppressors can be purchased by showing a valid firearm permit.
- Denmark: Suppressors are legal for hunting rifles with a valid hunting license. Separate permits are required for other firearms.
- Czech Republic: Suppressors are legal for gun license holders, requiring registration within 10 days of purchase.
Full disclosure, it’s difficult to get this information unless you live in these countries. I searched through multiple forums and blogs to compile this information. I’m trying to convey that America, as red blooded and pro-gun as we are, has stricter suppressor laws than progressive Europe.
Final Thoughts
What we learned:
- The suppressor was invented by a genius named Hiram Percy Maxim
- Lawmakers threw the suppressor in with other NFA items due to a few “theories” of them being used for assassinations
- Suppressors has almost never been used in gun crime
- The idea suppressors will be used in crime if removed from the NFA is a complete guess with all evidence pointed to the contrary
- Suppressors are not whisper quiet
- The U.S. federal government has profited over half a billion dollars from suppressor tax stamps (source)
The NFA is an outdated piece of legislation that does not serve the best interest of modern day America. Lawmakers should look to Europe for guidance on common sense suppressor laws.
Electing logical pro-constitution legislators is the best way to enact change. Using social media like X.com is also a great tool to put pressure on our representatives.
In the end, suppressors remain misunderstood and needlessly restricted under outdated regulations. They’re tools designed to protect hearing, reduce noise pollution, and improve shooting safety—nothing more. With negligible crime statistics involving suppressors and clear benefits to responsible gun owners, it’s time for legislation to align with the facts. It’s time we ditch the Hollywood myth, follow logic, and push for policies that respect our rights and realities.
- The Right Gear for Upland Hunting - December 21, 2024
- How to Get a Suppressor in a Few Steps - December 5, 2024
- What is The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act? - November 15, 2024
